At first I didn't care for the back highlights on her hair but after playing around with the image a bit that element grew on me.
Long story, short.
I played around with Elements 9 and FastStone Image Viewer and in the end I felt all that was necessary was a "adjust for skin tone" and some slight brightness/contrast adjustments.
Also cropped to 4/3's
The composition may be a little tight on the left side and I'd consider cloning out the tree at the back left but this image needs to be printed...
Cheers, Don
BTW - 22" Dell IPS monitor calibrated with Spyder3 Pro.
Every single one of these looks wrong to me by a lot, though the last one is closest. I think you'd have to go back to the original high res version to possibly save it. It's over-exposed and over-saturated and the color shift is very orange.
As for monitors, if you're serious about editing your photos, you need to have a good one and a color calibrating tool otherwise you're more likely to screw up the photos then to make them look better. I've got a Dell U2311H, which is fairly inexpensive and does a great job in conjunction with an x-rite i1 color calibrator.
Every single one of these looks wrong to me by a lot, though the last one is closest. I think you'd have to go back to the original high res version to possibly save it. It's over-exposed and over-saturated and the color shift is very orange.
As for monitors, if you're serious about editing your photos, you need to have a good one and a color calibrating tool otherwise you're more likely to screw up the photos then to make them look better. I've got a Dell U2311H, which is fairly inexpensive and does a great job in conjunction with an x-rite i1 color calibrator.
Completely agree. The bunch seems orange, oversaturated/desaturated and all that.
If you shot this in RAW, restarting with the right color temp in RAW would really help. But, it doesn't if the monitor isn't calibrated right in the first place. Gotta know for sure that it is. Scott, aside the RAW color temp, what is your monitor color temp set to?
The profile applied was 'c2' and the web is sRGB. Converting it to sRGB would probably help before uploading. This is what I came up with, anyway:
This thread is great. Never have I considered that we are ALL wrong. We all can't see colors properly. Do we need to hire a professional retoucher with $20,000 displays to actually tell us how this is supposed to look?
Meanwhile, while we are all wrong, we all think we are right. That's the best part. Calibrated displays or not, every one of these varies far too much.
Please feel free to post any reworks you do of my images. Crop, skew, munge, edit, share. Website | Galleries | Utah PJs
Thanks everyone for the help with this. I really appreciate all the comments and suggestions everyone has given with all my heart. I am working off a toshiba satellite a505 laptop with whatever screen came with it, as for color temp of the screen? I have no idea... whatever it came with is what I have been using and didnt know you could even change it. When I get money I want to get a good monitor and desktop, but as of right now, I just dont have the funds and wanted to get a great looking picture of my wife edited to print. Thank you all for your help.
I often edit on a laptop; not as good as a snazzy high-contrast IPS screen, but it's fine if you calibrate. You can get a Huey calibration devicefor not too much money (I bought mine - an original Huey, not the Pro which now seems to be the only one available, although the price has sure dropped! - from another dgrinner, in fact, for about $40). It definitely makes a huge difference when adjusting colours and skintone
THere's a lesson here, and I don't think we've pointed it out ... and it happens to wander down the road to what is becoming somewhat of an emerging mantra for me: get it right on the camera, rather than try to save something in pp. I think the OP recognizes the issues here, and I'd suggest it's a function of two things: balancing light (backlit=bad) and white balance. The orange cast off the shirt isn't helping, either.
Newspaper photogs specialize in drive-by shootings.
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
THere's a lesson here, and I don't think we've pointed it out ... and it happens to wander down the road to what is becoming somewhat of an emerging mantra for me: get it right on the camera, rather than try to save something in pp. I think the OP recognizes the issues here, and I'd suggest it's a function of two things: balancing light (backlit=bad) and white balance. The orange cast off the shirt isn't helping, either.
It hasn't been mentioned because it doesn't apply.
Several monitors on this thread, including my calibrated Imac, see this picture in different ways. That is nothing to do with the camera image it is to do with how the monitor displays the image.
Also the only way you can get an image close to right in camera is if you only ever work in Jpeg. Those of us that have outgrown Jpeg and shoot in RAW have to process the picture on the computer. It is rather like when we used film and had to have the negative processed.
I agree Canoe, very few images are posted here, without some type of PP. I don't think being backlit is an issue, it was handled nicely. I think several issues after that, the c2 profile doesn't play well with most image hosting sites (RGB). Secondly, yes, the hot pink shirt did splash somewhat, nothing that can't be PP'd. Lol, thirdly, that's what this site is for, to learn, and this thread most certainly is doing that lol.
