Bi-Weekly Discussion Thread: Before & After

Agnieszka

Every once in a while I create an image with a before & after shot. Seeing them next to each other helps me dial back my processing (:rolleyes :lol3) + it's something to be proud of / and if you'll ever have a bride that wonders what exactly you're doing when you say that you have to process your images, you have something to show off. :thumb

Care to share some of YOUR before & afters? I'd love to see :lynnma
Here are some of mine:

1: A recent one from an engagement shoot:


2: I don't usually remove hair like this, but this photo ended up in a magazine ... soooooo ....:


3: Just for fun:


4:


5:

angevin1

Nice set!

EEK! Removing wanton hair!! Great MAG job!

Love the colorful wall you decided to carry there in 3

Always helps to have beautiful locations too!

Great idea about putting them up side by side just to see how far off we can get~

angevin1

I'll play along too~

These haven't been critiqued...soo??

The Kiss-1


The Look-2..I removed the Mic for her final~


Thriller-3

Kinkajou

:jawdrop ANGIE!!!! Your PP skills are incredible. Just... wow.

happysmileylady

Ok, I officially LOVE this thread. I don't have any to share, but I love looking at everyone else's before and afters:D

mpaulie

Kinkajou wrote: »

:jawdrop ANGIE!!!! Your PP skills are incredible. Just... wow.

For serious, really wonderful!

mmmatt

Well... please appreciate my courage to show the original for this one. Just goes to show how sometimes when you fully choke a shot you can still bring 'er back to life. Note not only the blown out dress and whatnot, but note the houses around the pond, the junk on the edges and the raft. The dress on the final shot was even pulled from a window light shot earlier in the day. I'm happy to say I don't have to go to this extent often, but it is nice to know it can be done if you need to. We had just shot in the shade and I didn't reset my camera because we were getting rushed... There is no way a client would ever see the before on this one. I had a god 8 or so hours into it and only did it because I pushed them to stay a little longer and loved the comp.

Before




After


Matt

mmmatt

Something I have been seeing a lot around here lately are issues with convergence/wide angle distortion. That is what is corrected here. super easy ps fix using the crop tool and ticking the perspective button in the top bar, then moving the sides so they are parallel to the vertical lines in the frame. In the original shot, even though it doesn't look like it, the frame was straightened to be level on the horizon with the top of the stone wall.

Before:


After:


Matt

Agnieszka

Well done Matt! Boy, did you save that dress!!!

I totally agree on the "perspective button", I drives me nuts when I see lines go in crazy directions.

mmmatt

Agnieszka wrote: »

I totally agree on the "perspective button", I drives me nuts when I see lines go in crazy directions.

Yeah, this wasn't an extreme example really, but it never seemed straight until I stretched it out. Pointing your camera up/down or oblique makes things worse and keeping the camera level to the ground can make it somewhat of a non issue, so it is doable in-camera to some extent, but it isn't always possible to shoot the camera level. It should be noted that if you have people dominating the frame it doesn't work so well... it is only when the items of specific proportion (like people) are small and the relative proportion items such as buildings or trees are on the outer edges of the frame.

Matt

divamum

This thread is just the inspiration I needed. I'm in processing hell today, and getting insanely frustrated :bash - I'm just having one of those days where nothing I do looks right because I think I'm either moving too far away from the SOOC shot, or getting so, uh, "enthusiastic" with my mouse hand that it's straying into "creative" (instead of "enhancement). Seeing these side-by-sides is beyond useful (even though I'm processing in a different "genre" and style of portraits).

Thank you, Angie et al!!

Agnieszka

divamum wrote: »

Seeing these side-by-sides is beyond useful (even though I'm processing in a different "genre" and style of portraits).

Thank you, Angie et al!!

Well you know, I think we're very forgiving on this board, and don't mind seeing some portrait work side by side from you

mmmatt

Here is another trick I use... We'll leave the complexion alterations to Angie!

In this shot I wanted to shoot a wide scene of this outdoor wedding. I was using flash for some of the shots but for a wide shot it would have fried out the backs of the people in the crowd and fried the gazebo. Then maybe I would have gotten some light on my b&g... maybe! So I turned off the flash and shot ambient, exposing for the scene knowing that my b&g would be under exposed because of the shadows from the gazeabo.

