Any improvements on these ?

***Dave*** · 12-10-2005, 13:46

Couple more shots of my daughter using DJW high key effect (for the purists sake) as documented here

Starting from the mild :-
http://www.thephotographyforums.com/...oto_018_v2.jpg

To the stronger effect :-

Any thoughts on how to improve gratefully recieved. 2nd shot would have been better if she wasn't sucking her thumb....or if I had capture whole hand ...but sometimes you gotta catch the moment

Both shots taken with "nifty fifty" indoors with only light from window to side of face (the effect I like best).

SammyC · 12-10-2005, 14:29

Really good the second one, I think the closeness of it works very well.

CT · 12-10-2005, 23:32

I'm not a big fan of this technique I'm afraid. Why photograph a pretty little girl and then remove most of her features in a manner reminiscent of some of the awful air brushing you see in glamour magazines? She's a little girl, not a glamour model, and I'm not sure that this rather sophisticated approach is at all apt, although I accept that there's probably a market for this type of work. I'm not trying to be offensive mate, it's just my opinion.

Having said that, I do like high key shots and this one works quite well by virtue of the fantastic detail in the eyes contrasting with the high key flesh tones. I think if you're going to tackle high key, you need to do it in the camera from the outset, notwithstanding that you may need to manipulate in processing too. In other words a very light background, properly lit to avoid shadows. The subject shouldn't be the only high key part of the shot.

I don't dislike the above shot, but I find it hard to ignore the fact that on any technical assessment the flesh tones are burned out, particularly on the nose, cheek and hand.

***Dave*** · 13-10-2005, 09:02

No probs CT, High Key usually splits opinion, so comments appreciated. Daughter shots get the brunt of the experimentation as she's so accessible

. I'll post original with less processing....actually she has wicked blue eyes in the colour version

SammyC · 13-10-2005, 09:59

Maybe leave some hint of colour in the eyes. I realise that this'll make the shot look even more processed but we've lost CT now so who cares! lol

Pssst, Dave, he's old anyway....

CT · 13-10-2005, 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by SammyC

Maybe leave some hint of colour in the eyes. I realise that this'll make the shot look even more processed but we've lost CT now so who cares! lol

Pssst, Dave, he's old anyway....

'Mature' if you don't mind! :lol:

Well - I have no qualms about manipulating images, I'm not of the purist "If it's not done in the camera, it's not valid" school of thought. True high key though, depends on proper lighting and a fine balancing act between getting the effect you want and blowing out the highlights. It's far from easy to do and I just don't see too many good examples of this technique being a fair substitute.

Now where the f*ck did I leave my Zimmer frame?

SammyC · 13-10-2005, 10:36

That's where you and I have to differ I'm afraid CT, you know what you're talking about and I don't.

I'm sorry but there can be no compromise here.....

***Dave*** · 13-10-2005, 10:49

:lol: . Agree that proper High Key done with lighting is an art form. Unfortunately I have no experience of studio lighting.... something I would like to learn one day :eyesup: . For the mo PS is my only help....although long way to go with that too :lol:

***Dave*** · 13-10-2005, 11:06

Original shot here that was over exposed from RAW shot to achieve highlights, plus some sharpening.

Now no "I prefer this to other shot" as I see them as 2 seperate attempts at an image. Of course I have this image also stored as I love the colours of eyes & detail.

Here is version of above that just had red channel at 100% for monochrome, plus slight burning of shadows round nose & lips. Now do you prefer this to original B&W version at top of thread ? (Note I have not removed hair on eye etc, as I'm after feedback on effect rather than final shot)

CT · 13-10-2005, 11:28

Fantastic eye detail! What lens was that?

I much prefer the second version. I know it's not as high key overall as you'd probably like Dave, but it's technically much much better with the highlights being under control.

dod · 13-10-2005, 11:29

I'd say the second B&W version is better. It's still high key but there's more detail retained. Makes it more natural

CT · 13-10-2005, 11:44

Dave, I've just upped the contrast a little to get the skin tones closer to what I think you're after. It's probably just on the verge of blowing out, and as far as I'd be personally happy to go.

Working from this basic shot, you could do some careful local cloning around the eyes and darker spots and at least you'd be cloning from unblown areas. I'd set the clone tool opacity quite low and build up gradually to the tones you're after. It' s a pig of a job to do well, but you'd get a better result I reckon.

You really need to deal with that shadow to the left of her nose. It was ages before I saw it, but then it's like an eye magnet.

Matty · 13-10-2005, 13:22

really very good, i like the effect on these.

***Dave*** · 13-10-2005, 16:52

Thanks CT....see what you mean about shadow. I see you're in West midlands area...how far from Evesham WR11 postcode ? Might need to exchange some

for PS training

Taken with 50mm f/1.8 at f/4, ISO280 & 1/30 sec & no flash. Great lens , especially for the dosh

BTW, is there a simple way to cut'n'paste exif data from PS in text format ? I can access it pop up windows but they don't give you access to cut the text

CT · 13-10-2005, 17:23

I'm in Walsall Dave - right by Junction 9 M6. I can spit to it from here.

