Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 18 Jan 2011 (Tuesday) 11:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Heavily Shopped

 
sctbiggs
Goldmember
1,793 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: North Carolina
     
Jan 18, 2011 11:20 |  #1

Need some thoughts from just a quick glance perspective. Not pixel peeping (mainly because it is copied from Facebook) but just simply at a quick glance, does anything seem off?

Why? Because it is pretty heavily photoshopped and I just want to know if I need to adjust anything before it is handed over. The before and after image is over on the Facebook page if anyone is curious as to what was photoshopped in and out.

IMAGE: http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y298/nine7grand/179083_10150378031990206_269530110205_16797758_1286267_n.jpg

Baby Girl 2.0 has arrived!
Facebook (external link) | Wilmington, NC Wedding and Portrait Photographers (external link) - The seriously outdated website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Flo
Gimmie Some Lovin
Avatar
44,987 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Nanaimo,B.C.
     
Jan 18, 2011 11:22 |  #2

Why have that huge banner at the bottom?! Wow..it is the photo....

Without it looming..the photo would be cute, except for obligatory not needed tilt:confused:
I like the DOF in this one.


you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sctbiggs
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,793 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: North Carolina
     
Jan 18, 2011 11:39 |  #3

Flo wrote in post #11665796 (external link)
Why have that huge banner at the bottom?! Wow..it is the photo....

Without it looming..the photo would be cute, except for obligatory not needed tilt:confused:
I like the DOF in this one.

banner is there as 98% of my business comes from FB or travels through our FB page... it is a work in progress... constantly changing until I get it where I want it. This one is not used anymore. Used it for one set and changed it as I also thought it was too large. :) The new one is the same, just much thinner.


Baby Girl 2.0 has arrived!
Facebook (external link) | Wilmington, NC Wedding and Portrait Photographers (external link) - The seriously outdated website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrandonSi
Nevermind.. I'm silly.
Avatar
5,307 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 146
Joined Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
     
Jan 18, 2011 11:55 |  #4

Did you use a fill flash on the baby? Something seems off with the spatial relationship between the parents and kid, like it was two photos put together, and I'm thinking it might be lighting that's giving me that impression... or you lightened the baby's skin tone / face?

I don't think it's actually two photos, there's just *something* I can't place that's the slightest bit off.


[ www (external link)· flickr (external link)]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sctbiggs
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,793 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: North Carolina
     
Jan 18, 2011 12:03 |  #5

basic curves adjusting was done as most photos are so that changed the light on the baby's face... I'm more concerned if anything with the baby it self looked off...

IMAGE: http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y298/nine7grand/163614_10150378033160206_269530110205_16797786_5091971_n.jpg

Baby Girl 2.0 has arrived!
Facebook (external link) | Wilmington, NC Wedding and Portrait Photographers (external link) - The seriously outdated website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LettieVonDread
Senior Member
331 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Shelby, NC
     
Jan 18, 2011 14:32 |  #6

The baseboard in the background lost the shadow. That's what made me feel like it was two different photos put together. Because the baseboard looks much bigger.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrandonSi
Nevermind.. I'm silly.
Avatar
5,307 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 146
Joined Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
     
Jan 18, 2011 20:48 |  #7

LettieVonDread wrote in post #11666988 (external link)
The baseboard in the background lost the shadow. That's what made me feel like it was two different photos put together. Because the baseboard looks much bigger.

Yep, good call. I think that's what was doing it for me as well.


[ www (external link)· flickr (external link)]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
supernova74
Senior Member
Avatar
957 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Adelaide, Australia
     
Jan 18, 2011 20:59 |  #8

Wow good job of cloning the other person and teddy bear out.


Mark
Canon 5DMKII. 50D. EF 70-200 f2.8 II L, EF 24-70 L, 50mm f/1.8 II, Speedlite 580EX II, 15mm Fisheye
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
toxictv
Member
67 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Central Arkansas
     
Jan 18, 2011 22:35 |  #9

Agreed, good cloning job. If the baseboard and baby's face weren't so light it'd be hard to tell any editing had been done, at first glance.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Comerfjc
Senior Member
Avatar
564 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Puyallup, WA (USA)
     
Jan 18, 2011 22:44 |  #10

I didn't notice ANYTHING that would have made me think that someone had been clean edited out. Seems like a pretty darn good job to me!


Jason
http://www.jasoncomerf​ord.com (external link)
http://jasoncomerford.​zenfolio.com/blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowstone
Member
140 posts
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 19, 2011 00:01 |  #11

yeah that's a pretty fine cloning job! how long did it take you to edit this image?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oceanbeast
Senior Member
494 posts
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jan 19, 2011 01:09 |  #12

sick cloning job, i cant even begin to wonder how to




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FuzzFace
Goldmember
Avatar
1,076 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2009
Location: New Brunswick Canada
     
Jan 19, 2011 06:32 |  #13

I really like the comp and dof, but I find the tilt distracting




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bangtwister
Member
Avatar
163 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Hampshire, UK
     
Jan 19, 2011 07:28 |  #14

Excellent cloning, but is it just me, the babys cheeks are a bit orangy?


Canon 7D, Canon 400D, Canon G10, Canon G5X, Canon 24 - 70 lens, Canon 50 1.8 lens, Canon 1.4, Tamron 18 - 270, Canon 100mm Macro, Canon 10 - 22 Wide angle, Canon 90 - 300mm, Sigma 24 - 200 2.8, Canon 430EX Speedlight MK 2. Photoshop Elements 12, Lightroom 5, LR Time-lapse 4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sctbiggs
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,793 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: North Carolina
     
Jan 19, 2011 07:45 |  #15

thanks. will fix the baseboard. I thought it was off as well but was pretty sure I had lined it up using guide lines. Gotta redo it anyway because like a moron... i saved over the large file with the small file for Facebook. ooops.

will also address the tilt. It wasn't intentional but it's what I got while trying to keep the baby that wouldn't stay still for more than half a second in the frame.

And it took three hours but mainly because I had two screaming kids and a wife asking me for this and that every 15 minutes. :)


Baby Girl 2.0 has arrived!
Facebook (external link) | Wilmington, NC Wedding and Portrait Photographers (external link) - The seriously outdated website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,327 views & 0 likes for this thread, 11 members have posted to it.
Heavily Shopped
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rickldewitt
1027 guests, 107 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.