Help with edit?

Was wondering if anyone here could give me a few tips on how to get away from the "cut and pasted" look of this photo? What I've done so far is bumped up the exposure - shadows and highlights - levels adjustments and some sharpening. I wonder if it's the sky thats causing this? I'm using PSE 7 if that helps. Thanks...

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

Imo, you have too much depth of field. Your girls should be the center of attention and everything seems to be in focus.

I attempted to blur the background and make it a touch darker. It is really hard to make a selection on a low res image.

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

Sorry Sheldon but that edit looks way more copy and pasted than the original because you have blurred areas that would be in the same plane of focus as the girls and would be in focus.

For me the big issue is one of scale - the girls just look a bit too small / out of proportion to the rest of the image. Middle girl loos huge compared to the two on the edges.

It could also be that the girls were shot with a wide angle lens and the BG was not. Distorting the BG a bit may help.

Also one way of blending two images like this together is to apply a small amount of noise to the overall image. That way there is something common across all of the image elements - I've found this to help in some occasions the past.

Nightstalker wrote in post #10168919
For me the big issue is one of scale - the girls just look a bit too small / out of proportion to the rest of the image. Middle girl loos huge compared to the two on the edges.

It could also be that the girls were shot with a wide angle lens and the BG was not. Distorting the BG a bit may help.

Also one way of blending two images like this together is to apply a small amount of noise to the overall image. That way there is something common across all of the image elements - I've found this to help in some occasions the past.

This image was not cut and pasted...it just has that look, and thats what I wanna get rid of. I realize now that maybe I shouLd have shot it at f/4 rather than f/8. I just figured that at 20 ft. away, at f/4 everything would still be in focus so I went for sharpness with f/8. But I see now where the BG would benefit with a shallower DOF.

It looks to me like the wide angle lens distortion and the sharpness contribute to this appearance.
Try using (in PS5) Lens Correction -- Custom -- Geometric distortion and adjust until the masonry wall edge is straight (try +23).
then adjust angle until it is horizontal (2deg).
this will adjust the sizes of the subject to be more equal.
Then apply just a little lens Blur (try radius 2) to take off just a little of the sharpness from the flash.

ssim wrote in post #10167947
I attempted to blur the background and make it a touch darker. It is really hard to make a selection on a low res image.

IMO your edit looks very artificial. Did you just blur the background? You should really use lens blur and depth maps for these things.

It might help if there was more of the grass in the frame... cutting off the lower portion of the wall was a definite framing mistake.
Some subject motion blurring may have produced a more compelling image.

ckort wrote in post #10169940
This image was not cut and pasted...it just has that look, and thats what I wanna get rid of. I realize now that maybe I shouLd have shot it at f/4 rather than f/8. I just figured that at 20 ft. away, at f/4 everything would still be in focus so I went for sharpness with f/8. But I see now where the BG would benefit with a shallower DOF.

Since you've made that clear, then I'll chime in -- I believe you are seeing a common "flash vs ambient" effect, both in the brightness of the girls and in the different color temp/White Balance between the two.

Flash tyically has a WB very close to the temperature of bright daylight, whereas your shot was done late in the day when the color "temperature" is quite warm. This shows when you use an unmodified flast for fill, and the brighter the flash the more obvious it is.

If you were to reshoot it you would want to consider a "warming gel" over your flash to blend in with the ambient, and experiment with levels of flash power/Flash Expposure Compensation to blend in with the ambient light.

In post processing, you may need to do a selection or mask of the girls, "warm them up" color wise and maybe tone them down brightness-wise.

It's a thought at least, and it's still too early for me to pour an evening night-cap!

tonylong wrote in post #10170154
Since you've made that clear, then I'll chime in -- I believe you are seeing a common "flash vs ambient" effect, both in the brightness of the girls and in the different color temp/White Balance between the two.

Flash tyically has a WB very close to the temperature of bright daylight, whereas your shot was done late in the day when the color "temperature" is quite warm. This shows when you use an unmodified flast for fill, and the brighter the flash the more obvious it is.

If you were to reshoot it you would want to consider a "warming gel" over your flash to blend in with the ambient, and experiment with levels of flash power/Flash Expposure Compensation to blend in with the ambient light.

In post processing, you may need to do a selection or mask of the girls, "warm them up" color wise and maybe tone them down brightness-wise.

It's a thought at least, and it's still too early for me to pour an evening night-cap!

Tony, I believe you hit the nail on the head! I never even gave that a thought, but your explanation makes perfect sense. I tried your suggestion for editing, while it may not be exactly how I was wanting it (due to my lack of editing knowledge) it definitely got me much closer. I will also look into a warming gel for the flash. Thank you so much for your help . Thanks to everyone else as well.