Need some CC on this candid...

hi guys... last weekend we went out with some friends and i shot some candid shot of my friend. the first one you see if the original photo that i took after some PP in DPP2.2.

the second photo is what her bro adjusted because she think this will bring more attention to the subject. i must say i agree and disagree at the same time, simply because this is an outdoor candid, thus background should play a good part of the overall composition. but at the same time, i understand that by making the background darker, then more attention is placed on the subject. but if i had wanted that kind of portrait/ candid, i would've shot in f2.8 to get that creamy bokeh.

what do you think? which one do you think looks better or more natural?

plz CC, don't hold back! thanks!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

To be honest with you, I had a hard time telling the difference between the two. What I finally noticed was the grass is darker on the second one. It throws the color of IMO. So I would have to go with the first one. Nice candid BTW.

Art

Thanks Art. I like my original one too because i really wanted my friend to stand out the most from the photo, that's why her dog is off focus. I wanted someone to see the photo first and notice the girl instead of... oh.. that dog is soo cute.

but i guess in that case, it's kinda hard to tell the dog is misfocused as well. oh well....

I like the first one better, but I agree it would have been nice not to have such a distracting background. It's not only the contrast of the straight lines in the metal against the horizontal brown foliage, but the angle of the metal really throws the shot out of balance imo.

ah... good point there Trent! duely noted.

#1 looks more natural color-wise. Good framing but you need some fill flash. I ran some Shadows/Highlights on it in CS2 and was able to bring up some detail in her hair which I think improves the overall appearance quite a bit.

In my opinion it's not in focus - not only that but the dog is out of the DOF - you needed a smaller aperture, not bigger - if you had shot 2.8 the dog would have been a blur...

Titus213 wrote in post #2050028
#1 looks more natural color-wise. Good framing but you need some fill flash. I ran some Shadows/Highlights on it in CS2 and was able to bring up some detail in her hair which I think improves the overall appearance quite a bit.

titus.. can you post up that pic? would love to see what kind of detail was brought out. thanks!

canuck88 wrote in post #2050054
In my opinion it's not in focus - not only that but the dog is out of the DOF - you needed a smaller aperture, not bigger - if you had shot 2.8 the dog would have been a blur...

that photo was shot in f2.8 using a 17-55mm. so yeah, that's why the dog was blurred. i only focused on her face.

Hmmm I would expect alot shallower DOF at 2.8. Never used the 17-55 though.

dan-o, yeah... but i think on this photo i also had a bit of shake to it or something. the focus red square is the one at the 1 o'clock position.

nice avatar.. are you an avid roadie?

OK, no fussing with it color wise but here it is:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Here I shallowed it up.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE