Phoebe

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

Phoebe

Postby Geoff M on Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:58 am

A recent one of my daughter...have processed in a number of different ways, but here is just one hoping for your feedback.

Image
Fuji X-Pro1 | X-E1 | X-T1 | XF14 | XF23 | XF27 | XF35 | XF56 | XF60 | XF10-24 | XF18-55 | XF55-200 | MCEX-11

http://gmarshall.zenfolio.com

http://xtographer.weebly.com
User avatar
Geoff M
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Tamborine Mountain QLD.

Re: Phoebe

Postby Mr Darcy on Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:15 am

I find the "four eyes" detracts from the image. Either have the eyes showing either entirely through the glasses, or not at all please.
Apart from that, I really like the image
Greg
It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
User avatar
Mr Darcy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains

Re: Phoebe

Postby surenj on Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:50 pm

Lovely soft processing and colours. You have done brilliantly to avoid reflections in the glasses.

Now that Greg's pointed it out, I can see the refraction on the eyes.
User avatar
surenj
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7197
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
Location: Artarmon NSW

Re: Phoebe

Postby Matt. K on Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:55 pm

The eyes are distracting. Gregs advice is spot on.
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Re: Phoebe

Postby wendellt on Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:31 pm

the expression is priceless
great depth of field as well
Wendell Levi Teodoro
My Agents
Press - Getty Images
Creative Rep - T.I.D. FashionID, DBP Productions & The Nest Agency
My Book - Zeduce
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Re: Phoebe

Postby surenj on Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:17 pm

I have tried to re-adjust the eyes with a simple PS - cut n paste

I hope you don't mind Geoff.

Image
User avatar
surenj
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7197
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
Location: Artarmon NSW

Re: Phoebe

Postby aim54x on Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:11 am

Sorry Surenj...but it looks even more odd now....
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney

Re: Phoebe

Postby surenj on Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:20 am

aim54x wrote:but it looks even more odd now....

In what way?
User avatar
surenj
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7197
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
Location: Artarmon NSW

Re: Phoebe

Postby Geoff M on Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:03 am

Thanks guys for the feedback. I agree with the eyes/specs problem and did try to avoid it when taking the shot. The lens is quite small and with out a square on pose it was very problematic and nigh on impossible to avoid.

Surenj - No problems with the re-work, it looks much better in my opinion. I would like to know how you done it though I am next to hopeless with PS, I generally stick to LR for all my processing.
Fuji X-Pro1 | X-E1 | X-T1 | XF14 | XF23 | XF27 | XF35 | XF56 | XF60 | XF10-24 | XF18-55 | XF55-200 | MCEX-11

http://gmarshall.zenfolio.com

http://xtographer.weebly.com
User avatar
Geoff M
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Tamborine Mountain QLD.

Re: Phoebe

Postby Mr Darcy on Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:39 am

surenj wrote:
aim54x wrote:but it looks even more odd now....

In what way?


I think there are two issues in the rework.
First, there seems to be a colour cast that was not in the original. It looks bluer. I can't understand how that might have happened, but it is what I see.
Second, while you have straightened up the iris amazingly well, but the eyeball is still magnified and shifted. That makes, in particular, the RHS (as we look at it) eye look out of proportion to the left, giving her face an off kilter look.

I don't know the answers to any of this, but things I would try at click time are:
1. Take the glasses off altogether, but then that is not her look.
2. Slide them further down the nose into reading glass position so we don't see the eye through them at all
3. Push them further up the nose so they completely cover the eye. may look odd though.
4. Replace them with larger frames so they completely cover the eye. Again, not her look.
Greg
It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
User avatar
Mr Darcy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains

Re: Phoebe

Postby ozimax on Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:20 am

A nice soft portrait, but yes, two things come to mind. The eyes are a bad distraction and a smile would make things much better. Keep em coming....
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Re: Phoebe

Postby Geoff M on Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:29 am

Thanks for the pointers Greg, I will try to remember your advice next time.

Here is another from the same session and similarily processed, the glasses still encroaching on the eye a little but probably more acceptable in this case. Note to self.....next time Phoebe needs new glasses insist on her getiing some with a larger lens to avoid these photographic pitfalls!

Photos shot with the Nikkor 60mm f2.8 micro, and camera mounted SB800 fitted with a Gary Fong Lightspere.

Image
Fuji X-Pro1 | X-E1 | X-T1 | XF14 | XF23 | XF27 | XF35 | XF56 | XF60 | XF10-24 | XF18-55 | XF55-200 | MCEX-11

http://gmarshall.zenfolio.com

http://xtographer.weebly.com
User avatar
Geoff M
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Tamborine Mountain QLD.

Re: Phoebe

Postby DebT on Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:53 pm

the 2nd, while not quite as nice a pose or background has the same soft gentle quality and is more flattering simply because the glasses (and eye distorion) are not a distraction . Cute quirky head tilt and I like the position within the frame. Remember to also shoot her without glasses ocassionally (although they do suit her) - she may prefer it when looking back on old photos. Have you tried being slightly lower and shooting up a little ? PS done well to have no reflections in the lenses - are they no reflective glass or are you just clever?
Deb T
DebT
"so many dreams - so little time "
User avatar
DebT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:58 am
Location: Adelaide SA

Re: Phoebe

Postby Sandy Feet on Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:46 pm

Another option we used to us with Musos for photo shoots or TV performances, mainly because of reflection, was to pop the lenses out of the glasses.
May work in this case

Cheers
Rod
User avatar
Sandy Feet
Member
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Cooroibah, Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: Phoebe

Postby Geoff M on Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:51 pm

DebT wrote: PS done well to have no reflections in the lenses - are they no reflective glass or are you just clever?
Deb T


They are not non reflective lenses so I guess I must just be clever :lol: :lol: or very lucky :!:
Fuji X-Pro1 | X-E1 | X-T1 | XF14 | XF23 | XF27 | XF35 | XF56 | XF60 | XF10-24 | XF18-55 | XF55-200 | MCEX-11

http://gmarshall.zenfolio.com

http://xtographer.weebly.com
User avatar
Geoff M
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Tamborine Mountain QLD.


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques