I set my camera up outside my place of work and took random portraits of some friends for fun. Here is the first on 8x10 x-ray film w/ Gundlach Radar:
No it was a windy, rainy day and we were underneath a park's picnic area (roof only). The raw scan had green in the shadows of her flesh tone and pink highlights, with blue overall, thus I got to experimenting and deviating from reality in Photoshop. It will also convert to B&W beautifully and this is my standard operating procedure - shooting color negative gives you unlimited options. Probably getting a better drum scan would give me cleaner flesh tones, I think I am pressing the limits of my poor Epson 700.May i ask if there was some strobes or lights of any kind involved? I see a catchlight in her eye but can't figure if it's an artificial light or not
I don't care for how perfect her eye make-up is... I dodged the eye catchlight slightly but didn't add them, I also had to soften the eyes and remove some minor wrinkles, paint with color-only underneath, fix lines and lip edges around her mouth, slightly bring out the weak chin, and liquify her arms and shoulders to bring them in and also slightly fix the arm-fat wrinkles and hint at larger breasts. Oh and thin her neck and sharpen the angle between it and her shoulder. And take out some meat between cheek and ear that often looks unhuman. And then I had to go over and using the color-only mode with the right flesh color on the paintbrush tool, fix all the splotches of strange colors we all have. And then add a "peach" layer, selecting editing the mask to let the underlying color through (use a Wacom tablet). adjusted the eyes to pop out but not too much, this is the hardest part and usually where you see poor work. All to make her look like herself ;-) this is far less retouching than she is used to, she is a working catalog model and acts in commercials/small roles in LA.
I'm sure someone will have a wry comment about all this but it is what's expected for commercial work and to have happy clients. I don't think it is excessive myself but I've been doing Photoshop retouching on people for twenty years.
Starting to use lights outdoors more often, stay tuned as the weather is going to Hell and I will need to. Just bought more sandbags for the stands....
210 APO-Symmar on 4x5 Portra 400 at f/8, 1/60, kind of underexposed.
Thanks everyone... starting with a good looking person helps the most, if you follow the number of comments it is always proportional to the attractiveness of the subject regardless of the photographer!
Another take ~ I'll probably use this one, I don't want to do a bunch of fake color - if you show it, people will ask for it and you get stuck trying to duplicate a one-off situation.
Last edited by Frank Petronio; 27-Sep-2012 at 10:26.
Thank you very much for the extensive answer, Sir.
I was actually wondering the origin of the smooth highlights on her cheeks while her forehead was a bit darker: now it all makes sense underneath the picnic area. I'd vote for the color version if i was asked to
And will remember to shoot next picnic i do
I normally prefer black and white portraits but in this case I agree with Myzine and prefer the color version. Her eyes are captivating!
Frank, both the color and BW versions are terrific. I don't know which one I like better.
Corran, that's a good, straightforward portrait. Does he like it?
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Bookmarks