NON Square Cropped Portraits - (nSCP's) - please post them here

[Alis]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Ali,

First up, remember that capture sharpening needs to be done at 100% magnification if you want to be able to see the result. Second up, these only apply to RAW shots at full resolution

- I've never seen any change with 0.1%

- Usually there's no change to be seen with 0.2%, although I do get frosting on a small number of images in high-frequency areas at 0.3%, and often applying 0.2% twice does a better job.

- 0.3% is the usual for me (especially for landscape)

- 0.4 to 1% (sometimes higher) can also be used at times to counter the evil effects of small camera shakes or focusing issues (at a price).

Often content sharpening starts at around 40% / 4 pixels (viewed at far less magnifications).

Ironically, the 300 / 0.3 / 0 USM often works well on JPEGS that have been down-sampled for display in forums like this.

Does that help?

Thanks a lot, Colin. But I am not sure if I was clear. I was talking about the radius of 0.3 and I am not sure if you were talking about the same thing as you used % after these numbers.

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by sedali

Thanks a lot, Colin. But I am not sure if I was clear. I was talking about the radius of 0.3 and I am not sure if you were talking about the same thing as you used % after these numbers.

Doh.

Sorry Ali - we are - just a case of fingers moving faster than brain today!

I'll fix up the above.

[heather4279]

I took these pictures of my daughters as a Mother's Day gift for my mom. One thing that I would work on if I were to "re-do" the shot is depth of field, to blur the background a bit. Being a beginner though, I was happy with my results.

[Antonio Correia]

Here is a picture with non SCP and SCP looking good.
Nice people !
Thank you for posting and for the participation in this thread !

[Antonio Correia]

I shot this picture some time ago using the flash for fill in.
I made some adjustments in Lightroom softening the skin adn sharpening a little bit the eyes and lips.
I also worked on the background a little bit decreasing the saturation of the leaves.

[Dave Humphries]

Originally Posted by heather4279

I took these pictures of my daughters as a Mother's Day gift for my mom. One thing that I would work on if I were to "re-do" the shot is depth of field, to blur the background a bit. Being a beginner though, I was happy with my results.

Hi Heather,

I would be too, nice idea, quite well executed (and you already know what to do better next time).

Now you see, I might be able to take a nice pic (occasionally), but this kind of thing is usually beyond me, it never even occurs to me

Once I've got the pictures under control and my PP skills improve, perhaps I'll develop more in this direction.

Nice one,

[CNelson]

I'm enjoying this thread. Lots of good ideas and thoughts.

I don't usually do portraits but I took one recently when I was asked to put on a demonstration at a local art gallery. Two entire people showed up so I took pictures of both of them. This is one of those pictures. I used window light supplemented with a ceiling bounce flash. Unfortunately this is not too far off square, it's 8x10 aspect ratio. I made it that size so the lady in the picture could download it and have it printed then use and off the shelf frame.

The basic portrait was "nice" but I saw something more that I wanted to do so I did a close crop, isolated the face and added a digital background then added some subtle texture that shows on the skin as well as the gradient background. The background is digital because the gallery background was quite cluttered.

I recognize I have a long way to go to become a portrait artist but I like it and the lady in the picture and her husband like it. It wasn't much of a demonstration but I got some practice.

Chuck

[CNelson]

Originally Posted by heather4279

Being a beginner though, I was happy with my results.

Hi Heather, I wouldn't have taken you for a beginner. Any grandma would be pleased to get these pictures....a well put together package. The background blur might help a little, you are thinking along the right lines, but I don't find it particularly distracting.

Chuck

[heather4279]

Thanks for the positive comments. I am definately a beginner but love photography and am looking to learn all that I can from all of you.

[Alis]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Doh.

Sorry Ali - we are - just a case of fingers moving faster than brain today!

I'll fix up the above.

Hi again,

I started using your receip (here and from previous discussions) and got a little bit confused:

What do you mean by capture sharpening exactly. Do you first open the file in PS and apply the 300% 0.3 radius sharpening and then start working on it and apply mroe sharpening later? If so, and for someone like me who uses LR, what is the recommended format to go back and forth between these programs.

thats all for now.

