Need a whipping please

[Travis F]

I haven't spent much time here, but I would like to start.

This is a shot of my wife that I took last weekend.

Please don't be gentle - Only way to improve I guess.

Travis

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/LX200/Various/IMG_6415blackandwhitesmall.jpg

[wxwax]

I think you did a very nice job!

I especially like the B&W conversion and the compo. Her expression isn't bad, but it does feel a wee bit dead. The plunging bustline is a bit of a distraction, I'd be tempted to crop a bit off the bottom of the frame (and balance that crop by taking some off the left side too.) The eyes feel a bit intense, too much dodging? :dunno

Super effort, though. The bokeh and the B&W really pop. :thumb

[jfriend]

I haven't spent much time here, but I would like to start.

This is a shot of my wife that I took last weekend.

Please don't be gentle - Only way to improve I guess.

Wow, this is a very nice shot. Here are some thoughts:

Things I like:

She's a beautiful woman. This photo illustrates the sort of natural beauty that doesn't look like it was applied with makeup.
I like the expression - it looks partially mysterious and partially seductive
The composition works. It's a nice example of how moving your subject off center really improves things. I also like where it's cropped at the bottom. Not showing us her bustline adds to the mystery and contributes to the seductive/suggestive look
I like the eyes, looking right at the camera
Eyes and hair seem nice and sharp with good blur on the background
The B&W really works here. I think it draws attention to her eyes, hair and face.Things I'd think about changing:

There's a nice catchlight in one eye, but not one in the other. You might try adding the same catchlight into the eye that's missing it.
I'd rather not see the blown highlights in her face and shoulder. I wonder if a different B&W conversion could have preserved more detail in those areas
A little shadow/highlights in CS2 on her hair only can really bring out some nice detail in that darkest parts of her hair. You might want to see if you like that.
The sharpness is good for eyes and hair, but not so good for skin blemishes. You might want to try a subtle use of some of the skin smoothing techniques in just a few places on her face.
There's just a hint of a branch coming out of her head. It's not a big deal, but you might either want more blur on it or actually clone it out.
This would have been a neat shot to have had some lighting from behind to give the boundary between her hair and the background some tonal definition. I know that's not an easy thing to do in the wild, but with no color separation, you are left without a lot of tonal separation. Lightening the darker parts of her hair in post processing while not changing the background can help with this.
I'd rather see you not lose the very top of her hair or crop it even more deliberately. As it is, it's cropped just enough that it kind of looks like a mistake. Not a big deal, but you asked for everything we can think of.
I can't decide if there's too much empty space on the left. The off-center composition is good, but maybe it's just a bit too much. You could experiment with different crops that don't have quite as much room of the left.

[Travis F]

The eyes feel a bit intense, too much dodging? :dunno

Super effort, though. The bokeh and the B&W really pop. :thumb

Thanks for the reply.

I didn't dodge anything here. This is straight out of the camera except for sharpening, contrast adjustment, and the B&W conversion in channel mixer.

Travis

[Travis F]

Wow, this is a very nice shot. Here are some thoughts:

Things I like:

She's a beautiful woman. This photo illustrates the sort of natural beauty that doesn't look like it was applied with makeup.
I like the expression - it looks partially mysterious and partially seductive
The composition works. It's a nice example of how moving your subject off center really improves things. I also like where it's cropped at the bottom. Not showing us her bustline adds to the mystery and contributes to the seductive/suggestive look
I like the eyes, looking right at the camera
Eyes and hair seem nice and sharp with good blur on the background
The B&W really works here. I think it draws attention to her eyes, hair and face.Things I'd think about changing:

There's a nice catchlight in one eye, but not one in the other. You might try adding the same catchlight into the eye that's missing it.
I'd rather not see the blown highlights in her face and shoulder. I wonder if a different B&W conversion could have preserved more detail in those areas
A little shadow/highlights in CS2 on her hair only can really bring out some nice detail in that darkest parts of her hair. You might want to see if you like that.
The sharpness is good for eyes and hair, but not so good for skin blemishes. You might want to try a subtle use of some of the skin smoothing techniques in just a few places on her face.
There's just a hint of a branch coming out of her head. It's not a big deal, but you might either want more blur on it or actually clone it out.
This would have been a neat shot to have had some lighting from behind to give the boundary between her hair and the background some tonal definition. I know that's not an easy thing to do in the wild, but with no color separation, you are left without a lot of tonal separation. Lightening the darker parts of her hair in post processing while not changing the background can help with this.
I'd rather see you not lose the very top of her hair or crop it even more deliberately. As it is, it's cropped just enough that it kind of looks like a mistake. Not a big deal, but you asked for everything we can think of.
I can't decide if there's too much empty space on the left. The off-center composition is good, but maybe it's just a bit too much. You could experiment with different crops that don't have quite as much room of the left.

