1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. REMINDER

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Rosemary2

Discussion in 'Appraisal Gallery' started by RobertCoombes, Aug 28, 2019.

  1. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    R17cc.jpg

    This is an edit of a portrait posted in the exhibition lounge. I think it changes the mood; concentrating on the face and the soft curl of the hair. It becomes more intimate.
     
  2. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Yes it does, but lack of catchlights in the eyes robs it of life and vitality. The long drip or whatever on LHS is a bit of a problem.
     
  3. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I agree with Mike. A touch of fill-in would make the catchlights and provide some detail in the hair below her ear. You haven't a clean negative, there a quite a lot of dust spots as well as that smear.
     
  4. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    R17cc.jpg

    Spots removed. Using NX-D, I cannot find how to add highlights to eyes.
     
  5. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Honestly, that's worse. Now getting a lot of big blobs. You can't do it like that. Need to choose your clone points to match exactly and possibly use the healing tool if you have one. I will try to have a go later.
     
  6. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    So quick job on PS. Can go back to sepia if preferred:

    [​IMG]
     
  7. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    Thanks for that. I was used to NX-2 which is now unsupported so when I upgraded computer it went.It seems to be a habit with Nikon. I had thought that having paid for it, I owned it even if there were no upgrades. I hope it is in order to file it.
     
  8. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Sure, but it is only a low res version.
     
  9. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    I think I have found the problem; I had used the retouch brush on the NEF file and then converted to low res JPEG which showed all the lumps and bumps. I have tried again but retouching the low res JPEG, It appears to be an improvement. Here it is.
    R17a_01.jpg
     
  10. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    That is still not very good. Looking at the scan posted on June 24 the negative had a scratch top to bottom on the left that was only a fraction of the width of the line you now have and which shows a completely different texture to the background grain. If this were a print I'd have the spotting brush out too. It could be that the software is just not helping you, I have no knowledge of it. Mike's taken down his version, or at least I can't see it, but I'd expect photoshop to easily remove the line and replace it with something very close to the background.
     
  11. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    There you are again. It really needs fairly major surgery. Need to get rid of that line and clean up all the dust and scratches. The catchlight is easily added too.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
    AdrianSadlier likes this.
  12. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    What I sometimes do if I think a shot can't really stand up quality-wise no matter what I do, is look at where it is suffering and increase that to point where it has to look intentional. So given the IQ issues with this, I might be looking for:

    [​IMG]
     
  13. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    Utterly amazing how much the catch-light helps.
     
    Nikonchris and RovingMike like this.
  14. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    My preference is for no catchlights; you could drown in those dark wells.
     
  15. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Well it's your picture! That's the only view that counts:)

    Personally I think the pose suggests some element of surprise and spontaneity - catchlights suit it. A more direct pose might benefit from the more limpid look you like.
     
  16. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    Like this?

    R16.jpg
     
    RovingMike and Learning like this.
  17. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    That's different, much more engaging, a lovely smile and it comes with catchlights! She does look ever so tired though, this session of yours must have gone on for hours. What expression exactly goes with "dark wells to drown in" and the pose to go with it I can't really say because I don't do portraits at all. That over the shoulder look doesn't seem quite right to me to get the drowning feeling.
     
    Catriona likes this.
  18. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    An attractive young woman with real eyebrows, lovely freckles and no visible tattoos or ugly piercings.
    Please experiment further and put more shots on the thread.

    I don't know if the 'added' highlights in the eyes work - I believe they have to look natural, but risk looking like the result of artificial lighting. As usual, other opinions are available.
     
  19. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    This is a close crop. I have checked my filing and these were all taken with a Werra3 with tessar lens. So tiny portion of negative from a £30 camera. I cannot experiment further these were shot in June 1971.

    R16close.jpg
     
  20. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    I had assumed they were recent pictures, but this explains why there are no visible tattoos or ugly piercings. Did you ever give the subject any prints?
     

Share This Page