Back to the portraits - my mum

[JimMcrae]

I've been on a mission recently in an attempt to improve my portrait shots, but here we are again, hitting another brick wall and running to POTN for advice! :)

I took this shot of my mum, converted the raw file, adjusted the levels and... that's it. I'm by no means trying to imply that I think it's perfect, but I just can't think of anything else to do to it. I thought of softening her skin, wrinkes, shadows from specs, removing skin blemishes, sharpening eyes, etc. but none of that seemed appropriate; I wanted a shot of my mum, not Barbie. I considered the wb might be a bit out, but I don't think it is. She's 84 years old and as such her skin's maybe not as vibrant as it used to be.

I may not be looking at this objectively enough with the subject being so close to me, so what I'd like to know is what people think is wrong with it and how you would improve it.

Also, if you take a close look at her left eye, the lens from her specs has magnified a part of her skin on the edge of her face, making it look kind of deformed. Should I do something to remove that? A bit of cloning perhaps? Could I have avoided that in the first place, other than telling her to lose the Gregory Pecks?

Thanks if you've read this far :) and any cc would be greatly appreciated, as always.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2619/4145741824_37ecaa642f_b.jpg

[ScottKCooper]

Different background, have her looking toward the camera more (to avoid the view through the specs at the edge), have her straighten the necklace chain, and the collar on her right hand side of her cardigan. I think I'd wait until she relaxes her eyebrows a bit more as she's smiling more with them than her mouth. Keep shooting!

[JimMcrae]

Different background, have her looking toward the camera more (to avoid the view through the specs at the edge), have her straighten the necklace chain, and the collar on her right hand side of her cardigan. I think I'd wait until she relaxes her eyebrows a bit more as she's smiling more with them than her mouth. Keep shooting!

Good points Scott, cheers.

Incidentally, the background is an old sheet draped over the window frame. I need to get some decent backgrounds. :)

[ScottKCooper]

don't we all. I also notice that a tighter crop helps focus the subject, and not the background.

[Annie Social]

I wouldn't worry too much about the distortion from her glasses; that's to be expected and I see it all the time.
I'd like to see a slightly warm backlight, in addition to the other things mentioned.

[corkneyfonz]

I like it but you're playing to the half truth about Scot's being tight wads.

[JimMcrae]

Cheers Scott, I'll look into that. I agree with your comments on the background - it's hideous. The stage I'm at, I was simply looking for a plain background that wouldn't distract attention from the subject, so a handy bed sheet seemed just the job. Are there any guidelines on what backgrounds go well for specific age/hair colour/effects or whatever, or is it purely creative/experience?

Thank you Annie. My problem is I've only just moved to two lights and off-camera flash and three or more sounds like rocket science to me just now :) I understand the point you're making though.

Corkneyfonz, in a way I am being tight but mainly because I'm not too sure on what kit to buy next and don't want to waste cash on junk. I'm looking into backgrounds just now and hope to get something in the next few weeks (they're not cheap are they!) I like to think of us as 'careful' with money as opposed to tight :) Thanks for the comments.

[pixiephoto]

I think your mom is beautiful. You are lucky to have the oportunity to take such a wonderful picture of her, that you will treasure for years to come.

[JimMcrae]

I think your mom is beautiful. You are lucky to have the oportunity to take such a wonderful picture of her, that you will treasure for years to come.

What a lovely comment! Thank you pixie. :)

[Annie Social]

Thank you Annie. My problem is I've only just moved to two lights and off-camera flash and three or more sounds like rocket science to me just now :) I understand the point you're making though.

You're very welcome! Don't forget warm reflectors, an inexpensive non-complicated way to change the look of a photo. Even a relatively small piece of gold card can work wonders.

[PixelMagic]

Correcting the white balance goes a long way to improving this photo.

[JimMcrae]

Thanks Annie. I've only used white reflectors up until now so I'll need to look at that.