CT · 13-10-2005, 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJW

BTW, is there a simple way to cut'n'paste exif data from PS in text format ? I can access it pop up windows but they don't give you access to cut the text

I use Paint Shop Pro mainly, and I rarely bother with the exif data anyway, so I don't know mate. I've been meaning to have a look at the Canon software (I've never bothered loading it) presumably that reads the exif data I'd think? Perhaps you can cut and paste from that?

IanC_UK · 13-10-2005, 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJW

BTW, is there a simple way to cut'n'paste exif data from PS in text format ? I can access it pop up windows but they don't give you access to cut the text

If you use Firefox as a web browser there is a plug in that allows you to copy the exif data from a pic ?

12-10-2005, 13:46	#1 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,909	Any improvements on these ? Couple more shots of my daughter using DJW high key effect (for the purists sake) as documented here Starting from the mild :- http://www.thephotographyforums.com/...oto_018_v2.jpg To the stronger effect :- Any thoughts on how to improve gratefully recieved. 2nd shot would have been better if she wasn't sucking her thumb....or if I had capture whole hand ...but sometimes you gotta catch the moment Both shots taken with "nifty fifty" indoors with only light from window to side of face (the effect I like best). Last edited by Steve : 12-10-2005 at 16:00. Reason: Image size outside our rules

13-10-2005, 10:49	#8 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,909	:lol: . Agree that proper High Key done with lighting is an art form. Unfortunately I have no experience of studio lighting.... something I would like to learn one day :eyesup: . For the mo PS is my only help....although long way to go with that too :lol: Last edited by Dave : 13-10-2005 at 10:51.

13-10-2005, 11:06	#9 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,909	Original shot here that was over exposed from RAW shot to achieve highlights, plus some sharpening. Now no "I prefer this to other shot" as I see them as 2 seperate attempts at an image. Of course I have this image also stored as I love the colours of eyes & detail. Here is version of above that just had red channel at 100% for monochrome, plus slight burning of shadows round nose & lips. Now do you prefer this to original B&W version at top of thread ? (Note I have not removed hair on eye etc, as I'm after feedback on effect rather than final shot) __________________ Last edited by Dave : 13-10-2005 at 11:14.

13-10-2005, 16:52	#14 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,909	Thanks CT....see what you mean about shadow. I see you're in West midlands area...how far from Evesham WR11 postcode ? Might need to exchange some for PS training Taken with 50mm f/1.8 at f/4, ISO280 & 1/30 sec & no flash. Great lens , especially for the dosh BTW, is there a simple way to cut'n'paste exif data from PS in text format ? I can access it pop up windows but they don't give you access to cut the text Last edited by Dave : 13-10-2005 at 17:20.

12-10-2005, 14:29	#2 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	Really good the second one, I think the closeness of it works very well.

12-10-2005, 23:32	#3 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	I'm not a big fan of this technique I'm afraid. Why photograph a pretty little girl and then remove most of her features in a manner reminiscent of some of the awful air brushing you see in glamour magazines? She's a little girl, not a glamour model, and I'm not sure that this rather sophisticated approach is at all apt, although I accept that there's probably a market for this type of work. I'm not trying to be offensive mate, it's just my opinion. Having said that, I do like high key shots and this one works quite well by virtue of the fantastic detail in the eyes contrasting with the high key flesh tones. I think if you're going to tackle high key, you need to do it in the camera from the outset, notwithstanding that you may need to manipulate in processing too. In other words a very light background, properly lit to avoid shadows. The subject shouldn't be the only high key part of the shot. I don't dislike the above shot, but I find it hard to ignore the fact that on any technical assessment the flesh tones are burned out, particularly on the nose, cheek and hand.

13-10-2005, 09:02	#4 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,909	No probs CT, High Key usually splits opinion, so comments appreciated. Daughter shots get the brunt of the experimentation as she's so accessible . I'll post original with less processing....actually she has wicked blue eyes in the colour version

13-10-2005, 09:59	#5 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	Maybe leave some hint of colour in the eyes. I realise that this'll make the shot look even more processed but we've lost CT now so who cares! lol Pssst, Dave, he's old anyway....

13-10-2005, 10:36	#7 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	That's where you and I have to differ I'm afraid CT, you know what you're talking about and I don't. I'm sorry but there can be no compromise here.....

13-10-2005, 11:28	#10 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	Fantastic eye detail! What lens was that? I much prefer the second version. I know it's not as high key overall as you'd probably like Dave, but it's technically much much better with the highlights being under control.

13-10-2005, 11:29	#11 (permalink)
dod Feet under the table Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Nairn Posts: 1,911	I'd say the second B&W version is better. It's still high key but there's more detail retained. Makes it more natural

13-10-2005, 11:44	#12 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	Dave, I've just upped the contrast a little to get the skin tones closer to what I think you're after. It's probably just on the verge of blowing out, and as far as I'd be personally happy to go. Working from this basic shot, you could do some careful local cloning around the eyes and darker spots and at least you'd be cloning from unblown areas. I'd set the clone tool opacity quite low and build up gradually to the tones you're after. It' s a pig of a job to do well, but you'd get a better result I reckon. You really need to deal with that shadow to the left of her nose. It was ages before I saw it, but then it's like an eye magnet.

13-10-2005, 13:22	#13 (permalink)
Matty Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: kings hill Posts: 5,269	really very good, i like the effect on these.

13-10-2005, 17:23	#15 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	I'm in Walsall Dave - right by Junction 9 M6. I can spit to it from here.