This is all done in Adobee Camera Raw and never touched PS. An under appreciated feature of ACR is the vingette slider. It can add a creative vingette, but mostly it is to correct lens aberations. I use it to correct dynamic range issues mostly. By exposing for the scene I get detail throughout, then by pusing exposure, fill light, recovery, and black levels I am able to get proper exposure on the b&g in the center of the frame although it blows out the rest of the image. By using the vingette slider I can bring the outsides of the image back down so that I have acceptable exposure throughout. The thing that makes the ACR vingette slider so cool is that you can adjust the center point, so it can be used in many situations and because it is graduated it is fairly seemless. WAY faster than trying to burn everything in!! This would be impossible to do in camera with flash unless I had one hidden somewhere in the gazebo. This is a 2 minute fix. To dial it in completely and make it more complete I could pull this up in PS and burn the roof of the gazebo a bit, but for this example I didn't bother. This can also be done for the oposite situation by pushing the vignette slider the other way and brightening the outsides of the image.

Before (straight out of camera)



After (using only ACR)


Matt

divamum

Matt, I remember that lakeside photo - nice to see the final edit!

Angie, I'm taking you up on this - I'm showing this image because it's kinda-sorta in a wedding-y style (helped by the cream dress) and also because I am STRUGGLING with it (which means: all C&C/assistance/ideas for improving the processing warmly welcomed either here - or if that's not the appropriate place, in a pm or another thread ).

What I didn't realise as I took it was that I'd forgotten to turn one of the flashes off even though we weren't using it and it fired without my realising it. So I wound up with mixed light (and not enough of it at that) and an unexpected catchlight. But we both loved the shot so much for its 60's awesomeness that I'm determined to work it up to maximum potential despite some of the inherent problems with it. The WB on this shot is making me crazy - I'm literally dreaming LR sliders... and I still haven't got it right :cry When it goes to 8x10 I'll probably crop a tad more of the top, too which helps the upper rh corner, I think.

Kinkajou

For the record, Divamum, I think it looks awesome. Really. It looks spot-on to me.

Along the same vein, though, this is an engagement shoot that I have been struggling with because the bride-to-be never-ever-ever wears makeup, but wore it for the shoot... in the summer... on the beach... in the sun... in Florida... it was at least 90 degrees and 90% humidity... so the makeup didn't do well at all.

I have been working and working at trying to find a way to reconcile the areas of natural skin where the makeup has come off with the areas that still have makeup on without over-smoothing. I have noticed that his eyes are too bright and will need to be fixed in the 'after' shot.

So, here it is. The before & after.



I'm planning to put together a 'how to prepare for photos on your wedding day' sheet that will include warnings about makeup in the summer down here... hopefully that will improve the situation on the big day.

I'll probably post some more shots from their session later tonight. As always C&C is very welcome! Thank you thank you

smurfy

Here's one from yesterday's wedding...but looking at it here, it probably needs a bit more touching up on the arm still.

And Matt, that save on the lakeside walk shot was amazing. I would have trashed that image without a thought, but it's album-cover worthy thanks to your creative genius and patience!

mmmatt

smurfy wrote: »

And Matt, that save on the lakeside walk shot was amazing. I would have trashed that image without a thought, but it's album-cover worthy thanks to your creative genius and patience!

Thanks my little blue friend, but if I had exercised patience on-site it would have saved me a full day of turmoil in post... well 3/4 a day anyways since I would have had a lot of cloning to do on that one either way, but still! The key was having enough dynamic range to bring the faces back... the rest can be fudged. Not something I ever want to have to do again!

As for your shot, it seems soft to me and could use an exposure bump as well as a quick click on the mole on her arm. Your after seems softer than the original and I'm not sure what all went on there but I would go back to the original and try to sharpen her eyes some before you smooth her face out. You may also want to work on the forehead shine some before you do your skin smoothing. Angie?

Diva! Yum!!! that crop is wonderful. Really makes her pop, and I don't see any of the WB issues you are stressing about. I just wouldn't touch that a bit. That is a beautiful image.