Are these good monitors for editing? can they be calibrated like you all talk about?
IPS monitors have the best color reproduction and nowhere do I see these mentioned as IPS. Make sure they are first. Cause for this price there are quite a few IPS monitors you could acquire with very high display quality.
First of all, lovely wife! But, I'll be honest here, Scott - I think her eyes and teeth are a little too nuclear. Trying bringing the exposure down a bit, maybe like this?
My experience in shooting backlit shots like this is that it is really hard to get the colors in the shadows right while still keeping the bright background looking reasonably normal. When I look at these variations, I don't find anything that manages to do both, at least to my eye. I have tried several approaches, including high-thresholding out the background, and local adjustments that separately contrast and color the shadows (in this case her face) and the surrounding areas. Not saying I have been particularly successful at this, but it usually results in some improvement.
To my eye, the contrasts in most of these versions are off as well...
If you don't want to splurge on a monitor yet, try getting the Huey Pro calibration device mentioned above - it works just fine on a laptop screen (as well as full size monitors). It's an inexpensive addition which makes a HUGE difference to editing results.
Comments
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
Nikon D4, Nikon D3, Nikon D3
Nikon 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-70 f2.8, Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR II, Nikon 50 f1.8, Nikon 85 f1.4
Nikon 300 f2.8 VR, Nikon 200-400 f4.0 VR II, Nikon 600 f4.0 II, TC-1.4, TC 1.7, TC 2.0
(1) SB-800, (2) SB-900, (4) Multi Max Pocket Wizards
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
Yep, they are dead on.
I did not know this about google chrome. I only use it.. I hate internet explorer.. wonder if that is why I see so many problems.
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
First let me say your wife is beautiful
At first I didn't care for the back highlights on her hair but after playing around with the image a bit that element grew on me.
Long story, short.
I played around with Elements 9 and FastStone Image Viewer and in the end I felt all that was necessary was a "adjust for skin tone" and some slight brightness/contrast adjustments.
Also cropped to 4/3's
The composition may be a little tight on the left side and I'd consider cloning out the tree at the back left but this image needs to be printed...
Cheers, Don
BTW - 22" Dell IPS monitor calibrated with Spyder3 Pro.
Product Photography
My Acreage Bird Photographs
The others look either cold or lacking in detail.
Also congratulations on having a beautiful wife, what a smile.
www.jtsphotoblog.blogspot.co.uk
www.johngwynant.blogspot.co.uk
As for monitors, if you're serious about editing your photos, you need to have a good one and a color calibrating tool otherwise you're more likely to screw up the photos then to make them look better. I've got a Dell U2311H, which is fairly inexpensive and does a great job in conjunction with an x-rite i1 color calibrator.
Completely agree. The bunch seems orange, oversaturated/desaturated and all that.
If you shot this in RAW, restarting with the right color temp in RAW would really help. But, it doesn't if the monitor isn't calibrated right in the first place. Gotta know for sure that it is. Scott, aside the RAW color temp, what is your monitor color temp set to?
The profile applied was 'c2' and the web is sRGB. Converting it to sRGB would probably help before uploading. This is what I came up with, anyway:
Meanwhile, while we are all wrong, we all think we are right. That's the best part. Calibrated displays or not, every one of these varies far too much.
Website | Galleries | Utah PJs
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
Yeah, looks good here
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
It hasn't been mentioned because it doesn't apply.
Several monitors on this thread, including my calibrated Imac, see this picture in different ways. That is nothing to do with the camera image it is to do with how the monitor displays the image.
Also the only way you can get an image close to right in camera is if you only ever work in Jpeg. Those of us that have outgrown Jpeg and shoot in RAW have to process the picture on the computer. It is rather like when we used film and had to have the negative processed.
www.jtsphotoblog.blogspot.co.uk
www.johngwynant.blogspot.co.uk
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
Are these good monitors for editing? can they be calibrated like you all talk about?
http://www.scotthofferphotography.com
IPS monitors have the best color reproduction and nowhere do I see these mentioned as IPS. Make sure they are first. Cause for this price there are quite a few IPS monitors you could acquire with very high display quality.
I have an earlier model of this and am quite pleased with its color reproduction (when calibrated).
http://www.amazon.com/Viewsonic-VP2365-LED-23-Inch-Monitor-Black/dp/B0053YKE72/ref=dp_ob_title_ce
www.rfcphotography.com
To my eye, the contrasts in most of these versions are off as well...