The pp will work for some, others will dislike or hate it. It's great that you're experimenting and trying different things. That's how you find your personal vision. If you're not sure if it worked, then it's probably not exactly what you were going for, so you need to keep tinkering around with it. But you can't rely on others' interpretation of it.
Having said that, for me I like most parts of what you've done. There's just a tad too much red tone in it for me, but just a little. It's a very warm tone, and I think it works well for this overall image.
I like it. Beautiful model, beautiful background. What lens do you use? Not PP work related, I would cut the bottom a little bit, may be up to the end of her hair.
Beautiful shot. Cute model. I like the post work, but do you ever wonder why we want to do so much work beyond the shot? I do the same things ... always looking for a style of something.
It is little easier to offer critique or suggestions on these "stylistically-toned" images when you can explain your objectives a little bit. For example, the evaluation may be slightly different in the case of a portrait where the assumed objective is portray the subject effectively vs. a shot for a magazine or catalog where graphic and color matching elements may play a larger role. So with that in mind, I'll just offer some observations, which may be neither "good" or "bad".
- When you apply a fairly strong tint, it starts to move the image towards monochrome so some of the same thought criteria start to kick-in as when considering color or black-and-white. Does eliminating color variation and concentrating only on light and dark help the image or not? In this image, for example, any subtle color differentiation in her eyes has been largely lost. Did you gain enough with the color tint to make up for that? The color contrast between the scarf and the other elements in the frame will be less with this tinting. Is that desirable outcome for you or not? Did making the image more monochrome help eliminate distracting elements? Can the light and dark tones carry the image by themselves?
- There is very little contrast in the face. Going to an extreme with this can produce an effect that looks like eyes, nose, and mouth pasted to a wall. In this case, it's certainly not that bad but it still might be worthwhile thinking about objectives. If it's a portrait, does the softer, low-contrast look better reflect her personality? Would a version with a little more definition be more attractive? If for a magazine layout or clothing shoot, maybe you don't WANT the face to necessarily be the star or attract too much attention.
- A slight technical point: the reds in the scarf appear to me to have been saturation clipped somewhere in your workflow. It's not technically clipped in this Jpeg but I say this because of the way the scarf looks kind of blotchy and lacks detail in certain areas. This effect does contrast with the soft, detailed look of the rest of the image and it is hard for me to imagine an objective that would make that desirable.
- Often with this type of processing there is an objective to produce something "different". To evaluate the success for that kind of objective, it is necessary to understand how strong was the desire to favor that criteria beyond all others and what is the baseline you are using for determining "different". For example regarding the strength of the difference, I would say you have a balance here of the tinting but still producing a reasonably attractive image of the young lady. Regarding the baseline, I would say you have something that is "different" than a straight-processed shot but not necessarily very different from what is currently seen in magazines or even what is fairly common here on FM.
- Sometimes the objective is to emulate film in some fashion, but there are so many types of film and processing that it is nearly impossible to evaluate that without knowing which film and developing process was the target.
Great shot of your subject, and I like the fact she's not centered. Background is beautiful. The PP I don't care for. I'd really like to see this photo with more standard PP. And as Eyeball mentioned, a touch more contrast might be good. All is all, an excellent capture, and keep experimenting!
Gunslinger wrote:
Beautiful shot. Cute model. I like the post work, but do you ever wonder why we want to do so much work beyond the shot? I do the same things ... always looking for a style of something.
Great shot!
How very true...sometimes I do PP just for the sake of doing it.
The sad fact is people want weird processing. A naturally processed shot takes longer to process too.
having said all that it's a nice shot and the processing well if the OP is after that look than great. i find myself maybe editing a certain look from a session a specific way instead of just one image.
I like the composition and the background too. I do agree that the red tint is a bit too much and the features have become softer because of this, its not that sharp.
Thanks to all that looked and even more to those that took the time to comment! This is the stuff I'm looking for as a new photographer (I take pictures of my kids and family).
I should have made my intentions a little more clear. I was really trying something new and "different" for me, besides my "standard" PP. I have seen many amazing examples on this forum of what I was going after...a softer/film look I guess. I honestly don't know enough technically to know what to call it! So from that standpoint, my only objective was something outside my normal "box". All the comments/suggestions are extremely helpful and I appreciate it! Again, if anyone has suggestion as to some "recipes" for this look, or where I might be able to find some guidance, I'd love to hear about them. Trial and error is always fun, but I find myself getting frustrated easily as I'm a LR and PS novice as well.
And for "fsaigain", it was shot with 5d mii and 70-200 2.8ii, natural light.
