#1 or #2 - Please help me with my PP

I wasnt sure if I should put this in the 'Wedding' section as I'm not done with my PP, so I came to the 'people' section as I'm looking for 'input' at this point.

NO I'm not calibrated, no I cannot get calibrated it is what it is. I shot this wedding for a friend, free fun backyard wedding, anywho... enough for the 'builder'

40% of the time I'll get a comment "looks saturated" maybe its the persons screen, maybe its me...

I've never used AdobeRGB1988 before... this time I am as I did my research for printing... yadda yadda... ok now I'm rambling...

#1 is me toning it down...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

I think I like #2 better, but it seems as though the skin tones are off.

cpa016 wrote in post #8160343
I think I like #2 better, but it seems as though the skin tones are off.

think so?

this is her skin out in natural light... it would look slightly darker indoors under lamp lighting in a hotel room ya? I can keep working with the coloring however of something truely seems 'off' about it tho... it is those indoor getting ready shots I'm having a hard time pp'ing... the outdoor shots are going to be 'cake'

this is straight out of the camera, just resized

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

convert to srgb for web.

Sorry, I don't see any difference between 1 & 2.

MagicMarker wrote in post #8160459
Sorry, I don't see any difference between 1 & 2.

on my screen the 2nd one is more vibrant... weird.


in response to the skin tones. Is this better? This adjusting straight in LR2 & just re sized in photoshop... this copy has no additional PP to her face and teeth as the previous one did...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

#2 is "more" vibrant, but really I think it's hardly noticible. I do see her face is more exposed in #2 which is why it would get my vote of the two but you could probably clean it up a touch more and I don't know if its just the resizing method but it seems kind of grainy.

You seem to be posting images to the web in AdobeRGB--that will alter how the image appears to us more than the slight tweaking you are doing. When I load the images into CS4 they turn out to be far more saturated than appears on the web. I'd say too saturated and with a yellow cast.

I think the WB was correct however you have window light hitting her from the left side which appears blue because you are balanced on the incandescent. This gives her skin tone an odd color and almost impossible to correct out. Next time use some fill flash with an amber get to mimic the incandescent light, it will help clean everything up.

rambo7 wrote in post #8160798
I think the WB was correct however you have window light hitting her from the left side which appears blue because you are balanced on the incandescent. This gives her skin tone an odd color and almost impossible to correct out. Next time use some fill flash with an amber get to mimic the incandescent light, it will help clean everything up.

Indeed I learned ALOT from this LOL! I learned I definitely do not want to be a wedding photog tho I never claimed I wanted to be I just did this for fun for a friend.

But it was a wonderful learning experience indeed.

use the save for web function of PS

I just couldn't resist seeing what I could accomplish with this file.....
Duplicated layer twice and used screen mode. Second duplicate was 24%. This brightened it. Did a little dodging on her face and hair. Some more on her eyes and teeth. Desaturated it a bit. Adjusted color based on the cmyk numbers on her left side. It was very yellow. I left a bit of yellow to make it feel more "sunny". Maybe a hair too much .... Used levels to increase saturation. High pass sharpened her lips, hair and eyes. You will not be able to edit shots that are marginal unless you do calibrate your monitor. I'll bet if you put out some feelers, you will be able to find someone that will help you.

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

Honestly, I would not spend much time on this image... The angle is not flattering, the facial expression is a bit odd as well. Color tone is the least of ths images problems... I would do a BW conversion and be done with it or trash it altogether.

I hope you don't take this the wrong way. Some images are worth saving and some are not, this would be the latter.

Unfortunately, at least with what I can see via the web, this shot would need a great deal of work to even get close to print, because--
1. There's a harsh light with a strong magenta cast camera-left
2. That's putting a color cast everywhere, and creating really difficult shadow areas
3. No flash; there is no light up into the subject's face; that truly limits your options
4. Backlit -- Means even without flash, this shot underexposes the face of the bride overall; between underexposure and lack of light in the face, the detail just isn't there

Original:

poloman wrote in post #8161178
I just couldn't resist seeing what I could accomplish with this file.....
Duplicated layer twice and used screen mode. Second duplicate was 24%. This brightened it. Did a little dodging on her face and hair. Some more on her eyes and teeth. Desaturated it a bit. Adjusted color based on the cmyk numbers on her left side. It was very yellow. I left a bit of yellow to make it feel more "sunny". Maybe a hair too much .... Used levels to increase saturation. High pass sharpened her lips, hair and eyes. You will not be able to edit shots that are marginal unless you do calibrate your monitor. I'll bet if you put out some feelers, you will be able to find someone that will help you.

The problem with this, is that you have blown out the veil to the point it's not there anymore - which is the focus of the photo.

To OP - there is a slight change in the first 2 images. The second is darker to me and slightly more orange. Making photos more saturated or vibrate is fine, I do that myself. But when the white balance is off and you don't use a fill flash to help skin - you will always be leaning towards orange. (unless the skin is very pale to start with) I think all the issues you are having can happen in any type of photography, not just wedding photography - so having a calibrated monitor and working in the correct web space are key regardless of the type.