High Key...looking for feedback

kdotaylor

This high-key is new to me. I shot some photos of my daughter and boyfriend and used Photoshop to create something that I think looks high key. Any thoughts on these? Did I do it right? Any suggestions to improve?
#1

#2

JC

I like the second one better, the blacks aren't so saturated. I'd suggest that they wear light colored clothing, and get a lighter background, so that the details in their hair and their eyes are the only midrange and low range values.

DsrtVW

Another for 2

angevin1

kdotaylor wrote: »

This high-key is new to me. I shot some photos of my daughter and boyfriend and used Photoshop to create something that I think looks high key. Any thoughts on these? Did I do it right? Any suggestions to improve?
#1

#2

Kate, I think you can do better and here's how.

1. Choice of Back ground. Choose a non-contrasting BG with light/lighter tones.

2. Place your subject in front of the BG and work on exposure going up as far as one stop over exposed.

3. Hopefully you end up with a non-distracting but complimentary BG and good tonal quality in your Skin ( if you choose to shoot people) or main subject.

Your Photo #8 (three Boys) in Your Best of 2011 gallery is a prime example of good skin tonal range.
And your #4 (Winter scene) in the best of 2010 gallery is a good example of great tonal quality and HIGH KEY overall. ( Hope I got the numbers right!)

Just my opinion and Hope that helps.

eL eSs Vee

They're washed out. You've lost too much detail for the images to be interesting. What you have here is very high contrast. They're almost lithographs, which consist of pure whites and pure blacks - like a printed page of text on high-quality paper stock.

I posted this image in another thread:



You'll note that there is a lot of white, but there's also a lot of detail: nothing is washed out. (The loss of detail in her coat is due to this being a photo of a photo, yet the details aren't completely lost. In real life, I could see every hair on her coat.). There's detail everywhere and the image is light, but the contrast is relatively low. What you want to do is go for light with detail, not bright! Then you'll have two amazing images.

lkbart

I really like the framing, expressions, focus & lighting in #2. You could try using the layer blending mode "screen" & adjust the opacity to add more of a high key look.

kdotaylor

http://www.google.com/search?q=high+key+photography&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=ZbR&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=xiHiT5LmMu3o2gWmlv2pCw&ved=0CGcQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=870

I'm seeing lots of images without detail. I guess I don't understand high key..... Is there a single definition of high key??

JC

kdotaylor wrote: »

I'm seeing lots of images without detail. I guess I don't understand high key..... Is there a single definition of high key??

As many definitions as there are pictures, probably. The commonality is that the peak of an image's histogram, the bulk of the histogram, be to the right of 127.

For some definitions, saturated values considered allowable, for other definitions (the ones I favor) the general ideals of good exposure without blown out highlights are still followed.

This is going to be a hard challenge to judge, since the amount of detail seen in any of these images is going to be highly monitor dependent. The histogram of your second image (the one I like better) shows clipped values on the right side, but on one monitor, it looks like those values are found only on the arm on the left, and the guys face, but the girls face has a lot of detail, maybe only blown out pixels along her nose. On another monitor a lot less detail is visible. I think you can back off on the exposure a bit and stretch out the values more evenly above 127, but remove all excess dark details around the subject, to keep the overall image bright.

red_zone

I found myself asking the same thing about blown-out areas (fine if it's in the background, or areas of little interest?) vs. overexposure vs. hi-key. I think you've got the basic idea right with a light background like #1 and a more moderate tone for the woman's hair and face like #2.

angevin1

kdotaylor wrote: »

http://www.google.com/search?q=high+key+photography&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=ZbR&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=xiHiT5LmMu3o2gWmlv2pCw&ved=0CGcQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=870

I'm seeing lots of images without detail. I guess I don't understand high key..... Is there a single definition of high key??

You're not alone either!

As far as I know there's not a single definition. But we can create one.

I'll start

Use _______(insert key here) Key to show my eyes where they are supposed to look.

Pretty simple.

So instead of using only composition, or only this or that rule, and in this instance using high key, (like others have posted) Use the key to tell me where in the image I am to be drawn too. Your images above are in the higher key, but they don't easily tell me where I am to be drawn too.

I think that is as close to a definition as I can create.

dbveto

kdotaylor wrote: »

http://www.google.com/search?q=high+key+photography&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=ZbR&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=xiHiT5LmMu3o2gWmlv2pCw&ved=0CGcQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=870

I'm seeing lots of images without detail. I guess I don't understand high key..... Is there a single definition of high key??

My understanding of high key is the most detail should be on the subject.



This is what I think of as High key the players face is the subject so that is where the most detail is.