Portrait help, please?

The Tight Half Shot and the Head Shot are Very Good available light work. I agree very rapid progess in a week)

In the Tight Half Shot consider the torso to be 1/2 to 1/4 profile - not 3/4 profile - so to avoid the intruding leading edge of the bare shoulder of the Subject and the violent twist of her neck.

WW

Well done, Myra! Great photos: they look like they'll be wonderful memories.

Cheers,
Rick

Hi Myra,

Great stuff :)

If you shot these RAW, I'd be happy to retouch them for you to see if I could "squeeze a little more out of them".

Thank you for the words of encouragement. It's a relief to know that I'm going in the right direction.

Colin, I would love for you to have a go at a photo. If you tell me which one and how to get it to you in the RAW form, I would be happy to forward it to you. This time when I sharpened, I didn’t follow any rules; I just played around a bit to see what seemed to work, usually starting at 300/.3/0 or 150/.4/3. I also used the sharpening tool that is just under or above the burn and dodge set of tools to bring out her eyes a bit if they seemed to need it. The dress details and skin tones on the arms caused the most frustration.

William, the info about the torso shots is duly noted. Thank you for taking such a close look. Unfortunately, at this point in time I don’t have a lens hood, reflector nor filters. All in good time! The sharpening that you performed on her dress is fantastic for detail. (To answer the question, the dress is black. I managed to wash it out to blue in one attempt:)) The light, instead of shadow, on her face is also a vast improvement.

Steve (Wirefox), was your daughter’s prom this Thursday past or the upcoming Thursday? Looking forward to seeing your photos.

TC!
Myra

Hi Myra,

It's pretty easy to get them to me, eventhough it'll sound complicated!

- Zip the raw images up into a zipped file if you can

- Pop along to www.sendthisfile.com and create a free account for yourself

- Using SendThisFile, put in your own address as both the sending and receiving addresses and upload the file

- When you get an eMail saying there are files to be downloaded, copy/paste the link into a PM to me, and I'll take it from there.

If you get stuck, just come back here for help :)

Myra - Thankyou for sharing the results, as everyone has said they look terrific.
I am sure many of us without Portrait skills/experience have learnt a great deal by reading all the replies to your questions/comments.
I hope the evening went as well for her as your photography did.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...8&d=1277704100
Played around with the middle photo a bit (again for fun and practice and I am sure that I didn't do it as well as the experts would! I tried out sharpening (first time ever) and some other stuff and it worked out pretty well except that I kind of messed up her shoulder... anything else that I need to improve?

By the way Myra, These photos are a Huge improvement, you did really well! If you keep improving this quickly who knows what you could achieve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritimer1

William, the info about the torso shots is duly noted.

---

You can get around that another way.

Do not be afraid to go in tight on some crops:

http://i50.tinypic.com/161cgfs.jpg

I have (very gently) re-touched: the RH face: the hair (in parts), the eyes and the mouth, but I think you will agree that the main impact is in the crop: all the clutter is out of the way and we can see HER.

Her eyes are beautiful and in that expression they indeed are the opening to her soul - go in tight and exploit that, that's what I would do - but I like working very close with most portraiture and also candid work: at least for 50% of the session or event.

WW

How'd I do Myra? (PS: View it at 100% for best results)

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...0&d=1277718901

You go straight to the head of the class, Colin. The dress and skin tones are amazing and you've brought the shine back to her hair. The arms had just seemed too bleached out to bring back. Did you mask and use levels? The closer crop does a nicer job of showcasing the subject, too. Please tell me you've got at least seventy years of retouching/post processing experience under your belt to give me hope! Thanks ever so much for giving this a major tweaking.

TC!
Myra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritimer1

You go straight to the head of the class, Colin. The dress and skin tones are amazing and you've brought the shine back to her hair. The arms had just seemed too bleached out to bring back. Did you mask and use levels? The closer crop does a nicer job of showcasing the subject, too. Please tell me you've got at least seventy years of retouching/post processing experience under your belt to give me hope! Thanks ever so much for giving this a major tweaking.

