Which version of this do you prefer?
Here is the original
My first edit.
A more subdued tone
B&W
Thanks!
May 24, 2013 22:24 | #1 Which version of this do you prefer? My first edit. A more subdued tone B&W Thanks!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 24, 2013 22:57 | #2 I like the first one best, hmm, looking longer ... maybe number 2. Close call. The third looks a bit ghostly.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JeremyBlake Senior Member 532 posts Likes: 4 Joined Aug 2012 Location: Columbus, OH, USA More info | May 24, 2013 23:36 | #3 |
rrblint Listen! .... do you smell something? More info | I like the B&W best. Mark
LOG IN TO REPLY |
navydoc Cream of the Crop More info | What a cutie. Image hosted by forum (650280) © navydoc [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Gene - My Photo Gallery ||
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 25, 2013 08:50 | #6 |
ktan7 Goldmember 1,016 posts Likes: 4 Joined Mar 2013 Location: Vancouver More info | May 25, 2013 09:37 | #7 Truthfully, I don't like any of the color edits. The skin tone is out of range and not real. I prefer the black and white out of all the images. Good composition. Vancouver wedding photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Flo Gimmie Some Lovin 44,987 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Nanaimo,B.C. More info | ^ I think I agree. Although Gene's edit is closer. maybe a shade less pink. you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 25, 2013 11:05 | #9 navydoc wrote in post #15965713 What a cutie. I prefer the b&w also because on my monitor, her skin tones on the color edits appear to be too orange. Of the color versions, I prefer the subdued one. I know skin tones are a matter of preference, but here's an edit I tried with a more 'baby pinkish' look. I also added soft focus and a bit of white vignette. I did no enhancements to her eyes. See now on my monitor, this looks very blue...is that what you were going for? Is it just me??
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Flo Gimmie Some Lovin 44,987 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Nanaimo,B.C. More info | I don't see blue in Genes....
I found the light in the mouth area underexposed, so it was easier to de saturate and neutralize the whites. you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 25, 2013 16:38 | #11 On my monitor (calibrated) Gene's edit looks best Bill R
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Flo Gimmie Some Lovin 44,987 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Nanaimo,B.C. More info | I love Gene's color, not so much the smoothing;softening. you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
navydoc Cream of the Crop More info | I was going for a 'dreamy' effect to concentrate on her beautiful eyes...hence the extra smoothing. As I mentioned earlier, skin tones are very much a matter of personal taste as well as what kind of mood is sought. I just thought I'd give the OP an alternate look for comparison. Gene - My Photo Gallery ||
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 25, 2013 17:29 | #14 navydoc wrote in post #15966946 I was going for a 'dreamy' effect to concentrate on her beautiful eyes...hence the extra smoothing. As I mentioned earlier, skin tones are very much a matter of personal taste as well as what kind of mood is sought. I just thought I'd give the OP an alternate look for comparison. I absolutely appreciate your edit! I really like it, but ON MY SCREEN, certainly looks less "natural".
LOG IN TO REPLY |
HappySnapper90 Cream of the Crop 5,145 posts Likes: 3 Joined Aug 2008 Location: Cleveland, Ohio More info | May 26, 2013 18:49 | #15 No. 3
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1497 guests, 137 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||