Second Attempt

divmedic4divmedic4 Registered Users Posts: 160 Major grins
edited August 19, 2012 in Go Figure
Another the wife has agreed to me posting. Critique and advice are appreciated.

i-3srqrgw-L.jpg
Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, EF 50 1.8 II, 430EXII

Tom

Comments

  • toragstorags Registered Users Posts: 4,615 Major grins
    edited August 11, 2012
    Lotta wonder in that bra... :D
    Rags
  • divmedic4divmedic4 Registered Users Posts: 160 Major grins
    edited August 11, 2012
    LMAO! I am working on getting her to let her "wonder" loose for me to post.
    Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, EF 50 1.8 II, 430EXII

    Tom
  • canoesailorcanoesailor Registered Users Posts: 79 Big grins
    edited August 12, 2012
    divmedic4 wrote: »
    LMAO! I am working on getting her to let her "wonder" loose for me to post.

    Beware photshop it could set free before you're ready as in your last picture
  • toragstorags Registered Users Posts: 4,615 Major grins
    edited August 13, 2012
    divmedic4 wrote: »
    LMAO! I am working on getting her to let her "wonder" loose for me to post.

    Hehehe... You might be disappointed...

    I was talking about wonder as in "Wonder Bra" made famous by Victoria Secret. They put padding in the underside of the bra to push up smaller bust cleavage. Playboy was the first (I think), for their servers.

    It's all part of the "Immaculate Deception" conspiracy practiced by females... :D
    Rags
  • djamesdjames Registered Users Posts: 237 Major grins
    edited August 13, 2012
    torags wrote: »
    Hehehe... You might be disappointed...

    I was talking about wonder as in "Wonder Bra" made famous by Victoria Secret. They put padding in the underside of the bra to push up smaller bust cleavage. Playboy was the first (I think), for their servers.

    It's all part of the "Immaculate Deception" conspiracy practiced by females... :D

    isnt it interesting that what they want to keep hidden, they want to enhance?
    http://www.djames-photography.com
    In this great big world around us, we will find what we are looking for! What we do with it is up to us to decide.
    Olympus E-500 Olympus E-520 Zuiko 14-45 Zuiko 40-150 Sigma 50-500 Zuiko 18-180 4-AB800 strobes, 1AB-400 stobe, 4 softboxes, brolly box, umbrellas etc.
  • divmedic4divmedic4 Registered Users Posts: 160 Major grins
    edited August 13, 2012
    Rags, I took your comment to mean a wonder bra. After 10 years if they surprised me, I think I would have some more serious issues than trying to make my photography better!

    Djames, that doesn't surprise me as much as how offended most seem to get when you actually look at/notice what they are trying to enhance.
    Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, EF 50 1.8 II, 430EXII

    Tom
  • novicesnappernovicesnapper Registered Users Posts: 445 Major grins
    edited August 14, 2012
    I hope you don't mind. I worked on this in LR3.6 for an experiment.
    Opened it and used the exposure brush to lighten her face and her right arm, camera left. I think around 15% or so
    A second layer of exposure brush to the eyes, I just did skin on the first pass, just to brighten the eyes somewhat. About 10% or so
    Brushed an iris enhance over the pupils, as well, as a third step. Makes the pupils pop. Can't remember what %, but it wasn't much.

    I think, and maybe someone can confirm, the camera side lighting may have been over powered by the window lights, causing her face to fall into the shadows. Love the catch lights from them though. I only retouched her face, eyes, and the one arm. Lets see if Image Shack will embed without artifacts, I was having trouble some time back. If it does, I'll remove the embedded picture and just post a link. Lovely lady by the way.

    You're image straight from you're link
    i-3srqrgw-L.jpg

    My LR version'
    i3srqrgwl.jpg
  • divmedic4divmedic4 Registered Users Posts: 160 Major grins
    edited August 15, 2012
    Thank you for the comments and the work on the image Novice. I do see and agree with what you said about the darkness of her face. While I like the increase in brightness with your processing, it makes her face look "fake" to me. I don't rule out the possibility that this is because I look at her every day causing that feeling.
    Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, EF 50 1.8 II, 430EXII

    Tom
  • novicesnappernovicesnapper Registered Users Posts: 445 Major grins
    edited August 16, 2012
    I agree, I probably should have feathered the exposure change over a wider area. I was just tinkering around lol. She's very photogenic for sure, lovely eyes. Can I ask what the light sources were on the camera side? I'm kind of at this level myself, messing with light sources and varying strengths for different effects. TIA.
  • divmedic4divmedic4 Registered Users Posts: 160 Major grins
    edited August 17, 2012
    I understand what you are saying about tinkering around Novice. I will work the same shot 20 different ways trying to find "my style." The great thing is, I truly enjoy it. For this shot, it was all natural light via the windows. There is a second side window to the camera left that I was able to keep out of the frame. I was counting on the sheer curtains difusing the light.
    Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, EF 50 1.8 II, 430EXII

    Tom
  • novicesnappernovicesnapper Registered Users Posts: 445 Major grins
    edited August 19, 2012
    Lol, same here. I'll work some images, then get up and walk away for awhile, come back and critique it again. I find this is a great way to learn the limits of the software and see other areas I need to touch up. Sometimes I come back and mutter "what was I thinking?" or "ughh I have over worked the photo" lol. Most of my time I spend here, is on people, and I have learned a ton for sure. I went ahead and deleted the image for reassurance. This is a tough shot for sure, to get balanced naturally. Lovely wife, and looking forward to more of you're work.
Sign In or Register to comment.