I'd suggest dialing the main light back a lot and raising it higher. The flash is very overexposed. Were you using a gold reflector by chance? These are very orange. Maybe avoid gold until you have a better handle on controlling color.
To work on getting accurate color in post, try shooting RAW, then use a White Balance reference tool (like the WhiBal) - or a ColorChecker . Shoot with a fixed White Balance setting in camera (NOT-Auto - daylight is good for instance) as a reference and then sampling your WhiBal card, or creating a ColorChecker custom color profile will help a great deal as you work with the RAW images in Lightroom (or other RAW developer tool). Try it and post back!
Doc, good shots of your lovely wife BUT as KE says, whoa, you need to dial that key back a bit.
With as much light as it currently has not sure you even need a hair light, might just be adding to already too much light until you get the brightness under control. Use your blinkies to help you out, on camera.
Slide the orange a bit to the left and/or the color temp(or both) a bit to the left as well until the orange looks more natural.
I'd crop #1 about mid chest to at least get rid of about 1/2 of that blown out sleeve. Remember the eye always goes to the brightest areas first!
But otherwise good renditions.
John
Thanks KE,
I used a shoot through white umbrella.
I added some extra exposure in lightroom to make skin appear smoother (we're not in our 20's).
I'm wondering if I did more "damage" to the photo editing it. Will start over on them and repost.
KE_Photo wrote:
I'd suggest dialing the main light back a lot and raising it higher. The flash is very overexposed. Were you using a gold reflector by chance? These are very orange. Maybe avoid gold until you have a better handle on controlling color.
To work on getting accurate color in post, try shooting RAW, then use a White Balance reference tool (like the WhiBal) - or a ColorChecker . Shoot with a fixed White Balance setting in camera (NOT-Auto - daylight is good for instance) as a reference and then sampling your WhiBal card, or creating a ColorChecker custom color profile will help a great deal as you work with the RAW images in Lightroom (or other RAW developer tool). Try it and post back!...Show more →
Thanks John,
I appreciate both you and KE taking the time to help out. Will try re-editing photos and if that doesn't work will shoot again.
JohnSil wrote:
Doc, good shots of your lovely wife BUT as KE says, whoa, you need to dial that key back a bit.
With as much light as it currently has not sure you even need a hair light, might just be adding to already too much light until you get the brightness under control. Use your blinkies to help you out, on camera.
Slide the orange a bit to the left and/or the color temp(or both) a bit to the left as well until the orange looks more natural.
I'd crop #1 about mid chest to at least get rid of about 1/2 of that blown out sleeve. Remember the eye always goes to the brightest areas first!
But otherwise good renditions.
John...Show more →
I am actually not so critical of the light location as the previous posters. I think the hairlight was a nice touch, even if not strictly necessary, as it gives a hint of separation from the background that is similar in color and tone to the subject's hair. The key light location might do well to be raised slightly, but it also might not due to the subject's glasses. Also, raising it might make the shadows more prominent. It's probably worth a try to get the light up a slight bit and maybe a tad bit more to the right, but good job on the OP for paying attention to and avoiding reflections in the glasses.
Composition and framing are okay. For both photos, I think a little more room on either side would be an improvement. Perhaps a background with contrasting or neutral color would improve the image, or less light on the background.
Overall, yes, these are over exposed and the white balance is off. It looks like one or more color channels are blown, as is. Did you shoot in RAW? It might be possible to re-process and salvage it. If you are able to bring the exposure down and recover the blown color channels and tweak the color balance to be a little cooler, then the other criticisms are relatively minor and you'd have a very nice image.
Thanks Amacal1,
I shot both jpeg and raw.
Like I said earlier, I may have been the one to lessen the photos.
I'll post a sooc jpeg later as well, that might be a better indicator.
amacal1 wrote:
I am actually not so critical of the light location as the previous posters. I think the hairlight was a nice touch, even if not strictly necessary, as it gives a hint of separation from the background that is similar in color and tone to the subject's hair. The key light location might do well to be raised slightly, but it also might not due to the subject's glasses. Also, raising it might make the shadows more prominent. It's probably worth a try to get the light up a slight bit and maybe a tad bit more to the right, but good job on the OP for paying attention to and avoiding reflections in the glasses.
Composition and framing are okay. For both photos, I think a little more room on either side would be an improvement. Perhaps a background with contrasting or neutral color would improve the image, or less light on the background.
Overall, yes, these are over exposed and the white balance is off. It looks like one or more color channels are blown, as is. Did you shoot in RAW? It might be possible to re-process and salvage it. If you are able to bring the exposure down and recover the blown color channels and tweak the color balance to be a little cooler, then the other criticisms are relatively minor and you'd have a very nice image. ...Show more →
A few suggestions...
First take an ambient photo of the model with no strobes showing a basic exposure. Then stop it down by two stops (f/5.6 to f/11). The image is darker, but still has detail in the shadows. Now simply add your strobes and only adjust the strobes. No part of the image is going to get any darker because you're only adjusting the strobe. Next, place the the light(soft box, shoot through umbrella, grid etc.) at a 45 degree angle to your model This usually creates flattering lighting and most importantly contrast. Controlling contrast goes a long way to flattering photos as it shows dimension. Using a smaller light to rake the wall behind her would give a nice separation between for more dimension. Remember to only adjust the lights not camera settings, but do remember (shutter speed controls ambient) If using another strobe as fill, I usually adjust the color temp so it's slightly different than the warmer key. I place it up and off that the side a bit to create a ratio and add a subtle hair light. You can also use the inverse square law that simply means if you double the distance (strobe) the intensity drops a 1/4. This is useful in larger studios or on location. Also, use a gray card for WB by having your model hold a simple 18% gray card under the current lighting take a pic. Use this as a reference when editing. Simply use the WB dropper tool to place it on the gray card pic and sync with all pics using that same lighting. Using strobes adds so much more to the creative process of portraits and it gets you your "signature" look hopefully. Additionally, study old dutch master painters like Vermeer. Their use of natural lighting is incredible for creating dimensional depth, but also applies to strobes and the creative photographer.
