Critique My Image

spraynpray

Maybe because it is a 58/1.4 @1.4 and they are not sharp flat-out.

heartyfisher

had a quick edit crop hope you dont mind ..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ysgioptyt4l6849/19713643061_86bc3ce441_o_m2.jpg?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ufrgw361wcxxny2/19713643061_86bc3ce441_o_m.jpg?dl=0
cant post the image due to my access issues :-(

The crop on this in my mind is much improved. It was a good shot to start, the crop enhanced it a ton but I do detect a tad bit of softness there for some reason.

:-) I couldn't resist playing with a new plugin for my editor (gimp) it smoothes the skin a bit(G'mic/makeup) and I touched up her eyes(brighten) and lips(healed) a bit.. :-)

PS : my access issues are back :-( the temporary access is gone I am back to using a proxy :-( sigh ...

starralazn

ah nevermind

spraynpray

OK, if you are saying the image was sharp enough before @starralazn, then it is because heartyfisher softened it during his edit.

JonMcGuffin

OK, if you are saying the image was sharp enough before @starralazn, then it is because heartyfisher softened it during his edit.

I've downloaded the original and now have looked at the edits again. The image doesn't appear any less sharp in the cropped/edited shots. It's just more apparent now when this part of the image is enlarged to take up the same visual space as the old which is typical. The camera obviously isn't at fault. It's sharp, but not enough in my view to really let the eyes stand apart. I think this is the complaint on this lens.

Yes, it produced beautiful bokeh but honestly, the differences between the 58mm and the Sigma 50mm isn't that much and with the Sigma, you get the sharpness and you can blur in (very easily) the creamy color you'd like into the image. You can't go the other way around.

The Sigma 50mm 1.4 is the no brainer 50 to own in my view and I think this image actually helps prove that.

MaxBerlin

Experience has taken me up from 85mm to 135mm and 200 even when it comes to some portraits and you're right - the nose is everything.

A note on camera angle and choice of lens focal length.... in females, the size and shape of the nose is critical, along with facial shape. A long nose suggests to me a longer focal length to foreshorten somewhat, also avoiding a high angle for long nose, or long face is helpful.

Round face, sometimes a lighting which pulls the tonal range down on the sides so as to pull the center of the face out...

But, all so very subjective. Sometimes it works to simply try multiple camera angles, different lighting, and after about twenty or so trials, choose the best for a final shoot.

Vipmediastar_JZ

+1 on the nose. I liked shooting at 200mm now I like 300mm.

Vipmediastar_JZ

Im looking for CC on the WB only. I like the as shot my Mentor preffers the warmer one and most likely the bottom one.

Top As shot 5050 MIddle 5600 daylight bottom 6500 cloudy
The photo was taken during mostly cloudy moment

(also this is to see if my WB in camera is off)

WestEndFoto

Do you know how to fix white balance in Photoshop Vipmediastar. You can create a new threshold layer, use the sliders to find the darkest and lightest parts of the photo, select those with the colour marker (sic? - I do it without thinking about it), then use the levels adjustment on all three colours to set each colour to the same - I use 10 and 245.

Works 98% of the time to get the right colour. Once you are sure, you can tweak it from there.

Of course a grey card is the only sure fire way to nail white balance.

Vipmediastar_JZ

I will look into that. Any preference to which WB you preffer above?

spraynpray

6500

JonMcGuffin

For me, it's the 6500 and it's not close. When I first saw the shots I thought I was looking at a SOC vs Final Edit progression, but it was and is that obvious to me that the warmer rendition is much nicer given the subject and composition.

WestEndFoto

I was not sure as I am on my work monitor, but I was leaning towards 6500 until Spraynpray and JonMcGuffin posted. Now I am more confident. I will let you know if I change my mind after I get home tonite.

safyre

5050 or if you want a compromise, 5600. 6500 is just way too warm and overpowers everything from the background, to the hair, to the makeup. It's harder to see the details like the dirt on her face, etc. Just too much orange going on. 5050 is more cinematic and looks like something you would see in a film. 6500 looks like you slapped an instagram filter on it.

spraynpray

@safyre: Is your monitor in calibration? Because I looked at the images initially on my laptop (not calibrated but not too far out), following your post I checked on my editing machine (both screens calibrated) and still stand by 6500. As your opinion is pretty extreme, it makes me think you may need to re-calibrate your screen.