Kinka I like this image and your lady has beautiful sleepy eyes but her nose feels flat and there isn't any definition on the bridge of her nose. I'm not sure what you did there but it seems the shadowing is gone and that makes her nose look larger/flatter in the after. I'm just seeing the thumbnail version here but I don't see any makeup or complexion problems I just see a slight lighting/perspective issue that makes her nose less flattering. I would try to play with the shadowing some to define the nose more and then if you feel the need to adjust her makeup for her or mess with her complexion do it after you have her facial shape looking as good as you can get it. I'm not at all offended by any of what you are talking about but being a guy I don't notice trivial things like that ... or newly painted nails, new haircuts, or the new shoes. You know... general guy disclaimers. Ha!

Matt

divamum

Thanks guys - if it looks ok to you all, then clearly there's a point where I just can't SEE any more! And Matt, I swear that the cropping/rotating feature in LR is possible the single most important tool in the box - there are a lot of shots that without that are pretty penny plain but with a deep crop and tilt just jump off the page - because LR lets me play with it ad infinitum (and lets me go back and change it ad infinitum, even once I've done other stuff to the image) I can twiddle with it to my heart's content. It's one of the reasons I love the large pixel count on the 7d so much - I can indulge my crop-aholic tendencies without fear of degrading the image...

Kris, I don't know where I'd go with that one of yours - probably to CS3 and layer masking so I could adjust the faces individually. I'd probably play with reassigning the hue value on her face to bring it closer to less orange (not sure whether it needs less red, more yellow, or just desaturation+lightness, but one could play with it) and then bring up the brightness on her face with a contrast/brightness layer, but masking out his so he didn't get pasty white. That one's a toughie.

smurfy

originally posted by Matt:

As for your shot, it seems soft to me and could use an exposure bump as well as a quick click on the mole on her arm. Your after seems softer than the original and I'm not sure what all went on there but I would go back to the original and try to sharpen her eyes some before you smooth her face out. You may also want to work on the forehead shine some before you do your skin smoothing.

Yes, it's totally different processing than I've ever used before on that shot in the above post. I went ahead and bought Portrait Professional this week, after spending countless hours on skin issues for some recent weddings. After using the trial, this was the first image processed with the purchased version, where work can be saved. But looking at it today, with your constructive criticism coupled with getting over that normal post-wedding day exhaustion, I went back to Photoshop alone with the original. In defense of Portrait Professional, I've only had it for a few days, and have definitely not mastered the learing curve yet. I could have lightened the exposure there, but somehow didn't see how dark it was till you pointed it out.

Here is the same shot, before and after, with my regular processing: Curves as needed, airbrushing with the paintbrush tool, and a bit of unsharp mask around the eyes. You are right about it being a bit soft, probably because it was a manually focused catch as she exited the ceremony, and not done as part of the portraits. I must have moved a bit or missed the focus by a hair. Is it worth keeping?

mmmatt

Smurfy, it looks much better! I have an idea though... pm sent.

Matt

heatherfeather

Ok, so here is one hot off the presses... from yesterday.

Before: (Who put those ugly things there? Oh, yeah. The forgetful photographer when she set up for a different shot.)



After:


And for someone with such fair skin (I found someone paler than ME!) it needed a surprising amount of touchups.
After:


Before:

mmmatt

Heather, the lighting on her face is exquisite! Wow! As if painted by an artist. Can I assume this was in the shade with just your brolly to the right? Great angle on her too, showing those high cheekbones. The best part of all is how you added the gouge and then continued the water stain on the board you replaced... VERY nice little detail and again like an artist would have painted it. Great image Heather. I have to say that I can't get used to the perfect complexion that all you ladies love so much, but that is just personal taste. Super impressive PS work, and an awesome image.

Matt

divamum

Iimpressive skinwork indeed. What are you doing for those complexions, Heather - are you doing it "manually", or using some kind of dedicated portrait software/actions?

heatherfeather

mmmatt wrote: »

Heather, the lighting on her face is exquisite! Wow! As if painted by an artist. Can I assume this was in the shade with just your brolly to the right? Great angle on her too, showing those high cheekbones. The best part of all is how you added the gouge and then continued the water stain on the board you replaced... VERY nice little detail and again like an artist would have painted it. Great image Heather. I have to say that I can't get used to the perfect complexion that all you ladies love so much, but that is just personal taste. Super impressive PS work, and an awesome image.

Matt

You pretty much nailed the lighting... Though it wasn't really shade, it was just very overcast.