PixelMagic, I assume you've 'fixed' the white balance for me in your edit? Well there's something well wrong with one of our monitors mate - possibly mine - but your edit looks hideous to me. She looks like the Purple People Eater. :)

Thanks for comments though.

[Flo]

Your Mom looks like a lovely woman Jim!:D

Tried some color cast removal.then a little GND..and a slight sharp and light on the eyes( which you can handle with the full sized photo) also tried cloning out the side of her glasses and cheek....very quick edit.:o Cropped to 8x10
http://macymae.smugmug.com/Nature/Misc/414574182437ecaa642fb-Version/732235787_zda56-L.jpg

[SJC from VT]

Very nice portrait, and I see nothing wrong with using a sheet for the background. I just think a darker color would have been better so it wouldn't blend with her hair color. You were given some really good advice already. Yeah POTN!

[JimMcrae]

Your Mom looks like a lovely woman Jim!:D

Tried some color cast removal.then a little GND..and a slight sharp and light on the eyes( which you can handle with the full sized photo) also tried cloning out the side of her glasses and cheek....very quick edit.:o Cropped to 8x10
http://macymae.smugmug.com/Nature/Misc/414574182437ecaa642fb-Version/732235787_zda56-L.jpg

Now that's what I'm talking about! Nice one Flo, that looks great, thank you. I'll look into what you've done here but admittedly don't know where to start with 'colour cast removal'. And is 'GND' something to do with neutral density? I've seen that mentioned elsewhere but haven't managed to suss it yet.

Yup, she is a lovely woman, thanks for that too. :)

[JimMcrae]

Very nice portrait, and I see nothing wrong with using a sheet for the background. I just think a darker color would have been better so it wouldn't blend with her hair color. You were given some really good advice already. Yeah POTN!

Thanks for that SJC and I totally agree with that.

[PixelMagic]

I'd wager that its your monitor. The image you originally posted has a pronounced Cyan color cast and since you removed all the EXIF metadata its difficult to know what color space you shot in...presumably it was sRGB. While "correct" white balance isn't always "pleasing" white balance, the version I posted should be close to correct...at least it is on my calibrated monitor.

I used a Threshold layer to determine the Shadow and Highlight points in the photo and if you look at the Hightlight sample point there's a huge cyan color cast caused by the absence or Red in the color channels. The sample point shows Red=219 when it should be close to the numbers of the Blue and Green channels.

Of course all this assumes the sheet in the background was white, or near white, in the first place.





Thanks Annie. I've only used white reflectors up until now so I'll need to look at that.

PixelMagic, I assume you've 'fixed' the white balance for me in your edit? Well there's something well wrong with one of our monitors mate - possibly mine - but your edit looks hideous to me. She looks like the Purple People Eater. :)

[Flo]

Jim, I use Nik..Color Efex..but what you simply have to do is go to your RGB levels and slide accordingly;) You will notice the subtleties easily, knowing your Moms color etc.

GND is that....I have a slider to adjust it..I am sure the is something with PS or LR that accommodates.

[Flo]

Pixel.it is not his monitor..mine is calibrated.and in your edit it is very magenta. I also bet that the sheet is more blue grey than white?

[PixelMagic]

Whether your monitor is calibrated or not does not obviate the fact that there's a significant Cyan color cast.

[Flo]

Whether your monitor is calibrated or not does not obviate the fact that there's a significant Cyan color cast.

The fact is, on your edit, whether or not the "levels" show...on my screen it is magenta.;)

[JimMcrae]

I'd wager that its your monitor. The image you originally posted has a pronounced Cyan color cast and since you removed all the EXIF metadata its difficult to know what color space you shot in...presumably it was sRGB. While "correct" white balance isn't always "pleasing" white balance, the version I posted should be close to correct...at least it is on my calibrated monitor.

I used a Threshold layer to determine the Shadow and Highlight points in the photo and if you look at the Hightlight sample point there's a huge cyan color cast caused by the absence or Red in the color channels. The sample point shows Red=219 when it should be close to the numbers of the Blue and Green channels.

