Have to go against the grain and praise and say that the PP on the skin is more then a little over the top, especially for a child who already has close to flawless skin. The loss of a defining feature such as freckles is just too much in my opinion.
She didn't lose any freckles in my processing - I love freckles. Always has to be one in the bunch. I'm curious as to how you came to this conclusion anyhow - I have not posted any SOOC shots from this session here. Things I DID do: sculpt and enhance the lighting that was already there. Things I did NOT do: obliterate any freckles.
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
She didn't lose any freckles in my processing - I love freckles. I'm curious as to how you came to this conclusion anyhow - I have not posted any SOOC shots from this session here.
Because I retouch fashion photographs professionally and the work is very apparent.
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
Always has to be one in the bunch
I agree.
You are very defensive for such a critique; I'll refrain from posting in your threads in the future unless I have nothing but praise for you.
I'm disagreeing with you. I did not touch the freckles, nor did I do anything to the photos that would alter the freckles. I'm not allowed to disagree? She did not have a heavy scattering of freckles as some redheads do. And ironically, when people DO have heavy freckling, I do the exact opposite of what you are accusing me of doing to these photos and actually enhance them and make them stand out more. I'm pretty sure I know what I did/did not do during editing. lol
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
I'm disagreeing with you. I did not touch the freckles, nor did I do anything to the photos that would alter the freckles. I'm not allowed to disagree? She did not have a heavy scattering of freckles as some redheads do. And ironically, when people DO have heavy freckling, I do the exact opposite of what you are accusing me of doing to these photos and actually enhance them and make them stand out more. I'm pretty sure I know what I did/did not do during editing. lol
The skin has been retouched, looking like a gaussian styled skin filtering system (such as Nik, DA's Beauty Box, etc - also achievable manually) with the layer altered in areas of the eyes/lips and then sharped on those areas. I'm not saying you went out of your way to remove her freckles; it's just that these filtering or gaussian methods for retouch remove detail and give a mushy skin look to photographs and in the process removes fine detail.
I wouldn't worry about what I think; You have your FM and FB legions who love your work and I'm sure 'the client loved it' as well, so to take offense at the "always one in the crowd" (..who didn't find your image perfect I guess?) seems silly. I will not dare to be the voice of dissention in your threads going forward.
42 out of 43 people think your work is fantastic. 97.67441860465115 % of us think you did a great job... you scored an A+ for this series. (just getting ready for my math classes to start again )
I'm going to disagree with you Jeremy as I think she is just a young girl with great skin. I think the lighting might washout a little bit of the fine details in the skin but I don't think they appear overly smooth for a person her age. Also, being the images are web size and not full res... really hard to make that leap ... Just my $.02
hatch1921 wrote:
42 out of 43 people think your work is fantastic. 97.67441860465115 % of us think you did a great job... you scored an A+ for this series. (just getting ready for my math classes to start again )
I'm going to disagree with you Jeremy as I think she is just a young girl with great skin. I think the lighting might washout a little bit of the fine details in the skin but I don't think they appear overly smooth for a person her age. Also, being the images are web size and not full res... really hard to make that leap ... Just my $.02
For sure, hell, I didn't even say I didn't like the images, just that the skin is over-processed. Will gladly view the RAW to be proven wrong of course!
jeremy_clay wrote:
For sure, hell, I didn't even say I didn't like the images, just that the skin is over-processed. Will gladly view the RAW to be proven wrong of course!
all is well in the universe... sent a PM reply so we avoid taking away from the post.
Before and after. The before is the raw file with not even so much as a single LR edit or noise removal on it. Just resized for the web. I like the edit. This is my style of editing. This was also not a paid shoot but just something for me for fun. Therefore, I played up the color of her hair and her eyes a bit more than I normally would. I touched up the circles under her eyes and enhanced the lighting and colors. I did not, however, delete any freckles or turn her skin to mush. I never do that.
This discussion is going in circles. I know you like your edit, I know a million people probably do; there is no need to get defensive or justify your stylistic decisions to me. You didn't purposely 'delete' freckles etc. fine. But even in this low-rez sample the texture loss and localized blurring is apparent (the nose bridge, the brow, etc). It doesn't matter what I think of course, so please don't take so much offense - I just feel like a children's skin looks better retouched without skin smoothing as done here.
Oh my god!! I need a 200 2.0l!! hehe,You and your subject deserve the merits!! I am sure you can make killer photos with a kit lense!! I really like the last one,almost look like her hair are on fire!!
Lisa its a beautiful portrait and i love the strong use of complimentary colors (red & green) here. Nicely seen as executed. I shoot with my 200 2L wide open all the time and as long as the eyes are sharp in my opinion you are good to go unless the photograph is about an eye brow or a nose then those should be sharp. Otherwise, rock on.
(just getting ready for my math classes to start again 
)