Wow! Very thought out reply and analysis. This is what I was looking for.

My post processing skills are just barely above beginner. I have tried numerous times to get that "glamour" look on the skin without losing detail in everything else. The way I have tried in the past is to create a duplicate layer and apply gaussian blur to that and add a layer mask. I then try to mask out the parts I don't want soft. Is that the best way to do this?

I couldn't really decide on the crop myself, so this is straight out of the camera. I thought I would give others the pleasure of helping me decide that point.

I have absolutely no lighting except for a Sigma 500 Super flash. Plus this shot was taken behind our house in a piece of woods that we don't own (Shhh don't tell). So hauling lighting equiptment into that would be a pain to say the least. But I will keep that in mind, maybe next time I can improvise with some sort of reflector (I don't have any of those either), like aluminum foil or a white poster board.

Thanks again,
Travis

[wxwax]

Search around, we have some good info on skin techniques. See the How To section a thte top of the screen. At a minimum, repeated use of the healing brush with a small brush will work wonders.

[pathfinder]

Travis, she is a lovely woman. You are a lucky fellla.

I think the image needs a better black point; there are only dark greys here, not blacks. When I read the pixels by her left cheek which seems the blackest spot in the image, I read 36,36,36 and real blacks should get close to 6,6,6 or so. Real black will give this image a lot more pop. Curves or even Levels should help with this.

The off center comp creates an awful lot of uninteresting dead space on the left side of the image. She is the subject - let us really see here, rather than that drab grey stuff to the left.

As for lighting, start with window light - or just plain shade, and add a little bounce flash or a white poster board reflector for fill.

You have a great start here, and your model is available for a reshoot I suspect:):

[jfriend]

Travis, she is a lovely woman. You are a lucky fellla.

I think the image needs a better black point; there are only dark greys here, not blacks. When I read the pixels by her left cheek which seems the blackest spot in the image, I read 36,36,36 and real blacks should get close to 6,6,6 or so. Real black will give this image a lot more pop. Curves or even Levels should help with this.

Travis, pathfinder is right here about the black point. Just pulling the left edge of the curve over 10% to the right (or the same with the left edge of levels) really gives this image a lot more pop.

[Travis F]

Yeah I took his advice. This is what I came up with.

I also recropped and used the healing brush on the blemishes on her cheeks. That is yet another tool I don't use much. I mostly just use the clone tool. What is the difference between the two anyway?

Well, here is my work up for you.....

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/LX200/IMG_6415blackandwhitesmallcopy.jpg

Travis

[Nikolai]

Sorry I'm late :-)

You did a super job! And the second version is a whole lot better than the first one:thumb

But since this is a WP, I still can think of some CPs (critique points:-)

While I'm all up for a female beauty, I agree with Sid that the bottom part is kinda distracting in this case. Either show more, or crop more. Half-and-half does not in this case, IMHO.

I would really like to see the top of her head not to be chopped off...

While in the v.1 there was too much of a negative space, I liked its off-centeredness. I guess this one can use some more on the left..

All in all - very nice work! Keep doing this, and Yuri will become scared:-) :wink

[Travis F]

Sorry I'm late :-)

All in all - very nice work! Keep doing this, and Yuri will become scared:-) :wink
Just wondering who Yuri is? I haven't been around here long enough to know if it is a regular member.

I will give the crop one more try. Hold for more work in progress.

Travis

[Nikolai]

Just wondering who Yuri is? I haven't been around here long enough to know if it is a regular member.

"Search is your friend".
Go "Advanced" and look for posts by "Yuri Pautov". Prepare to be awed.. :): He *is* Da Mastah :bow


I will give the crop one more try. Hold for more work in progress.
Travis

Cool! :thumb
However, I must note, that according to WP rules, this is not the place for it. Critique/whipping only, one image per week per person. :dunno
Why don't you post your next version in, say, "People", and we'll have fun with it..:-) :wink

[Travis F]

Cool! :thumb
However, I must note, that according to WP rules, this is not the place for it. Critique/whipping only, one image per week per person. :dunno
Why don't you post your next version in, say, "People", and we'll have fun with it..:-) :wink

OK. Sorry, I haven't been around here too much. I know I SHOULD have read the rules but I don't read assembly instructions either LOL! I thought that I could re-post the improvements though.

I'll try to post the last work up in People. My wife helped a little, she was telling me what she would like changed, so maybe we make a good team.