TC!
Myra

---

Hi Myra,

I have to admit, some of the skin tones were quite tricky. I did most of the work in ACR; one of the biggest issues was the fact that the arm was brighter than the face, so in the end I had to use the adjustment brush to seperate the face, arm, and dress as different zones. With that sorted I did a few of the usual things in Photoshop (whiten eyes, saturate eyes, soften skin, small levels and colour balance adjustments etc).

All in a days work :)

She pops out of the Background too, you worked on that - the Background is important in the Full Length shot.



Cheers Colin

WW

These adjustments are all so effective. Lilly, that arm gave me trouble, too<BG>. William, as a mom, I have to say that she may look a tad under-dressed in a close crop...:) I do like the more amply filled frame, though.

Colin, one of these days I will figure out how to separate zones with adjustment brushes.

Kay, I really hope others who might like to try some portraits are reading. The advice has been incredibly helpful! It's also interesting to see what others do with the photos to bring out the sharpness, correct colours etc.

Thanks!
Myra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritimer1

as a mom, I have to say that she may look a tad under-dressed in a close crop...:) I do like the more amply filled frame, though.

---

Interesting point of view. Thank you for the feedback.

Below is just part of the final product I shot for a Client last year: it is the story book Collage titled “Rites of Passage” – the story of Girl’s preparation for her First Formal, or Début.

As I mentioned, you will note that I work quite close to the Subject, even whilst Journalising the Story of the Event.

I think that the perception of “under-dressing” has more impact if one image is viewed in isolation.

In this picture story “Rites of Passage” the last frame might appear more “acceptable” simply because it sits within a story Book of Images:

http://i48.tinypic.com/15cm2r8.jpg

Also any one particular image might not be necessarily chosen for display in the Family Home: for example this is the image the Family chose from my work for one of the Enlargements, as a Wall display:

http://i49.tinypic.com/2ev9hte.jpg

To be clear: my intention was merely to enhance your image by cropping it tight to display the Subject’s eyes: as I mentioned in that tight shot her eyes are definitely the most dominate artistic and commanding feature of the image, followed closely by her gentle smile.

WW

I might have remembered this wrong but when I was at school I was told that dof is both in front and behind the point of focus, and to focus behind the eyes.

Now I do know this lens suffers considerably for edge sharpness at f1.8 but recovers quickly but since I work it all out for landscape don't do portrait only remember it is above nyquist over the whole sensor at f5.6 and best at f6.3, I think f2,8 should give reasonable edge sharpness and dof and I suppose I could find it out but just looking at the photo gives me confidence.

In fact I will work it out; f4 gives 0.24 metres dof at 2 metres distance, f3.3 is 1000 LW/PH approx at the edges but sharp in the middle which is all you need. So I suppose iso 200 or maybe 400 and job done. :)

At 4 metres you have about a metre do at f4, I'm not very good with judging distance from a photo. :)

William, your candids and portrait are lovely. What a good idea to provide a photo essay of the day. I hope you don't think I was upset with the crop! It just struck me as a little funny, actually, because it looked like she was posing sans dress. It's just my warped sense of humour:)

TC!
Myra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arith

I might have remembered this wrong but when I was at school I was told that dof is both in front and behind the point of focus, and to focus behind the eyes.

---

Hi Steve,

The DoF DOES cover both in front of and behind the focal point, but not by equal amounts. 1/3 in front & 2/3 behind is as good a rule of thumb as any (unless anyone has any better rule, short of a DoF calculator on a iPhone).

So by focusing on the eyes (which are the most importnt part of any portrait) - hopefully - the DoF covers things nearer (like tips of noses, chins etc), and things further away (like ears).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritimer1

it looked like she was posing sans dress.

---

That reminds me of my #1 studio joke ...