Of course all this assumes the sheet in the background was white, or near white, in the first place.

Thanks for taking the time on this PixelMagic, but the sheet was not white; it was, in fact, exactly the colour that appears (on my monitor) in the original shot. Admittedly, it's a horrible colour, so maybe that threw you thinking that nobody in their right mind was use such a thing :)

Interesting point you made about me removing EXIF data. I didn't intentionally remove anything, so don't know how this happened?

[PixelMagic]

I don't know what application you used to save the photo but the posted version has all the EXIF stripped:

In any event the photo needs some amount of color correction...the cyan also shows up on your mum's sweater and was probably caused by the flash reflecting off the backdrop.

[JimMcrae]

Jim, I use Nik..Color Efex..but what you simply have to do is go to your RGB levels and slide accordingly;) You will notice the subtleties easily, knowing your Moms color etc.

GND is that....I have a slider to adjust it..I am sure the is something with PS or LR that accommodates.

Thanks Flo, I'll look into that.

[JimMcrae]

I don't know what application you used to save the photo but the posted version has all the EXIF stripped:

In any event the photo needs some amount of color correction...the cyan also shows up on your mum's sweater and was probably caused by the flash reflecting off the backdrop.

I used Photoshop CS2 and a 18% grey card for wb. I don't have a clue where my exif data went?

A lot of the stuff you've mentioned is way over my head, but I think my choice of background was poor - I take your point on reflective light - and the walls of the room are lilac, so maybe some reflection from that? I intend giving it a going over in white paint soon... and using better backdrops! :)

The main reason I posted this pic was because of my mother's skin tone. I think it's very much the same in the shot as it is in reality, but as I said, being 84 years old, the skin is somewhat different from a young person's. I see a lot of shots of older people taken in b&w - is this to get over a skin tone problem in older people? - and wondered what others thought about this on here.

I'll look into the points you've made anyway, thanks.

[Flo]

Jim we do tend to lose the rosy reds when we get older....and the skin will take on a yellowish pale look...thats life. But its nice to "ease" the look by a slight edit or so;), not talking wrinkles and all the great stuff that age brings.but skin tones only.

[JimMcrae]

Jim we do tend to lose the rosy reds when we get older....and the skin will take on a yellowish pale look...thats life. But its nice to "ease" the look by a slight edit or so;), not talking wrinkles and all the great stuff that age brings.but skin tones only.

Flo, this directly addresses the main reason I started this thread and the main question I was asking. Do I try to get rid of the 'yellowish' skin tone inherent in older people and replace it with the rosy, red look, or just leave it as 'natural'. Maybe I could've asked the question more clearly, but this is spot on. Thank you for this and your previous posts/edit which are exactly what I was looking for.

If my mum reads this she'll probably punch me for my comments on her skin! :)

[Flo]

Flo, this directly addresses the main reason I started this thread and the main question I was asking. Do I try to get rid of the 'yellowish' skin tone inherent in older people and replace it with the rosy, red look, or just leave it as 'natural'. Maybe I could've asked the question more clearly, but this is spot on. Thank you for this and your previous posts/edit which are exactly what I was looking for.

If my mum reads this she'll probably punch me for my comments on her skin! :)

I think leaving as much as the natural as wanted Jim.there shouldn't be rosy red, but a little blush won't hurt, and may boost ones spirits:D SLight adjustment with the color levels is all you need.

[JimMcrae]

I think leaving as much as the natural as wanted Jim.there shouldn't be rosy red, but a little blush won't hurt, and may boost ones spirits:D SLight adjustment with the color levels is all you need.

bw! I should be paying you a consultancy fee Flo! :)

[Flo]

bw! I should be paying you a consultancy fee Flo! :)

You are too kind.and I have a Mom that has loads of wrinkles but rosy skin.lol..its all good!

[JimMcrae]

You are too kind.and I have a Mom that has loads of wrinkles but rosy skin.lol..its all good!

Ha! :D

[PixelMagic]

I used Photoshop CS2 and a 18% grey card for wb. I don't have a clue where my exif data went?

