Testing a new portrait lens

Gary752 · November 3, 2012

I decided to start upgrading my lenses, and purchased a Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I wanted to test this lens out, and got a friend to pose for a few shots. These were all available light, on an extremely overcast day (pending hurricane Sandy, which never got as bad as predicted), under the roof of the gazebo in the park in town here. I just wish I would have purchased this lens sooner.

All PP was done in LR4, mainly to clean up a few blemishes, and brighten her eyes a little.

1. Ashley without her glasses and her usual smile.

2. This is a smile I got from her after some joking around with her.

3. Ashley and her friend Tasha

4. Ashley & friend again

Ashley's mom loved the photos I showed her and now wants me to shoot her other 2 daughters, and shoot a family photo for Christmas. Next thing on the list to buy is a device to calibrate my new LED monitor. Then it will be back to upgrading lenses.

Thanks in advance for any C&C or tips to make these better, especially getting skin tones/color more accurate.

GaryB

unique93 · November 3, 2012

Tooo much retouching...there is no texture on their skin...2. is the best...

WinkXR6T · November 3, 2012

^ Agreed.
The eyes and teeth look too white to me as well.

Hackbone · November 3, 2012

On my laptop the images look soft.

System · November 3, 2012

Hackbone wrote: »

On my laptop the images look soft.

They look soft on an iPad also...especially the first one.

Bilsen · November 3, 2012

Gonna agree with all above.

The images look soft on both a calibrated screen and an iPad. Maybe a bit too heavy on the PP for the skin also.

Pretty kids though. Keep shooting.

Sam · November 3, 2012

All images are soft and or show motion blur. I think you need to go back to the drawing board.

Put your camera on a tripod and do some test shots at various f/stops and make sure the lens and camera are performing well. If the shots are clean and sharp then start looking at your technique.

Sam

FlyNavy · November 3, 2012

Soft or blurry on my monitor.

Gary752 · November 4, 2012

Thanks for all the replies! Sorry for taking so long to reply back, but I've been very busy lately.

I think I was a little too heavy on the skin touchup as both girls had blemishes that I tried to fix in LR4. As for the softness, I think what might of happened is 1. My monitor is not calibrated, which will be as soon as ColorMunki (sp?) arrives. 2. I think a preset got accidently selected to do noise reduction to be run on import in LR4 that I had created when I had to use a high ISO. I just read a good tip on how to create presets based on lens and ISO, so I'm going to delete my old presets and start working on this.

My question now is, is there a way to have all my photos that I already edited to go back to "As Shot", short of deleting and re-importing, so I can correct this problem? As soon as the monitor calibrator arrives and I get the monitor calibrated, I will re-edit the photos and post them to see if I am headed in the right direction. Is there a good book or video tutorial on skin touch-up?

Again, thanks for the C&C! You don't know how much I appreciate it!

GaryB

novicesnapper · November 4, 2012

My question now is, is there a way to have all my photos that I already edited to go back to "As Shot", short of deleting and re-importing, so I can correct this problem?

Just select all the photos in the lower preview window, go to edit (I think), and hit reset photo. This removes all changes performed and takes it back to SOOC. I do this mysef when I took a left turn and should have taken a right lol.

Gary752 · November 4, 2012

Thanks for that tip!

I guess I've been taking too many left turns and just now finding out!

GaryB

novicesnapper · November 4, 2012

Correction, it's the setting's tab, and then click, reset all settings. That takes the images back to SOOC or the last saved import of that image. A tip I picked up last week, is right click the image and make a virtual copy of it. To isolate an original from current edits. Anymore, I think the trick to editing is to make the images look like they haven't been lol.

Zerodog · November 4, 2012

The trick to editing an not looking like it has been overdone is don't over do it! Do the basics in LR. Don't go to town in PS on the skin and don't overuse the brushes in LR.

I agree with the others as well. These are soft. Something wrong with lens or technique. Maybe too slow shutter speed?

Gary752 · November 4, 2012

Zerodog wrote: »

The trick to editing an not looking like it has been overdone is don't over do it! Do the basics in LR. Don't go to town in PS on the skin and don't overuse the brushes in LR.

I agree with the others as well. These are soft. Something wrong with lens or technique. Maybe too slow shutter speed?

I just checked, and a preset had gotten used on import by accident, and it had applied some noise reduction from when I played with some really high ISO's as a test. I checked the metadata on a few of them and shutter speed ranged from 1/125 to 1/640, so I don't think it was too slow of a shutter speed. I also zoomed in on the eyes on the first two and the eyes seemed sharp.

I deleted the offending preset and then I reset them back to as shot, then created a preset that does lens correction only for the lens used (as mentioned by Icebear in the Finishing School forum), and then deleted the raw files and then re-imported them. Now they are back to original with just lens correction applied. I'm going to wait till my monitor calibrator arrives to go any further. Hopefully, that will be here by Friday. Once I finish re-editing them I'll post the re-edits to find out if I went in the right direction this time.

GaryB

babowc · November 4, 2012

#1, 1/40.. motion blur and editing makes it look even more soft/blurred.
#2, 1/125, unflattering angle and pose.. too much retouching on that one too..
#3, 1/500 and no blur, but poses aren't doing much for me. The girl on camera right looks too-retouched...

WinkXR6T · November 4, 2012

Monitor calibration has no effect on sharpness. It's only a colour adjustment.

Gary752 · November 10, 2012

Is this any better? I removed all the photos from LR and re-imported them, after deleting all the presets I had created. Only thing that is done now is lens correction and noise reduction if a high ISO was used. I opened the RAW file in LR4.2 and then sent it to Portrait Professional Studio v11, which automatically took care of the blemishes. Only thing I did was to brighten the irises a little bit, then had PP export as a JPG. Then I opened it in FastStone viewer and used that to add the watermark, and called it done.

Thanks to all that provided C&C

If you have any tips to make this better, I'm all

!

GaryB

ripbob · November 11, 2012

Yes, much better and it doesn't look over PP as #1. Still slightly soft but much improved.

Sam · November 11, 2012

Gary,

Sorry to tell you this but this isn't any better.

You need to work on getting a well exposed in focus image to begin with, before worrying about post processing.

Several things could be contributing to the unacceptable soft image. f 2.8 at 1/40 of a second at 75mm. 1/40 of a second is too slow a shutter speed for me to hand hold. That coupled with a relatively shallow DOF can easily explain the softness.

Start with putting the camera on a tripod and take a shot of a stationary object. Try different f stops, and look at the results. Next you could try taking photos of a ruler placed at a 45 degree angle to determine if you have any front or back focus issues.

These images are unacceptable. I recommend you start with the basics and work you way through testing and evaluating your camera and lenses to determine if the problem is with you or your gear.

Once you know what the problem is you can solve it.

Sam

Foques · November 12, 2012

the softness of the images reminds me of the issues I was running into with my Tamrons, and why I bit the bullet and switched to Nikkors.

With my tamrons, I was never able to get a tack sharp image wide open. at f/3.5, i'd get a sharp image every 5-7 shots fired. Naturally, I thought, it was due to the lack of knowledge.. However, while shooting a band session, I borrowed my partner's 24-70, and could see the difference nearly right away. once I went pixel peeping, the difference just became that more obvious.

Then, there is what Sam is suggesting. 1/40th is truly way too slow for a handheld shooting

r3t1awr3yd · November 12, 2012

Gary,

When in doubt about shutter speeds to make sharp images, try using the inverse focal length rule. So say you're shooting at 75mm, don't shoot any slower than 1/75s or on a nikon, 1/100 would be the next closest speed. I find this to be helpful when shooting without a tripod.

Also, to echo what Foques said above, I sold the one tamron I had because it was NEVER sharp. Third party, I stick to Tokina. Nikkors are the only other option IMHO.

