A few things come to mind, that could improve this image. Bearing in mind that this is all just opinion, here goes...
You've shot at an upward angle. Now, while that adds strength to the subject, it can also make the body appear large and the head seem small. You've got to watch your angle carefully when doing this style of shot. Also, as the hand is closer to the camera than is the face, the viewer's eye is drawn to it. A hand is close to the same size as a face, so when the hand is closer it appears larger - best to keep hands further away, and shooting at eye level, or having the subject lean forward toward the camera, can help this.
You have cut off the left hand. It's a little awkward, but not a killer.
Your subject has not tilted their head forward toward the camera, or leaned toward you, so you are looking up their nose a bit. It isn't extreme, but it isn't flattering either.
Because you have a backlit shot, and no fill or reflected light, the eyes have barely any hint of catchlights. They seem a bit dead.
Your aperture is quite small. Now, before anyone shouts out, "But she used f/2.8!" I need to point out that you're using a compact camera. F/2.8 on a compact, especially with this wide angle lens view, means you have depth of field equivalent to f/8 or f/11 or so on a DSLR. It is too much. The tree is in focus near the bottom, and the leaves behind are barely out of focus - so there is no subject isolation. This just means that there are many distractions in the image.
You also have some motion blur in the left arm. 1/60th is generally not enough for a portrait. Try for 1/125th or so, unless you have a subject that can stand really still (even slowing their breathing). For children, sometimes 1/125th isn't even fast enough.
this was taken when my daughter was halfway up a tree just playing around so the angle wasn't taken into account also her left hand was resting on the tree trunk at the back - i didnt notice at the time.
any ideas how i could have lessened the effect of her right hand?
your right about her eyes - is there anything i can do in post processing to help that?
I think the aperture problem is due to having it on the wrong setting- opps i wasn't expecting such a good opportunity
i have tried to through the tree and leaves out of focus and attempted to correct the barrel distortion. Does this help?
@mjkthorpe I do like your new edit better, but mostly because there is more local contrast around the face, which helps to draw the eye to the right place. Photoshop (or other software) blurring doesn't very well replicate lens DOF blur, unfortunately, and is also very difficult to mask accurately in order to preserve the sharpness of your subject. It isn't too bad at this resolution, but it will be seen straight away in print.
You can try dodging and burning, to further lead the viewer through the image. Darkening that right hand will help to diminish it (very carefully, though), and brightening the face will also help draw the eye. The catch is, however, that light colours appear "further away" and dark colours and textures appear "closer". By the same token, warmer colours appear closer, and cooler colours appear further away, so if you can play with those a little you can dramatically affect the apparent perspective, without it being obvious you've done so.
If you have Photoshop, try this: Duplicate your image to a new layer. To this new layer, apply an unsharp mask with settings in the three fields of 25, 25, and 0 (threshold 0). Add a mask to it, and invert it so it hides the unsharp mask version of the image. Then paint in, using a white brush, just where you want it to be. The trick is, you only want it to be where it is you want the viewer drawn to - so, in this case, the face. That will help a lot more with local contrast, and make her lovely features jump off the screen.
Oh, catchlights - not really. You can brush them in with a white brush, but it is almost impossible to make them look real. You could try cloning the small one from the left eye across to the right - that may help a little.
hi- thanks for the extra help- i dont have photoshop i have corel paint pro and have tried to tweak the pic as best i can again using your suggestions.
can you take a look at this one and criqtiue it again- you really are a great help.
Seems to be a little over-saturated, to my eye. The catchlights look pretty good (at this resolution), and her face is now the focus of the image. I mean to say, it is a lot better than at first, but there is still only so much you can do when the original shot is flawed. Please don't think I'm saying the original is bad! I just mean that, in order to create a fantastic image you need to start with something great. This is a really nice shot - a keeper for you and your family (and I'm sure grandparents etc would adore it), but as portfolio material it is a bit off. That said, people are making money from far worse than this! If I were you, I'd reshoot it - you don't need to get everything right, but you could go a long way further with only a few little changes before you click the shutter. Good luck! :)
I think you've done a fantastic job with the editing of the original, particularly her eyes. :) The focus is definitely drawn much more quickly to her face in the third photo. :)
your daughter is beautiful! and what a difference from the 1st shot to the 3rd... my first thought was have you tried cropping the photo to just show your daughter's face & take away the distraction of her hands totally? =D
I like the original, and I like the first edit more, but after that it starts to seem a bit artificial. I am completely agreed with @jinximages about pretty much everything. This is a lovely shot and you've captured her expression really nicely, but if there are problems with DOF or exposure, or the positioning of her hand, you can't really correct these in post processing. Maybe try some more, similar shots and work on the things that need to be improved on, rather than trying edit after edit of this one shot. It's a great starting point, so perhaps it's time just to learn from it and try other photos. Your daughter is a lovely subject and doesn't seem to mind having her photo taken, so just get as many as you can. :)
the thing that is standing out to me is that the white shirt and the sky seem to be making a bit of a glare for me. Also with her left hand it seems that it looks in motion or out of focus where everything else is sharp. It seems that Jinx really did a great job, so I will only add the two above.
@mjkthorpe For me the first one is better (as there is halo more noticeable around the face) but it's the 3 dots on her nose, this is a bit tricky, I mean if it's a birth mark then clients normally want to maintain them, but if not or you are showing to someone else such as a portfolio, a cleaner face is ideal, just my thoughts, otherwise a good shot!
(p.s. Oh, i just noticed the left arm which is a bit blurry, if cannot be corrected, i would suggest just cut off the scene.)
I may be the last one here qualified to critique, but I did some tweaking in Picnik (not very high-tech, I know) and came up with this... Not everyon'e cup of tea, but it does do away with the cut off hand and the dots on her face are gone and it also places the focus more on her face. I'm sure others could do better and more with Photoshop and a higher level of skill...
Hi Mary!
It's only a beautiful shot! Nothing's wrong there, it's a nice girl, a beautiful background, wonderful trees, funny laugh, good POV... I don't know what's not in this picture! Yes, of course - reflections, ...
But it's also perfect without these other things, and there aren't much things which lacks. Like this you have posted the photo it's wonderful, because there's also a small effect and the sunshine between the trees coming to the laughing girl are brighter and lovelier.
So, I think it's a perfect shot of a beautiful girl in the nature! It's my mind...
Caroline :)
Omg
This latest picture looks like something off CS Lewis' hard-drive
Don't turn the poor girl into an angel!!
For sure the first picture right at the top of the thread is the best, it's damn near perfect, I love it, your processing stands out to me too much on other versions, sorry.
And the spelling of the word Desperately is the only thing which needs work. Good luck with whatever you decided on!
@jinximages ok, that was great. The information you gave was so helpful! If you get bored one day, c'mon over to my project and just pick a picture. Heck, if you get really bored, do them all. I learned so much from this discussion and it had nothing to do with me. ;)
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
A few things come to mind, that could improve this image. Bearing in mind that this is all just opinion, here goes...
You've shot at an upward angle. Now, while that adds strength to the subject, it can also make the body appear large and the head seem small. You've got to watch your angle carefully when doing this style of shot. Also, as the hand is closer to the camera than is the face, the viewer's eye is drawn to it. A hand is close to the same size as a face, so when the hand is closer it appears larger - best to keep hands further away, and shooting at eye level, or having the subject lean forward toward the camera, can help this.
You have cut off the left hand. It's a little awkward, but not a killer.
Your subject has not tilted their head forward toward the camera, or leaned toward you, so you are looking up their nose a bit. It isn't extreme, but it isn't flattering either.
Because you have a backlit shot, and no fill or reflected light, the eyes have barely any hint of catchlights. They seem a bit dead.
Your aperture is quite small. Now, before anyone shouts out, "But she used f/2.8!" I need to point out that you're using a compact camera. F/2.8 on a compact, especially with this wide angle lens view, means you have depth of field equivalent to f/8 or f/11 or so on a DSLR. It is too much. The tree is in focus near the bottom, and the leaves behind are barely out of focus - so there is no subject isolation. This just means that there are many distractions in the image.
You also have some motion blur in the left arm. 1/60th is generally not enough for a portrait. Try for 1/125th or so, unless you have a subject that can stand really still (even slowing their breathing). For children, sometimes 1/125th isn't even fast enough.
Those are the main issues that jump out at me.
I hope that helps!
Hi Jinx
Thanks for the opinions.
this was taken when my daughter was halfway up a tree just playing around so the angle wasn't taken into account also her left hand was resting on the tree trunk at the back - i didnt notice at the time.
any ideas how i could have lessened the effect of her right hand?
your right about her eyes - is there anything i can do in post processing to help that?
I think the aperture problem is due to having it on the wrong setting- opps i wasn't expecting such a good opportunity
i have tried to through the tree and leaves out of focus and attempted to correct the barrel distortion. Does this help?
You can try dodging and burning, to further lead the viewer through the image. Darkening that right hand will help to diminish it (very carefully, though), and brightening the face will also help draw the eye. The catch is, however, that light colours appear "further away" and dark colours and textures appear "closer". By the same token, warmer colours appear closer, and cooler colours appear further away, so if you can play with those a little you can dramatically affect the apparent perspective, without it being obvious you've done so.
If you have Photoshop, try this: Duplicate your image to a new layer. To this new layer, apply an unsharp mask with settings in the three fields of 25, 25, and 0 (threshold 0). Add a mask to it, and invert it so it hides the unsharp mask version of the image. Then paint in, using a white brush, just where you want it to be. The trick is, you only want it to be where it is you want the viewer drawn to - so, in this case, the face. That will help a lot more with local contrast, and make her lovely features jump off the screen.
hi- thanks for the extra help- i dont have photoshop i have corel paint pro and have tried to tweak the pic as best i can again using your suggestions.
can you take a look at this one and criqtiue it again- you really are a great help.
Thanks
dont worry im not offended
its exactly what i needed to hear :)
thanks :) im much happier with the 3rd version although i have desaturated it a little .
@loopy12
thanks- i have tried but the crop looks off- worth a shot though :)
heres the last edit- what do you think?
(p.s. Oh, i just noticed the left arm which is a bit blurry, if cannot be corrected, i would suggest just cut off the scene.)
It's only a beautiful shot! Nothing's wrong there, it's a nice girl, a beautiful background, wonderful trees, funny laugh, good POV... I don't know what's not in this picture! Yes, of course - reflections, ...
But it's also perfect without these other things, and there aren't much things which lacks. Like this you have posted the photo it's wonderful, because there's also a small effect and the sunshine between the trees coming to the laughing girl are brighter and lovelier.
So, I think it's a perfect shot of a beautiful girl in the nature! It's my mind...
Caroline :)
thank you :)
and thanks everyone for your input and help :)
This latest picture looks like something off CS Lewis' hard-drive
Don't turn the poor girl into an angel!!
For sure the first picture right at the top of the thread is the best, it's damn near perfect, I love it, your processing stands out to me too much on other versions, sorry.
And the spelling of the word Desperately is the only thing which needs work. Good luck with whatever you decided on!