There are several types of 18% grey cards and most of them are not spectrally neutral. For this reason 18% grey cards are not usually recommended for White Balancing. They were traditionally used for ascertaining exposure in film cameras which is quite different from WB in digital cameras. Unless you know for sure the card you're using is spectrally neutral I'd use something designed specifically for digital cameras like a WhiBal card, an ExpoDisc, or best of all an X-Rite ColorChecker card.

How did you use the card? Did you make a custom WB in-camera or did you use the card to set the WB in post-production?

Retaining the EXIF depends on how you saved the file. If you use the "Save for Web" command it will automatically strip all the EXIF. Usually you'd want to use the File > Save command, then use the Quality slider to determine the final file size. The File > Save method will retain your EXIF; which also allows viewers using color managed browsers to see the photo accurately.


A lot of the stuff you've mentioned is way over my head, but I think my choice of background was poor - I take your point on reflective light - and the walls of the room are lilac, so maybe some reflection from that? I intend giving it a going over in white paint soon... and using better backdrops! :)You can get around the problem of reflected color by gelling your flash/strobes to counteract the color cast. I generally use Rosco Cinegels and they work perfectly. If you don't gel your flash/strobes they you'll have to color correct in post production.

The main reason I posted this pic was because of my mother's skin tone. I think it's very much the same in the shot as it is in reality, but as I said, being 84 years old, the skin is somewhat different from a young person's. I see a lot of shots of older people taken in b&w - is this to get over a skin tone problem in older people? - and wondered what others thought about this on here.

I'll look into the points you've made anyway, thanks.You're touching on aspects of portraiture that require the photographer's judgement. But its also important to get the correct skin tones to use as a baseline. Once the baseline is established you can then decide how to alter it to suit your preference (or your client/subject's preferences).

[JimMcrae]

Somebody on here put me onto the grey card and I think it was specifically for wb in digital cameras, but not sure. I'll need to check on that. I use custom white balance on the camera.

I converted the raw file to tiff and then saved as a jpeg after editing. That's how I've always done it. Uploaded to flickr, then linked to here. I didn't save for web. Is this the right way or should I have saved for web?

Gelling flash is new to me. I'll look into that. Good one!

A lot of useful info there PixelMagic. Thank you.

[PixelMagic]

It appears you saved it correctly so its a mystery why the EXIF is missing.

In Photoshop CS2, only use Save for Web if you want to remove all metadata to reduce the file size.

Would it be possible to post a link to the original RAW file? If you're curious why I'm asking here's a sample of some recent work I did: Need Help to Remove/Replace Background in PSE7 or CS3 (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=786167)

You can use a file hosting site like www.yousendit.com to host the RAW file.

Somebody on here put me onto the grey card and I think it was specifically for wb in digital cameras, but not sure. I'll need to check on that. I use custom white balance on the camera.

I converted the raw file to tiff and then saved as a jpeg after editing. That's how I've always done it. Uploaded to flickr, then linked to here. I didn't save for web. Is this the right way or should I have saved for web?

Gelling flash is new to me. I'll look into that. Good one!

A lot of useful info there PixelMagic. Thank you.

[JimMcrae]

It appears you saved it correctly so its a mystery why the EXIF is missing.

In Photoshop CS2, only use Save for Web if you want to remove all metadata to reduce the file size.

Would it be possible to post a link to the original RAW file? If you're curious why I'm asking here's a sample of some recent work I did: Need Help to Remove/Replace Background in PSE7 or CS3 (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=786167)

You can use a file hosting site like www.yousendit.com to host the RAW file.

I'll have a go at doing that, thanks mate.

[JimMcrae]

I had a quick go at yousendit.com but don't have time to go through the sign-up process right now (I'm on my way out for the evening). I'll have a go tomorrow.

Have a good one! :)

[SJC from VT]

I read somewhere on POTN that when you use "Save for the Web" it does strip the EXIF. I don't know if it is true or not.