Thanks.

And thanks for the comments,
Travis

[jfriend]

However, I must note, that according to WP rules, this is not the place for it. Critique/whipping only, one image per week per person. :dunno
Why don't you post your next version in, say, "People", and we'll have fun with it..:-) :wink

Actually the WP rules have been modified (a few months ago) to allow the original poster only to post additional revisions that incorporate feedback given on the WP so I think he's following the revised rules.

[Travis F]

Actually the WP rules have been modified (a few months ago) to allow the original poster only to post additional revisions that incorporate feedback given on the WP so I think he's following the revised rules.

Ahh. Thanks. I thought that was the way I read it, but it was a pretty fast skim of the rule to be honest.

Well, here it is. I hope it is an improvement...

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/LX200/Portraits/IMG_6415blackandwhitesmallglamour2c.jpg

Thanks,
Travis

[Nikolai]

Actually the WP rules have been modified (a few months ago) to allow the original poster only to post additional revisions that incorporate feedback given on the WP so I think he's following the revised rules.

Here's a 10-seconds-ago quote from Da Rules (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=13428):


4) Post your original image, the new and improved image along with a link to the original thread in our Before/Afters thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=20074).


What am I missing? :):

[Nikolai]

I like the NegSpace on the left :thumb
I like the "moderated" bottom :thumb
I'm still missing the top part of her hear :cry Was it not in the shot? :dunno

[Travis F]

Here's a 10-seconds-ago quote from Da Rules (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=13428):



What am I missing? :):

But, check rule #3. That is what I was basing it on. I am not trying to start any problems. I just thought it was acceptable. Sorry if I was wrong.

Travis

[jfriend]

Here's a 10-seconds-ago quote from Da Rules (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=13428):
What am I missing? :):

In that same message right below, it says:

3) A limited number of repostings of your image as you work on it is allowed, but the Whipping Post must not become a post-processing tutorial.

[Travis F]

I'm still missing the top part of her hear :cry Was it not in the shot? :dunno


Yeah, that was my fault. You don't want to see that anyway, she looked kind of like a rooster (hey I have to protect myself here LOL). No, to frame it the way I wanted I had to cut something and I thought I should take it from the top.

Travis

[Nikolai]

But, check rule #3. That is what I was basing it on. I am not trying to start any problems. I just thought it was acceptable. Sorry if I was wrong.

Travis

Not that I'm a rule-obsessed person (in fact, I'm quite the opposite:-) , but since we're talking about them.. :):

3) Make any changes you want, or possibly re-shoot.

It does not say "post the results" here, does it? And that's exactly when you need to read The Rule #4... :wink

HTH

[Travis F]

In that same message right below, it says:

3) A limited number of repostings of your image as you work on it is allowed, but the Whipping Post must not become a post-processing tutorial.

OK, sorry. It looks like I messed up my first whipping, but not how I thought I would. Sorry I broke the rules.

Thanks for being nice about it though. I will read the rules more thoroughly tomorrow.

Travis

[Travis F]

Not that I'm a rule-obsessed person (in fact, I'm quite the opposite:-) , but since we're talking about them.. :):

It does not say "post the results" here, does it? And that's exactly when you need to read The Rule #4... :wink

HTH

OK!

I have said that I am sorry I broke your rules. It was a first try at whipping.

I notice this site doesn't get nearly as much traffic as some others I regularly go to. Maybe, it is because of this. Talk about a bad taste in your mouth...

Jeez, man lighten up. I said all along I was sorry if I broke the rules. I was just pointing out the way I interpreted them.

Not mad, but how long do you want to hound me?

Travis

[Nikolai]

OK, sorry. It looks like I messed up my first whipping, but not how I thought I would. Sorry I broke the rules.

Thanks for being nice about it though. I will read the rules more thoroughly tomorrow.

Travis

"The Code is more like a guidelines" (Cpt. Barbosa, POTC Episode I:-)
You did great for your first WP! :thumb
Cheers!:1drink

[LeDude]

OK!

I have said that I am sorry I broke your rules. It was a first try at whipping.

I notice this site doesn't get nearly as much traffic as some others I regularly go to. Maybe, it is because of this. Talk about a bad taste in your mouth...

Jeez, man lighten up. I said all along I was sorry if I broke the rules. I was just pointing out the way I interpreted them.

Not mad, but how long do you want hound me?

Travis
Please don't get sour, it's all cool here... he's just being a friend and pre-empting for moderators who do a thankless and difficult job. Just remove the middle pic (via 'edit post') and call it a day with reposting. And, remember, you've gotten some great feedback, so keep the experience positive.

Nice shot too. I had some thoughts, but I think they've been summed up and expounded beyond my capacity.

Good shooting,
LeDude

[edit: p.s. crop a bit more off the top and the hair not in frame will look intentional... it's an' ole musician's trick, too: when you make a mistake, do it again and they'll think it was purposive :) ]

[Travis F]

Please don't get sour, it's all cool here... he's just being a friend and pre-empting for moderators who do a thankless and difficult job. Just remove the middle pic (via 'edit post') and call it a day with reposting. And, remember, you've gotten some great feedback, so keep the experience positive.

Nice shot too. I had some thoughts, but I think they've been summed up and expounded beyond my capacity.

Good shooting,
LeDude

I'm not sour really. It was just hard to be hounded like that when I was in fact trying to abide by the rules as I read them. Maybe they are a little ambiguous for newcomers, I don't know.

But I would like to hear your thoughts on the photo as well. And I PROMISE I won't post any follow-up rework images here:): .

I really would like to start visiting here more often. And the WP is exactly the reason why. On most boards I go to at least, all you hear is; nice shot, lovely, oh... very pretty.....etc.

I have noticed that the WP is not that way. If you want brutal and honest feedback, you better come here!:clap

Travis

[jfriend]

Please don't get sour, it's all cool here... he's just being a friend and pre-empting for moderators who do a thankless and difficult job. Just remove the middle pic (via 'edit post') and call it a day with reposting. And, remember, you've gotten some great feedback, so keep the experience positive.

Nice shot too. I had some thoughts, but I think they've been summed up and expounded beyond my capacity.

Good shooting,
LeDude

It looks like we need to get Andy to change a few words and make the rules a little bit clearer. What happened was the original rules said you could have and only one image posted here ever. I posted a whipping, got a bunch of good feedback and then wanted to incorporate that feedback into a subsequent revision such that I could ask the people who gave me feedback if this successfully incorporated their feedback. At the time, according to the rules the only way to do that was to split the thread into a second thread in another part of the forum and continue the discussion over there. I thought that was a less-than-ideal situation. Why split the thread. It's not like the WP has so many posts that we need to shave it's traffic down. And, it's not like anybody really benefits from splitting the thread into two threads in separate forums.

So, after much back-and-forth, it was agreed by Andy and somebody else whom I can't remember that helps to moderate the WP (might have been DavidTo) that the original poster only could post a few iterations to incorporate feedback and get feedback on the iterations and that would be OK. The intent was still not to make this into a post processing tutorial forum, but certainly some feedback is going to be about things that can be changed in post processing. After all this discussion finally ended, I believe Andy updated the WP rules. I believe he had the intent to allow a few iterations by the original poster. But, as I read the rules today, that isn't spelled out quite as clearly as it could be.

FWIW, I stand by my earlier argument that it's silly to force the thread to split into two and force the original poster to post revisions and solicit feedback in a different thread in a different forum. That just makes it a lot more difficult for the original contributors to follow the subsequent discussion with no material benefit to anyone that I could see. We probably shouldn't turn this thread into a continued debate on that topic. If we want to debate it again, we should either find the original debate thread or start a new thread in a different forum. I just wanted to share the history with those who were discussing the rules.

[Travis F]

FWIW, I stand by my earlier argument that it's silly to force the thread to split into two and force the original poster to post revisions and solicit feedback in a different thread in a different forum. That just makes it a lot more difficult for the original contributors to follow the subsequent discussion with no material benefit to anyone that I could see. We probably shouldn't turn this thread into a continued debate on that topic. If we want to debate it again, we should either find the original debate thread or start a new thread in a different forum. I just wanted to share the history with those who were discussing the rules.

Thanks for letting me know that. Not having been here much in the past this is all new knowledge to me. I hate to beat a dead horse, but I agree with everything you were debating about.

If I can give my quick opinion: The reason I posted this picture here in the whipping post on DGRIN was to get critique from people that I have viewed as to give an honest opinion of an image. I read the rules and as I understood them, it was OK for me to re-post some re-worked images in response to the feedback that I recieved. Not only for my benefit, but also so the the contributors could see the result of their suggestions.

I, by no means, meant to start a debate here. I was just looking for a whipping of my wife (man that sounds bad out of context LOL).

Sorry to stir so many problems here,
Travis

[jfriend]

Thanks for lettingme know that. Not having been here much in the past this is all new knowledge to me. I hate to beat a dead horse, but I agree with everything you were debating about.