Gary752 · November 12, 2012

Ok. I have to agree that the shutter speed was too slow, but I did say I was testing the lens out. Below is one that was taken at 75mm @ f2.8 and 1/125. The eyes and eye brows look sharp on my monitor when zoomed in, in LR4.2. All I did with this one was lens correction, and bumped the exposure up a tad and then sent it to Portrait Professional Studio 11 and cleaned up some blemishes, then sent it back to LR4.2 to add the watermark, then export. I was using Faststone Image viewer to add the watermark in the past, and noticed it was compressing the file to a smaller file size, so now I'm letting LR do the watermark on the final export.

GaryB

Giselle · November 12, 2012

soooo much better!

Foques · November 13, 2012

better, yes.. but still not a portrait material, imo.

divamum · November 13, 2012

Bro, what does that shot in post #22 look like SOOC? Can you post a link to a full size version of it for us to see?

I agree with the others - take some new shots, being very careful about your shutter speeds and stopping it down just by by a little (even 1/3 of a stop can significantly improve sharpness). Make sure you've got good light, and don't underexpose (boosting in post will increase grain which will make it look softer even if it was originally sharp).

Post what you get and let's have a look!

novicesnapper · November 13, 2012

Need a larger image to actually view details.

Sam · November 13, 2012

I known your not gona like this, but.......start over!!!

Throw these away....................

Sam

Gary752 · November 14, 2012

divamum wrote: »

Bro, what does that shot in post #22 look like SOOC? Can you post a link to a full size version of it for us to see?

I agree with the others - take some new shots, being very careful about your shutter speeds and stopping it down just by by a little (even 1/3 of a stop can significantly improve sharpness). Make sure you've got good light, and don't underexpose (boosting in post will increase grain which will make it look softer even if it was originally sharp).

Post what you get and let's have a look!

Diva. below is the shot SOOC, only thing done is the watermark added on export from RAW. I made sure that all sliders were at 0, and white balance was set to "As Shot" before exporting. Only thing that was done was the lens correction thing at import, done the way Icebear mentioned in another post.

Note that the shots were taken like 4 to 6 hours before hurricane Sandy went to the east of us, and was extremely overcast, plus she was standing under the roof of a gazebo. I figured this would be a good test for this lens in general. It was in no means intended as a portrait session.

GaryB

Gary752 · November 14, 2012

Sam wrote: »

I known your not gona like this, but.......start over!!!

Throw these away....................

Sam

These were not ment to be used for anything, other than a test of a new lens. Trust me, I'll be taking others as soon as things slow down at work a bit. I've been working a lot of overtime lately, and now it's dark when I leave for work, and not much time till it's dark after work. I guess it's time to start investing in flashes and radio triggers and start working on that, otherwise I'll only get one day a week to shoot with available light.

GaryB

babowc · November 15, 2012

Instead of running it through the portrait program, try cloning out the imperfections.
Take it to LR, do quick WB/Exposure adjustments, import it to PS and start cloning her imperfections like pimple spots, moles, etc.

I think your portrait program is WAY overdoing the skin..
I can try a go at it, if you have the RAW?

I did a quick clone/edit on PS for the color/exposure adjustment, her imperfections, "bags", and something that looked like a unibrow...
I'll take it down if you don't like it.

kevingeary · November 16, 2012

BroPhoto wrote: »

Diva. below is the shot SOOC, only thing done is the watermark added on export from RAW. I made sure that all sliders were at 0, and white balance was set to "As Shot" before exporting. Only thing that was done was the lens correction thing at import, done the way Icebear mentioned in another post.

Note that the shots were taken like 4 to 6 hours before hurricane Sandy went to the east of us, and was extremely overcast, plus she was standing under the roof of a gazebo. I figured this would be a good test for this lens in general. It was in no means intended as a portrait session.

GaryB

What mode are you shooting? If Aperture Priority, you should have used exposure compensation for this. The camera chose to expose for the background and left your subject highly underexposed.

Testing a new portrait lens

Comments