Msmoto

As noted, the idea of coming up with a meaningful critique on the colors, when we are viewing these on a multitude of different monitors.....?

In fact, I will sometimes find if I am doing my post processing in unusual ambient conditions, like in my travel trailer and the sunlight is pouring in, or something like that, I will post all the way to Flickr, review the image, then go back to LR5.7 and revise the image.

So, to offer my comments....I have not in my life, as far as I know, used anything but Auto WB in my Nikon digital bodies. I correct in post, and have found the ability to change virtually everything is adequate in post.

Having said that, if one is doing a high volume shoot, i.e., a wedding, needs to have the WB very close for each unedited frame, (so they look more professional) I can see how it would be potentially necessary to have the WB adjusted during the image capture process vs. post.

P.S. With film...totally different animal. In the 1960's we would purchase an entire emulsion run of e.g., Ektachrome 8" x 10" sheet film, do tests and come up with our own filter pack which was reevaluated weekly as processing and lighting issues changed. This in a studio with maybe thirty sets active at any one time......20+ photographers.

Msmoto

@Vipmediastar_JZ

Hope you understand I have done this simply to share my thinking, not anything better, but what is in my head....

starralazn

@msmoto
while the process sounds like a grand endeavor, it remains unfathomable to me (since i've never shot film exclusively before...)

as far as why @safyre may see the lighter 2 ones as better, I think it may have to do with the background color. the white oof elements in front of her mouth are close to neutral, whereas the increase in temperature of the third makes the picture very warm.. almost too warm, making foliage and the background look unrealistic? to me.

I've shot a lot out door portraits and events, and i have used the LR to adjust WB ( presets (sunlight, cloudy, shade) and manual) and while cloudy and shade makes portraits even warmer, properly exposed white surfaces become yellow. I personally don't know what is better, to have a warm portrait fitting into a warm coloured background, but i find it odd being too warm while converting from NEF to jpeg in LR, so, in this case, i would choose the daylight image.

JonMcGuffin

@msmoto
while the process sounds like a grand endeavor, it remains unfathomable to me (since i've never shot film exclusively before...)

as far as why @safyre may see the lighter 2 ones as better, I think it may have to do with the background color. the white oof elements in front of her mouth are close to neutral, whereas the increase in temperature of the third makes the picture very warm.. almost too warm, making foliage and the background look unrealistic? to me.

I've shot a lot out door portraits and events, and i have used the LR to adjust WB ( presets (sunlight, cloudy, shade) and manual) and while cloudy and shade makes portraits even warmer, properly exposed white surfaces become yellow. I personally don't know what is better, to have a warm portrait fitting into a warm coloured background, but i find it odd being too warm while converting from NEF to jpeg in LR, so, in this case, i would choose the daylight image.

I think safyre's opinion is just that, an opinion and certainly no worse than anybody elses. Some people just prefer different color temps and combinations thereof. There's really no right or wrong I would say but I do wonder if you polled 100 photographers here on this site and they voted, how that vote would go down. I suspect the 6500 would probably get 70% of the votes, but then again, that's 30% who don't agree.

@msmoto - I think your crop looks good. Obviously kind of a hack job in terms of removing the background but I don't know how you could do that much better anyway with an OOF background like that. It's cool you saw that pic in VIP's pic.

Jon

Msmoto

Hack job....for sure....LOL

donaldejose

I like Msmoto's revision. I just don't like the subject!

Vipmediastar_JZ

@msmoto I like what you did given your CC on flickr.
One flickr CC was also the cloudy WB.

If you guys had shot the same photo as shot would it have been as cool or warm as cloudy one?

Probably unrelated but we see colors different and that's why we calibrate monitors with tools.
I suppose I like cooler images but I may be going wrong about it.

That's what my mentor said, given the photo it should have been warm.
However the event organizers made a poster of his warm photos and cooled them. I like the cool wb poster.

Looks like I have to resend the camera to nikon for something unrelated but I will ask them to check WB.

sevencrossing

@ Vipmediastar_JZ
Sorry if you answered this already. Do you use a grey card and check WB in LR or similar

Vipmediastar_JZ

Yes I use one as much as possible.

calengor

Thoughts and comments welcomed on this image: