Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 16, 2015, 8:47 PM   #1
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Amber

These are part of a much larger series from a weekend of shooting about a month ago. Rather than flood the forums with a thread for each shot, I'll post one thread per model, and restrict to the top few of each. Today is Amber.

C&C is welcome and appreciated!

Attachment 204998

Attachment 204999

Attachment 205000

Last edited by conor; Apr 21, 2016 at 9:13 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 17, 2015, 7:20 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

Great shots. I prefer the first one. In the last one I attempted to reduce the redness in the knee by brightening and skin smoothing, couldn't do much for the elbow though
Attached Images
 

Last edited by musket; Aug 17, 2015 at 7:23 AM.
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2015, 11:40 AM   #3
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The popular choice so far has been the first one.

Thanks for that tweak, musket. I may run these through Portrait Professional at some point to further smooth the skin (further than the few touch-ups I made in PS).
  Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2015, 9:12 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 500
Default

There is what is technically correct and then there is what the majority of people prefer.

If you read camera operation manuals, then they will tell you that over saturated pixes appearing to the eye have been noted to be preferred.

If you dont believe it, then look at peoples TV screens. The majority, by far, are adjusted to display over-saturated.
sdromel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2015, 3:38 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Default

last one is my favorite
just would tried with the left knee over the right leg

nice framing and lighting on all of them
D3v1l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2015, 2:04 PM   #6
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

sdromel: I agree. I think it's because 99% of people do not adjust their TV or monitor when they open the box, and simply become accustomed to the oversaturation that seems to be present with most modern displays. I'm often guilty of oversaturating my shots, especially those with a lot of colour, like the graffiti in the background of the first. I had quite a few iterations of that edit, many of which were pushed even further. I finally settled on a balance between "as shot" and "brutally oversaturated".

D3v1l: Thank you for the kind words as well as the suggestion. Posing a model is still my biggest weakness; whether it be lack of practice or lack of confidence giving direction. I'll keep it in mind for next time!
  Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2015, 7:08 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 500
Default

My use of the term over-saturated is probably suggestive of "extreme", but that is not the vision. I simply mean "more intense than technically correct."

Typically when processing photos, if there is a question or doubt, then I will choose to error on the + side.

One of the biggest variables I have found when submitting photos to others is consideration of the probable display that will be used to view them. As such, for the public, I choose "run-of-the-mill." This means that I will test the photo across a number of different monitor types one of which includes the public library machines.

Again, as I have stated, "there is what is technically correct, then there is what most people prefer" (when they see).
sdromel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2015, 10:45 AM   #8
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdromel View Post
My use of the term over-saturated is probably suggestive of "extreme", but that is not the vision. I simply mean "more intense than technically correct."

Typically when processing photos, if there is a question or doubt, then I will choose to error on the + side.

One of the biggest variables I have found when submitting photos to others is consideration of the probable display that will be used to view them. As such, for the public, I choose "run-of-the-mill." This means that I will test the photo across a number of different monitor types one of which includes the public library machines.

Again, as I have stated, "there is what is technically correct, then there is what most people prefer" (when they see).
I didn't assume you meant "extreme", I assumed you meant "more saturation than your eye would have seen in person"

That's an intelligent approach. I have started checking all edits on my Samsung Galaxy S5 (the colours are pretty close to the iPhone 5), as it seems, that these days, most people (especially the people I shoot) are browsing the internet (Facebook) on their cell phones.

That said, my general attitude is to get my monitor as close to print colours as I can. I'm generally not all that concerned with how it looks on everyone else's monitor (as long as they don't look brutal on cell phones). All of my people shots end up professionally printed and put in my book. Most of the time, that's what I show people. Other than a few shots posted on ModelMayhem, and a few posted on SDC, the online footprint of my photography is quite limited (unless the models themselves want them posted to Facebook or other social networking site).

Last edited by conor; Aug 20, 2015 at 10:49 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2015, 10:50 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 500
Default

I have a bit of a different issue. Mainly, I'm requested to do photo work for others (eg, newsletters for publication and various special projects). As such, the photo selected for publication will be the one the document creator likes best (which is not me). And the one they like best is the one that looks best to them based on what they SEE ON THEIR display (which is the analog case with displaying stuff on this forum that is viewed by all kinds of people using different displays and their local settings).

Anyways, regarding the statement "getting my monitor as close to print colors", this sounds strange. What is supposed to be done (ie, normal procedure) is to adjust the monitor to theoretical, then choose the ICC profile for the photo application that prints to match the monitor (ie, this is the compensation for the printer characteristics relative to the monitor screen; typical: http://www.usa.canon.com/CUSA/assets...tml/iccg03.htm ).
sdromel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2015, 12:05 PM   #10
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdromel View Post
Anyways, regarding the statement "getting my monitor as close to print colors", this sounds strange. What is supposed to be done (ie, normal procedure) is to adjust the monitor to theoretical, then choose the ICC profile for the photo application that prints to match the monitor (ie, this is the compensation for the printer characteristics relative to the monitor screen; typical: http://www.usa.canon.com/CUSA/assets...tml/iccg03.htm ).
This is great information, for which I thank you.
When it comes to colour profiles and matching monitor vs printer is something I've never wrapped my head around. So far, my rudimentary system of having a few test prints done and comparing back to my monitor has worked. I realize that this is far from the most intelligent approach (actually, probably a complete waste of time!), but due to the fact that I'm typically editing on a plethora of (usually cheap) monitors, the system has been working for the shots I do print.

Again, thanks a ton for this information, the weather here is brutal today (raining so hard its overflowing my brand new gutters), maybe, if the power stays on (it's already rebooted my machines once), I'll spend some serious time reading with the goal of understanding how to do this properly!
  Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 PM.