If I can give my quick opinion: The reason I posted this picture here in the whipping post on DGRIN was to get critique from people that I have viewed as to give an honest opinion of an image. I read the rules and as I understood them, it was OK for me to re-post some re-worked images in response to the feedback that I recieved. Not only for my benefit, but also so the the contributors could see the result of their suggestions.

I, by no means, meant to start a debate here. I was just looking for a whipping of my wife (man that sounds bad out of context LOL).

Sorry to stir so many problems here,
Travis

Travis, it's a great image - exactly what we want in the WP. It looks like you got some good feedback and did something useful with it. That's exactly what WP is for. Thanks for posting it in the first place.

I think everyone thinks you tried to follow the rules. As I look at the rules now, I think they aren't as clear as they could be and they were changed a little while ago which adds to the confusion. I'll start a new thread over in the place where moderators read, to discuss some clearer wording to use in the rules.

So, you shouldn't feel bad. In my book, you're doing exactly what the WP is intended for. I wish all the images posted here were as quality to start with as yours.

[Travis F]

Travis, it's a great image - exactly what we want in the WP. It looks like you got some good feedback and did something useful with it. That's exactly what WP is for. Thanks for posting it in the first place.

I think everyone thinks you tried to follow the rules. As I look at the rules now, I think they aren't as clear as they could be and they were changed a little while ago which adds to the confusion. I'll start a new thread over in the place where moderators read, to discuss some clearer wording to use in the rules.

So, you shouldn't feel bad. In my book, you're doing exactly what the WP is intended for. I wish all the images posted here were as quality to start with as yours.

Thanks John, it means alot to me that you followed the thread to try and clear things up.:clap

I really do appreciate all the great feedback that I got here. It just suddenly got overwhelmed.

But my picture ended up better in my wife's and my eyes due to the feedback and trial and error process we went through here. So to those that felt like they did, thanks for bending the rules for me.

And, I am not mad or upset or sour. The internet is the absolute worst for trying to put emotion into something you say. By that I mean, if I come across as rude, I am not trying to, it is just the typed word.

Thanks,
Travis

[pathfinder]

To get back to the images posted:wxwax - ( rather than mull over the forum rules that David usually enforces swiftly, well, and with some deftness) -

I think the subsequent shot you posted was much better due to real blacks and whites, and less negative grey amorphous space. Well done.:1drink

Please give the forum a second chance:): - it is designed to give strong advice without artificial sweetener for those who really want honest, pertinent advice. I think the improvement in your second image demonstrates that it can be of value.

Welcome to dgrin and the WP:thumb :):

The Clone tool needs a sampled area to move the pixels from, to the desired spot, while the Healing brush automatically samples the color and texture around the area being brushed to blend in the area needing retouching. With the Healing brush you do not have to select the sampled area. The Healing brush can be much faster to use for retouching small facial blemishes or spotting dust motes in the sky for example.

[wxwax]

Funny how much difference a monitor makes. The second image is what the first one looks like on my work monitor.

Looking now on a calibrated monitor, I agree completely with Pathfinder regarding the absent black point.

I think your second take works wonders on her shoulder. But I don't think it's flattering on her face. I'd suggest there's too much contrast there to be flattering.

I don't agree on the crop, either. I think the off-center style of the first was fine. The fact that the space was empty is not necessarily a bad thing, if it draws your eye to the subject and creates a tension in the frame, which it did. I also disagree with the suggestion that you should have left room for the entire top of her head: plenty of classic headshots don't.

Here's a piece of advice, taken from my news writing days: show a script to six people, and you'll get six opinions back. Not every piece of feedback can be slavishly incorporated, it's impossible. What you have to do is pick out the bits that make sense to you, and rework the piece to your satisfaction. Keep doing that until you develop a style that works for you.

Ditto here. :1drink

[Jeffro]

Actually the WP rules have been modified (a few months ago) to allow the original poster only to post additional revisions that incorporate feedback given on the WP so I think he's following the revised rules.

I've "heard" this before, but when I read the rules there is no mention of this....:scratch It still says to post your reworked image in the befoe and after section, with a link to it, from the original post.....anyone, anyone?:dunno

[DavidTO]

I've "heard" this before, but when I read the rules there is no mention of this....:scratch It still says to post your reworked image in the befoe and after section, with a link to it, from the original post.....anyone, anyone?:dunno


Yep, it's true. Read the rules again.

And this thread has gotten off-track with the rules discussion enough. Let's just talk about the shot.

Any questions, PM me. :thumb

[wxwax]

I'm noticing that the highlight on her nose is basically blown out. So too is her strap. I took the liberty of playing with your image, and making changes that pleased my eye. :evil

Here (http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/80347795-L.jpg)it is.