Thanks,

Ali

[Colin Southern]

Originally Posted by sedali

Hi again,

I started using your receip (here and from previous discussions) and got a little bit confused:

Hi Ali,

Do you first open the file in PS and apply the 300% 0.3 radius sharpening and then start working on it and apply mroe sharpening later?

Yes. Most digital cameras have an anti-aliasing filter that introduces a degree of unsharpness - and the demosaicing process introduces even more. Capture sharpening "reverses" this.

However, it USUALLY won't make much difference to a final image unless (a) your printing really large, and the print has to withstand a closeup inspection, or (b) your cropping an image heavily. Having just said that (and as I mentioned before when talking about your comment to Antonio about skin smoothness), capture sharpening can give a certain harshness to skin texture (especially where there's noise present) (sharpening accentuates noise).

You might wonder why I do it if it doesn't make any difference to the finished average image? Short answer is, it makes the images a LOT nicer to work on at high magnifications. Some people can tolerate softness when working on an image, unfortunately, I'm not one of them - it just drives my eyes crazy.

In terms of how to tie this in with LR, sorry, can't help - I don't use it.

Hopefully this helps anyway!

[Alis]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Ali,



Yes. Most digital cameras have an anti-aliasing filter that introduces a degree of unsharpness - and the demosaicing process introduces even more. Capture sharpening "reverses" this.

However, it USUALLY won't make much difference to a final image unless (a) your printing really large, and the print has to withstand a closeup inspection, or (b) your cropping an image heavily. Having just said that (and as I mentioned before when talking about your comment to Antonio about skin smoothness), capture sharpening can give a certain harshness to skin texture (especially where there's noise present) (sharpening accentuates noise).

You might wonder why I do it if it doesn't make any difference to the finished average image? Short answer is, it makes the images a LOT nicer to work on at high magnifications. Some people can tolerate softness when working on an image, unfortunately, I'm not one of them - it just drives my eyes crazy.

Thanks. Very helpful. Looks like it is much more complex that I thought.

By the way, I got this Spyder III Elite, and it is asking me questions that I can not answer. Or I can not answer right now. For now, it is telling me, not to edit anything since the ambient temperature is too much

[Antonio Correia]

Can this be of any help ?
I was looking for what I saw yesterday about I van't find again.

Meanwhile ...

If I see it again I will come here to post the link ...

[Colin Southern]

Hi Ali,

Originally Posted by sedali

Thanks. Very helpful. Looks like it is much more complex that I thought.

Capture sharpening is pretty easy - for most RAW images from Canon cameras just give it a USM of 300 / 0.3 / 0 (somehow) and "job done".

By the way, I got this Spyder III Elite, and it is asking me questions that I can not answer. Or I can not answer right now. For now, it is telling me, not to edit anything since the ambient temperature is too much

Start a new thread on this and I'll try to help you - shouldn't be too hard.

[Antonio Correia]

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

... Start a new thread on this and I'll try to help you - shouldn't be too hard.

Which link is ... please

[Antonio Correia]

This is one of those images I really don't know if I like. Stupid may be. But I have this doubt because the guy looks as if he was not there when in fact he was. He is too bright, too artificial.

When I shot - as excuse I can tell you that I was in a hurry - and I didn't take much care about the camera readings/adjustments.
This is one of those cases that I should have used a flash for fill in but it was not available...

Comments welcome !
Click on the photo for the EXIF, please.

[Alis]

Originally Posted by Antonio Correia

Can this be of any help ?
I was looking for what I saw yesterday about I van't find again.

Meanwhile ...

If I see it again I will come here to post the link ...

Looks good, Antonio. I am going to watch it now. Thanks!

[Antonio Correia]

A different approach, a different way to photograph...
Camera at the stomach level point and shoot type, slow speed or small aperture and pray to God
Sometimes, and only sometimes His secretaries listen to me.

Click on the photo for the EXIF, please.

[SRH]

In the Grand Canyon, at the end of a day of big rapids. One poor boatman had the task of guiding the crapper boat. He's either exhausted, or the fumes have had an effect.



Stephen

[crisscross]

Just a PC comment Stephen, was this type of boat invented by Thomas Crapper of greater fame for another invention (see Blue Delf thread)?