Just about everyone who see it makes a comment of "Oh yes ... I know what you're shooting down here ... nudge nudge, wink wink" (referring to naked women). I assure them that it just never happens, and then add "We would, but we just can't find any willing women ... they're too smart for us"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritimer1

I hope you don't think I was upset with the crop! It just struck me as a little funny, actually, because it looked like she was posing sans dress.

---

I did not know if you were having a joke, or if you would not choose to do that because it looked like the Subject was nude. I tend to generally write and read on forums: literally.

But it doesn’t matter how I interpreted your comment as I did not take it personally, but rather took it as an opportunity to further develop the thread and discuss another point.

Obviously there will be Clients (from my perspective) and Parents (who take Portraits of their Children – like you) who would feel that going is too tight on the crop gives the impression of a nude pose; and therefore would be reluctant so to do.

I was merely pointing out that the place the image might take within the whole coverage or as part of a Collage can have an influence on that perception – and also by providing the two samples, give ideas as to how that could be – and also show other ideas as to how “Prom Photos” might be addressed.

I now understand your humour and understand that your comment was a joke, thanks for explaining: and certainly don’t feel that I was upset in any manner – I was not. Participating in this thread has been most enjoyable, your efforts and the rapidity with which you have applied the knowledge gained is most impressive. This is a credit to you and to everyone who participated – we all take something away from the table here.

Good luck with your Photography: IMO you have talent and a brain and a willingness to listen and extract information which is useful and relevant and then try things out and then regroup and try again – this thread and your efforts show that wonderful images can be made with an inexpensive Prime Lens and a Prosumer DSLR . . . others can learn from that as well as extracting very useful information along the way whilst reading through.

I hope your Daughter enjoyed the Evening.

Thank you for the kind comments on my work.

WW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Steve,

The DoF DOES cover both in front of and behind the focal point, but not by equal amounts. 1/3 in front & 2/3 behind is as good a rule of thumb as any (unless anyone has any better rule, short of a DoF calculator on a iPhone).

So by focusing on the eyes (which are the most importnt part of any portrait) - hopefully - the DoF covers things nearer (like tips of noses, chins etc), and things further away (like ears).

---

In this regard another rule of thumb is to focus on the leading eye.

Taking the Collage above and numbering the nine frames from Top Left and then Left to Right across: In Frames – 5; 6; 7; 8; 9, the Plane of Sharp Focus is through the Subject’s Leading Eye (“Leading” means closest to the Camera).

The only difficult situation apropos this “Rule of Thumb” in those nine images was Frame 3 - where I needed to get impact through the extended arm as she was choosing the hair clips.

That frame is the result of a compromise on the run, as my first intention was to get her face and arm in focus – but I was at F/4.5 and already at ISO1250 and I did not want to go higher ISO.

I was pulling 1/320s. My Tv (Shutter Speed) limit in this situation is about 1/250s to ensure no Subject Motion – so even if I dropped to Tv = 1/250s that only would give me ⅓ more Av (Aperture) and that was not enough to get the adequate DoF I required.

I was shooting a 24L on a 5D at about 3ft SD (Shooting Distance) and I knew to do what I wanted and to stay at the same low angle, and close to the Subject, for the feeling of intimacy and involvement and also lead the viewer's eye along the Perspective of an in Focus Profile and Arm: I would need about F/11 . . . there was NO WAY I could get to F/11


So I do know that DoF gets larger as the Plane of Focus gets further away from the Film Plane - but I did not want to move further away from the Subject – so as she was expending her hand for the second time to choose another item I refocussed on her hand and move up just slightly, to catch the mirror with the knowledge that her RELFECTION of her face would be in focus . . . and I used that shot and not the first.

I was just lucky that Girls generally take their time choosing things and most often need to pick them all the items up and have a close look at each item . . . had she not looked at that second hair clip, the Collage would have been different, because the first shot I pulled I knew was wrong as soon as the Shutter was Released – and it was destined for the Cutting Room Floor – which is where it went.

Incidentally, I chose this particular Collage as a sample for this thread, because (except for Frame 9) all are shot sans Flash, which is generally how I work.

WW