As to the skin processing, I hate plastic-y looking skin processing.... it has to look like there is some texture to it for me, but I sure don't mind the removal of wrinkles and blemishes. I think each photographer has to find their own balance in order to create their own look, so it doesn't bother me in the slightest that it isn't what you would do. I rather like it that way!

You make it sound like I drew all of that background. Not so much... It was super simple and took all of ten minutes to do.

What I did:
1. Lasso the section of wood above the nasty frames.
2. Hit ctrl+J to make a copy on a new layer.
3. Go Edit>transform> flip verticle.
4. Pull it down to cover the part to be hidden and add a mask.
5. Select background layer and use the magnetic lasso around the flowers.
6. Select the layer with the mask and invert selection of the lasso and using a large brush, paint in the section of the background.
7. Do a little finessing brushng of the mask edges to hide the transitions and the mirrored effect.
8. The waterspot you mentioned is merely a clone spot to cover up the mirrored hole that was above... I just thought it was too much mirroring.

See? Not too hard. Not even artistic, really. But thanks for the kudos, anyhow!

tenoverthenose

Here's a few of my before and afters showing off my lack of PP skill

1.



2.




3.

heatherfeather

divamum wrote: »

Iimpressive skinwork indeed. What are you doing for those complexions, Heather - are you doing it "manually", or using some kind of dedicated portrait software/actions?

A combination....

It is a lot of use of the patch tool, and then shift+ctrl+F to fade on the larger blemishes and wrinklings.

And then a very soft light grey brushing of TRA pro retouch that I turn the opacity down even further. Again, it has to have texture or I am not happy with it.

liflander

Patrick, you made some nice yet subtle changes to those images. Can you explain what you did to them?
Thanks.

tenoverthenose

Mark all I really did on these shots (and most others) was a bit of contrast for a little more drama, and a tinge of color tweaking. I try to do all of my work in Lightroom using my presets to speed things up. Of course #2 made it into photoshop to remove the white line in the lower right.

mmmatt

heatherfeather wrote: »

You make it sound like I drew all of that background. Not so much... It was super simple and took all of ten minutes to do.

What I did:
1. Lasso the section of wood above the nasty frames.
2. Hit ctrl+J to make a copy on a new layer.
3. Go Edit>transform> flip verticle.
4. Pull it down to cover the part to be hidden and add a mask.
5. Select background layer and use the magnetic lasso around the flowers.
6. Select the layer with the mask and invert selection of the lasso and using a large brush, paint in the section of the background.
7. Do a little finessing brushng of the mask edges to hide the transitions and the mirrored effect.
8. The waterspot you mentioned is merely a clone spot to cover up the mirrored hole that was above... I just thought it was too much mirroring.

See? Not too hard. Not even artistic, really. But thanks for the kudos, anyhow!

Oh I understand how you did it Heather, and that it isn't rocket science, but the fact that you covered your cloning with subtle points of interest is masterful... don't sell yourself short!

heatherfeather wrote: »

I think each photographer has to find their own balance in order to create their own look, so it doesn't bother me in the slightest that it isn't what you would do. I rather like it that way!

Love it!

Matt

divamum

heatherfeather wrote: »

A combination....

It is a lot of use of the patch tool, and then shift+ctrl+F to fade on the larger blemishes and wrinklings.

And then a very soft light grey brushing of TRA pro retouch that I turn the opacity down even further. Again, it has to have texture or I am not happy with it.

Oh, I'm with you - I can't STAND skin without any texture. Bleah.

I've been looking for more info on the TRA action - it's not listed in with the others that I can see. Can you tell me more? I've been using Coffeshop's "Glamour Glow" action which I actually really like (although you have to use it VERY VERY sparingly - I use a brush with low opacity and fill values on a separate layer and then often reduce it even more) - it's free, which is a nice bonus

Agnieszka

Got a couple more from the most recent wedding. It was a gooooorgeous mansion right at the water.

#1: Hate shooting in the direct sunlight, but there was no way around it. I had to get a couple of shots with the water in the background ... Nothing spectacular (and looking at it now, I should probably also fix that spot in the grass) ... but:


#2: I blew the sky in this one , fixed it in Photoshop / I ended up NOT fixing the perspective as the house was on a hill and it would have looked wrong (as I was WAY below the house on the next couple of shots):


#3: Same here + added a vignette: