Judge my PS skills

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by SLC Flyfishing, Apr 28, 2008.

  1. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #1
    So in the past I've generally stayed away from heavy editing in PS, mostly because I've not done much of it in the past, and Lightroom does such a great job that I haven't seen a huge need. I never learned how to really use Photoshop to it's fullest and I'm not saying that I have now, but I did some heavy layering etc to this photograph.

    Needless to say, I'll be using PS a whole lot more now that I have learned some techniques, I think it really made a huge difference in the photograph.

    So now comes my request,

    I'm wanting your opinion, is this photograph believable? I did a lot of adjustment to it, but tried to be as conservative as I could (a lot of steps, but very light on them all). I'm hoping the PS doesn't show too much, the model will notice, but I think it's flattering. But if you hadn't seen the original would you think this photograph to be retouched?

    I'll post the original and then the version I edited heavily. The first one has just had basic global adjustments made in Lightroom.

    I can describe my method for touching up this portrait if anyone is interested, but most of you probably already do this sort of thing easily.

    SLC

    [​IMG] Lightroom version

    [​IMG] Final version (Photoshop CS3)

    Thanks!
     
  2. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #2
    The second image is a bit warmer and at first I thought you'd gone over board but its okay, I don't mind it. It would have made a better comparison if you had the 2 images the same size.
     
  3. thr33face macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    #3
    the skin smoothing is distracting, especially since she has freckles.
    by smoothing the skin you 'destroy' the freckles and give the illusion that her skin has uneven red blotches.
     
  4. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #4
    Taking the skin texture out of the forehead was very necessary, but I'd probably also healing brush the wrinkles out of the sweater. I'd probably tone down the forehead a bit too.

    Overall, it's pretty good. I'd probably have worked the freckles on the nose and cheeks a bit differently- healing a fair portion of them out in a layer and then adjusting the opacity until it looked right.

    If you'd shot with the main light (window?) more from the model's front, then you wouldn't have had the skin texture problems. In general, side-lighting women is a bad idea. Taking care of the stray hairs and clothing wrinkles before hitting the shutter would also be a good idea for future shoots.

    I think I'd probably smooth down the smile line on the right side of her face (camera left) just a bit and darken her chest some too.
     
  5. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #5
    Hadn't noticed the smoothing of the skin, I'd have preferred it in there since I dislike airbrushing.
     
  6. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #6
    I can't tell what you did at all. Looks like you made the image brighter... so good job.

    I would use the history brush/burn tool to bring the lightness in the background back to the original, the way it looks in the LR version is a bit more pleasing..
     
  7. SLC Flyfishing thread starter Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    This and Digital Skunks comments are perhaps what I was looking for. If you can't tell, my objective was met.

    SLC
     
  8. orpheus1120 macrumors 65816

    orpheus1120

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    Malaysia
    #8
    The original is kinda almost perfect IMHO.

    I think you slightly overplayed the hairs a little with the highlight. The focal point of the composite has shifted because of that. For a portrait, it is essential to focus more on facial details than anywhere else secondary.

    Defreckling(sp?) can be improved a little more, and perhaps adjust the overall level a little as well to bring more depth to the whole picture.

    I think the essence of photo retouching is to do as little as possible, and preserving as much of the original quality, while eliminating visual flaws subtly. This will give a realistic and pleasurable look.

    I enclosed an attempt by myself on the subject to illustrate my points. However my attempt is not to say my take is better than anyone's, but to serve more as a visual illustration of my opinions.

    Original
    [​IMG]

    Retouched
    [​IMG]
     
  9. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #9
    No i think you're wrong, I did state the differing sizes were a problem and your adjustments to the skin though slight are a problem now I've noticed it. The forehead is far too shiny and it shows now when comparing it to the hair next to it.

    Please remember as well you're also asking us to compare two low quality images online when really what you need to do is print both of these with a good quality printer and ask people what they think while it is in their hands.

    I would be more inclined to pay more attention when looking at a print because most people's attention will be focused on it more so than a person with music blaring and multiple tabs browsing various sites. So don't take much stock in people's opinions from an internet forum, print the images. I did view these on a 13" screen without being able to make a side by side comparison after all.

    I printed an image today, AO size from a 35mm neg to make sure it looked good enough, viewing images on a screen sometimes isn't good enough. The damn thing cost me $54 as well.

    More to the point, what is wrong with the first image anyway?

    @Orpheus1120 - Why are you removing the freckles?
     
  10. SLC Flyfishing thread starter Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #10
    Mostly the first portrait when viewed at full resolution has some very pronounced pores in the skin of her face. I wanted to soften those up a bit hence the skin smoothing. Apart from that I was fairly happy with the photo and the model was thrilled, even more so with the edited version.

    What I was trying to get at and what I commented to crackedbutter about, was the fact that he/she didn't notice the airbrushing on the skin at first. I was hoping it wasn't too obvious and apparently it isn't. This was my first attempt at doing anything but global edits to a portrait.

    Thanks for the comments, I'll incorporate your observations into future work!

    SLC
     
  11. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #11
    But what I was trying to get at was that this isn't a fair test of your skills if it is something you want to improve upon.
     
  12. Mr.Noisy macrumors 65816

    Mr.Noisy

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Location:
    UK™
    #12
    what can i say, Cracking Subject, I love red haired women, I think more could have been made of the red hair, Using the color parameters available in your image, I neutralized the white tones a little, makes the eyes clearer, but nothing more light couldn't cure when photographing the subject to start with, make the most of the eye colour, First thing to hit you when looking at this kinda image is the eyes, Up your lighting system, I Prefer to edit in CS2 if possible (I find it better than CS3) , I only use CS3 for B&W or HDR :)
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page