Doc25 wrote:
ok, Here is one shot straight out of camera.
So do I need to stop trying to edit?
Oh! That's quite nice. Well done. Exposure looks much closer to right on the money. The overall contrast is lower, as well, which suits the subject a little more in this case, I think. Color balance is also a lot better here.
No, you shouldn't completely give up on processing your pictures. There is still some benefit you could realize by post processing, and having a RAW file available is always best for such cases. You may consider whether your computer/monitor is showing you accurate colors. If your monitor is making your pictures look overly cool (which is not uncommon), then you will surely be warming them up too much to compensate. It's understandable that you might like to give your photos some extra "pop" and contrast and color when you have access to tools that let you do so, easily. With some time and experience you may temper this some.
For this picture, some of my previous critiques still stand, but are minor. My only real critique now is that the large white patch on her shirt in the first picture is a bit distracting and draws the viewer's eye away from her face. You could consider adding a subtle vignette to attract attention back towards the face and also taking the overall exposure down just ever so slightly. Also, I think both are framed a little tightly, and could maybe stand to have a little more breathing room around the subject. Also, the background is a little bright and too similar in color to the colors for the subject, so you don't get much separation from the background, but this is very much subjective and you can ignore this if you disagree.
Again, these are minor critiques. Overall, nice job on the lighting and attention to the (lack of) reflection in subject's glasses.
Thanks Amacal and John,
I did use a meter to get exposure and they were shot at f5.6
I color corrected my monitor last night as well. It was definitely too bright.
The SOOC image is much better - color-wise and exposure-wise.
So do I need to stop trying to edit?
Yes - if edits keep coming out like they did - but -
No - you just need to improve on some basics of exposure and color. Work on it!
Besides the tools and processes to do this - also just use your eyes to compare and adjust accordingly.
There are many freely available skin tone references out there - here is one I posted some years ago on DPR - feel free to grab it and keep it handy to compare the color you are working on. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58195963
Once you start getting the large scale things like exposure and color dialed in, then portraits also need attention to fine details - while one post praised no reflections from the glasses, it entirely missed the dark shadows the rims caused which are very unsightly. A good retoucher can fix this but it's often better to find a live shoot solution if possible. (move or add lights/reflectors etc. to minimize shadows like these).
Thanks,
Didn't even notice shadows from the frames until you mentioned it.
You also mentioned that I should move the light up higher, could you explain what results to expect? As you can see from the catchlights it is to the right and raised. About how much higher should it be above the head?
KE_Photo wrote:
The SOOC image is much better - color-wise and exposure-wise.
Yes - if edits keep coming out like they did - but -
No - you just need to improve on some basics of exposure and color. Work on it!
Besides the tools and processes to do this - also just use your eyes to compare and adjust accordingly.
There are many freely available skin tone references out there - here is one I posted some years ago on DPR - feel free to grab it and keep it handy to compare the color you are working on. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58195963
Once you start getting the large scale things like exposure and color dialed in, then portraits also need attention to fine details - while one post praised no reflections from the glasses, it entirely missed the dark shadows the rims caused which are very unsightly. A good retoucher can fix this but it's often better to find a live shoot solution if possible. (move or add lights/reflectors etc. to minimize shadows like these).
Keep on working at it - each time gets better! ...Show more →
Doc25 wrote:
Thanks,
Didn't even notice shadows from the frames until you mentioned it.
You also mentioned that I should move the light up higher, could you explain what results to expect? As you can see from the catchlights it is to the right and raised. About how much higher should it be above the head?
There's no right or wrong really so this is all IMO etc. Right now most of the reflection of the circular modifier is visible in her eyes and the shadows appear to be close to horizontal with bright light hitting her arm and neck. When the light is higher it will feather off towards the ground - vs hitting her arm first. I don't think you mentioned what lights - but if there's a modeling light try turning it on and seeing how the shadows and brightest areas move when you adjust the light's position. Experiment!
Check out the ten gazillion articles and videos on Portrait Lighting and play with the looks -
See what I mean? There are so many styles and looks - a little higher (2-3') might be more pleasing though, that's all I was saying!
Thanks,
This time I was just using an off camera "strobe" so no modeling light. Thanks for the link as well, I'll take a look at it.
I understand there's no perfect, but ... still want people to look at my pictures and say "yeah!"
KE_Photo wrote:
There's no right or wrong really so this is all IMO etc. Right now most of the reflection of the circular modifier is visible in her eyes and the shadows appear to be close to horizontal with bright light hitting her arm and neck. When the light is higher it will feather off towards the ground - vs hitting her arm first. I don't think you mentioned what lights - but if there's a modeling light try turning it on and seeing how the shadows and brightest areas move when you adjust the light's position. Experiment!
Check out the ten gazillion articles and videos on Portrait Lighting and play with the looks -
See what I mean? There are so many styles and looks - a little higher (2-3') might be more pleasing though, that's all I was saying!...Show more →
Honestly, the first thing I'd do is check the calibration of your monitor and I would think it might be way off as the highlights on her left cheek and shoulder/arm are way blown out, whereas they looked fairly good straight out of camera. I think your lights were too far off camera right as I've never seen a headshot before where the brightest part of the shot was the arm. You can also look under the left side of her nose (our right) and you'll see there is now shadow, which indicates the light is lower than the nose. Typically, you want the light up a little higher.
