Feedback re EXPOSURE

Which image do you prefer?

  • Total voters
    81
EdinburghGary

EdinburghGary

Reply not Report
Suspended / Banned
Messages
19,271
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Guys,

I am trying to evaluate my current output at the studio, in terms of SHOOT to VIEWING (in other words, not the finished product). I have recently changed my lighting setup, not hugely, but enough to have an impact, however regardless of the change, keen to get your input / suggestions / crit etc....

This is a bizarre test, I have TWELVE versions of this shot, all ULTRA QUICK EDITS (other than the first, which is out of camera). The wee chap has dark skin:

1: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE (poll option 1)
69233792.jpg



2: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/3 A STOP (poll option 2)
96691945.jpg


3: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/2 A STOP (poll option 3)
35697127.jpg


4: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 2/3 A STOP (poll option 4)
92177725.jpg



1C: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, ADDED CONTRAST (poll option 5)
01c.jpg


2C: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/3 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST (poll option 6)
02cz.jpg
 
3C: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/2 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST (poll option 7)
03c.jpg


4C: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 2/3 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST (poll option 8)
04cq.jpg


1N: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, ADDED CONTRAST, DESAT (poll option 9)
01nd.jpg


2N: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/3 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST, DESAT (poll option 10)
02n.jpg


3N: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 1/5 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST, DESAT (poll option 11)
03n.jpg


4N: OUT OF CAMERA EXPOSURE, MINUS 2/3 A STOP, ADDED CONTRAST, DESAT (poll option 12)
04nt.jpg



Now if you are still with me, if you can / will, tell me your overall favourite of the bunch, and why....tell me what you don't like about the other extremes....

Keen to hear your views!

Gary.
 
1 has lost skin detail on the face
2-3 are my pick of the bunch - voted for 2
4 is beginning to lose it's punch

Everything else - the colours look 'dirty'
 
1N by far, some of those look like he's spent an hour in the tanning salon. To me 1N looks the most natural by a long way.

The picture numbers don't match up with the numbers in the poll though so I've not been able to vote.
 
Dman said:
1N by far, some of those look like he's spent an hour in the tanning salon. To me 1N looks the most natural by a long way.

The picture numbers don't match up with the numbers in the poll though so I've not been able to vote.
Click to expand...

Sorry I maybe should have added, he is mixed race - he does have a very dark tan...

G.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Sorry I maybe should have added, he is mixed race - he does have a very dark tan...

G.
Click to expand...

This was exactly what I was going to ask when looking at these!

The extremely desat ones dont work for me so number 4 be my pick :)
 
EdinburghGary said:
Sorry I maybe should have added, he is mixed race - he does have a very dark tan...

G.
Click to expand...

Ah, that explains it then :D

Knowing that, I'm stuck between 2N and 3N. I don't mind over exposure as such, I do think some of your previous stuff has been over exposed but that's a personal thing. If the boy was white then 1N would have been spot on for me personally but now I know he's mixed race, it's too far over.

Again though, it's all personal opinion, what doesn't work for me could work wonders for your customers and vice versa. You always have to bear in mind that most parents will love 99% of pictures taken of their kids as they have no concept of photography like we do, they simply love nice smiley pics of their kids. I'd be surprised if anything you've ever posted hasn't gone down a treat with the parents or subject.
 
I'm with Phil on this one, I'm torn between 2/3. Not so keen on the desaturated ones but I'm on a non calibrated lappy. I bet the parents like the out of camera with contrast because it is very striking(jumps out of the screen)
 
At my viewings, I normally show ONE photo several times like this, and VIVID almost always gets chosen, people seem to want those colours...

Anyway guys, keep the feedback coming, its going to prove invaluable - I will do more tests and examples in due course, really keen to get a wide selection of opinions...

G.
 
Voted for no 2 myself as it was the best imho.


Are you about sunday morning matey... " a postcode or mobile will make a flying trip[ easier lol"


MD
 
Deffo No 3 for me, although I'm guessing his actual skin colour is more like 4? - I can't see anything else that looks just 'right' to my eyes, although the parents would no doubt love it if you 'popped' the colours in the top a bit more... actually amazing the difference between 1/2 stop and 2/3 stop next to each other!
 
I voted for No. 3 (I am the only one so far :thinking:)

I just think it represents ( on my monitor ) the truest colours, slightly deeper saturation than No.2 which makes the eyes pop a bit more and makes the best of the shot for me.

With my relative noob experience for what it is worth. :thumbs:
 
EdinburghGary said:
You up here on Sunday? :D

G.
Click to expand...



I will be passing edi about 2am friday morning lol. Leaving Perth sunday morning heading to your place then home...


Dave
 
EdinburghGary said:
Cheers VIC. Any feedback on 1 and 2? :D

G.
Click to expand...

I think 1 and 2 are bit too overexposed and 4 just looks the more natural :) To be honest I am not the biggest fan (or expert) on the white background thing :exit: Still love looking at your stuff though:thumbs:
 
I think they're all too yellow, confirmed by looking at the greys in the reflection. I'd guess you're using a Nikon, it looks like it. (I note actually your profile says a D3, so that mystery is no longer! Nikon's seem to lose the plot in the red channel quite quickly, which can leave skin highlights clipped yellow instead of pink. *hugs Fuji*.)

Try sticking a curve on number 2, and dropping the midpoint of the blue channel from 50 to 46 (Looking at the Input/Output in the curves dialog).
That leaves the shadows a tad warm ( 3b ) which you could correct by shifting the end point from 100 to 98 (Again, input/output in the curves dialog. Use the keyboard to adjust the values as it can be easier than the mouse). The lil' fella does have straw coloured hair though, so the extra points in the b channel could be accounted for by that quite easily, so perhaps no need to fuss on this particular image.

Monitors are far too variable to trust, but the info palette never lies.

NOTE!!! I have my curves dialog set to pigment/ink NOT to "light". The values won't make sense if you're looking at the curves in the 0-255 "Dark at the bottom, light at the top" sense.
 
Denyerec said:
I think they're all too yellow, confirmed by looking at the greys in the reflection. I'd guess you're using a Nikon, it looks like it. (I note actually your profile says a D3, so that mystery is no longer! Nikon's seem to lose the plot in the red channel quite quickly, which can leave skin highlights clipped yellow instead of pink. *hugs Fuji*.)

Try sticking a curve on number 2, and dropping the midpoint of the blue channel from 50 to 46 (Looking at the Input/Output in the curves dialog).
That leaves the shadows a tad warm ( 3b ) which you could correct by shifting the end point from 100 to 98 (Again, input/output in the curves dialog. Use the keyboard to adjust the values as it can be easier than the mouse). The lil' fella does have straw coloured hair though, so the extra points in the b channel could be accounted for by that quite easily, so perhaps no need to fuss on this particular image.

Monitors are far too variable to trust, but the info palette never lies.

NOTE!!! I have my curves dialog set to pigment/ink NOT to "light". The values won't make sense if you're looking at the curves in the 0-255 "Dark at the bottom, light at the top" sense.
Click to expand...




Some very good feedback there.. " and just what the op is after i suspect"


md
 
Gary No1 - Reds in the face are totally blown. You say sooc - Did you do any Lr/aperture adjustments to the file? Colours just look odd on my montior and exposure too high. Very yellow!

No2 - Reds on the face are still way too hot and still quite a strong yelllow cast there.

No3 - Starting to get a little better but colours still looking odd - Again very yellow.

You only need to look at the RGB values to see red very high and blue very low giving the odd cast.

Is there something in the room causing this?

None of the images look right (I'm saying this in a helpful way Gary so hope you don't mind mate)! I want to see you nail this problem 1N is the closest though I think.
 
Gary
Just as a comparison, here's one of mine sooc - Slightly under exposed Original all zerod in Lr except brightness standard at +50 and contrast standard at +25. I didn't use this image so easy to pick out -

BH1-1.jpg


Here's the 20 second edit in Lr only using auto mask to whiten the floor. and +0.75 in exposure +19 in blacks - Nothing else.

To me the skin tones are natural and she's slightly darker than fair too. Look at the skin tone differences in yours. RGB values on the bright side of the face are R220 G201 and B174. Compared to yours they are very different.

BH2-1.jpg


And a final edit for presenting - Again a 2 minute job (less actually)! Brighter as more contrast added RGB now is R244 G215 B196 (on the bright side of her face - camera right)

BH3-1.jpg


Now I'm open to crticism too if anyone thinks these are off? Would be good to know for me too :)
 
Denyerec said:
Monitors are far too variable to trust, but the info palette never lies.
Click to expand...


Too true.

I am not sure about any of them, I know he has dark skin but the whites of his eyes appear grey in all of the shots.
 
Ok, I picked 2... but then realised I'm looking at this on my work monitor which is always a tad darker than my home one... So I'm thinking that I would have actually preferred option 3 or 4! So sorry if I've mislead your poll ever so slightly.

My reason for my choice was it was the most natural looking one with just the right balance of punch and exposure. As I said though, I'm guessing that at home I would have made a different choice.
 
Whoops - voted for the wrong option (I meant 10 instead of 11)!

The first lot look waaaay too orange/red to me. The second lot with the desaturation look much nicer. If you hadn't said he was mixed race I would have gone for the most overexposed one, but given that fact I would go for the second most overexposed one - i.e. number 10. Although even then he does look like he could do with a bump in the curves a little maybe. Tough call without seeing the child for real!
 
Guys,

Thanks for all the feedback. I think what I am going to do is continue more or less unchanged for the time being....after having tried this a few times, clients always seem really happy at the viewing when I explain these are brighter than printed....

I am going to really reign in the processing though on the sold images, I want to ensure that those are perfect. I was reading that shooting way into the right of the histogram is not a bad thing as lots of nice data to pull back, and massive potential in PP....

Remember these are ONLY for the viewing, the final output I am obviously happy to spend time on as a result of the payment.

I do have one potential *MASSIVE* change on the cards, but not ready to commit yet. Basically drop the pure white backdrop, get a pro in to design and build a perfect infinity wall and reflective floor, and shoot ONE LIGHT using my Bowens 1000 pro and Octobox 150. As I said, not sure.

G.
 
tiler65 said:
I know he has dark skin but the whites of his eyes appear grey in all of the shots.
Click to expand...

I'd expect quite a bit of blue in the whites of the eyes of toddlers, it's a natural thing and I'd expect ot see increasing amounts of yellow in the eyes of people over 40.

It's the natural blueing that may appear grey at this size / colour depth.
 
I'm quickly learning I need more than one light! Hair light/fill light have their uses. (not allowing already for the background lights if required).
 
Picture 2 is refusing to load, so based on your steer on skin tone I've voted for #3, even though I suspect the skin in that image is lighter than real life, but then that's art, is it not? :)

On my monitor I'm not keen on the versions with added contrast or desat.
 
I voted for 9 as it was least wrong in my opinion, but as you later said he had darker skin I am not so sure about that any more. As mentioned above the skin tones are way too yellow. That needs to be fixed before adjusting the exposure. I don't know what software you use, but Lightroom makes it dead easy to get these things spot on in two clicks. I only ever use photoshop if I need to do something very special.
 
no.4 for me, but surely your customers would want to see full edited images so they can see the final image they are paying for or does the final image not look that much different from the quick edit?
 
Cheers guys,

After saying I was not going to touch the setup, I spent tonight working with the lights, and have something I feel is much more balanced. (will post in due course).

Corby, I basically show the customers bright vibrant photos on the plasma, and explain they will be toned down for print. People seem indifferent, I still get all the ooh's and ahh's, its not really the customer that is driving me to want to improve this, I really want to get it perfect for personal reasons as much as commercial reasons.

G.
 
Gary
I find that even bad images (some I kjnow I shouldn't show) get oohs and ahhs and tears!! Non photographers generally don't know good from bad particularly when it's their kids. They may think some are better than others and it's not always the ones you think are technocally better.

Regards the colour and exposure, it's how you see your images and your own personal take but you can create stunning images without having the image over exposed - In a well exposed image, it's easy to lift it to high key without bringing in much if any noise.....

The calibration tool will help how you see them on the screen. Every pro should have their monitors calibrated.
 
EOS_JD said:
Gary
I find that even bad images (some I kjnow I shouldn't show) get oohs and ahhs and tears!! Non photographers generally don't know good from bad particularly when it's their kids. They may think some are better than others and it's not always the ones you think are technocally better.

Regards the colour and exposure, it's how you see your images and your own personal take but you can create stunning images without having the image over exposed - In a well exposed image, it's easy to lift it to high key without bringing in much if any noise.....

The calibration tool will help how you see them on the screen. Every pro should have their monitors calibrated.
Click to expand...

That's my point, customers are happy regardless. It's why I'm obsessing, as I know how easy it must be to just accept the status quo and run with it. I'm absolutely committed to providing good work, and eventually if I can, the best in the area. It sounds arrogant, and its not meant to, but I really believe patience and perseverance will pay off. I know I can nail the other aspects of the business, I don't want the final product to be a let down.

G.
 
We all want to be the best we can be Gary - Nothing arrogant in what you're saying at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top