How to create stunning digital portraits with out spending alot of time in "PhotoShop"

[donny1963]

by the way if your not using any hardware to calibrate your monitor to do your digital enhancements then what looks right to you may not be, specially if you intend to publish anything you do, because after you do post production, the actual print will not be the same.

 

[Vtec44]

To be honest, this looks like the portrait style 15-20 years ago when the over softening of the face was popular. I have bunch of those taken of me throughout my high school.

 

[KmH]

by the way if your not using any hardware to calibrate your monitor to do your digital enhancements then what looks right to you may not be, specially if you intend to publish anything you do, because after you do post production, the actual print will not be the same.

Prints and publishing for electronic display are 2 very different things.

There are different electronic display device types, many of the same display type using differing operating system software, and a broad assortment browsing software, some of those color aware, some not color aware.
Of course if the electronic display device your digitally enhanced image isn't also calibrated exactly the same as your display device your carefully enhanced digtail image may not look the way you intended.

Soft proofing for prints in your editing application still only shows you an approximation of what a print will look like. It can be a close approximation if you use the right ICC profiles (print making device profile and print paper profile) but still only an approximation.
Then the print has to be lit properly where ever it hangs to have any chance of looking like the soft proof you saw in your editing application.

But no doubt, routinely calibrating your display is essential if you want to have a solid foundation for doing any digital editing.

 

[donny1963]

by the way if your not using any hardware to calibrate your monitor to do your digital enhancements then what looks right to you may not be, specially if you intend to publish anything you do, because after you do post production, the actual print will not be the same.

Prints and publishing for electronic display are 2 very different things.

There are different electronic display device types, many of the same display type using differing operating system software, and a broad assortment browsing software, some of those color aware, some not color aware.
Of course if the electronic display device your digitally enhanced image isn't also calibrated exactly the same as your display device your carefully enhanced digtail image may not look the way you intended.

Soft proofing for prints in your editing application still only shows you an approximation of what a print will look like. It can be a close approximation if you use the right ICC profiles (print making device profile and print paper profile) but still only an approximation.
Then the print has to be lit properly where ever it hangs to have any chance of looking like the soft proof you saw in your editing application.

But no doubt, routinely calibrating your display is essential if you want to have a solid foundation for doing any digital editing.

I use a Eizo CG247 24" Widescreen ColorEdge monitor it's perfect for photo editing. has panels around it to keep any light hitting on the screen.
But even with that monitor you still need to calibrate it,
I use the X-Rite i1 Display Pro Densitometer it's only a couple hundred dollars and it does a fantastic job.
it's easy all you do is put it on your monitor surface and the software does all the calibrating for you.
how it works is a chord hangs over the top and the unit is flat against the screen and the software just displays a bunch of colored squares in different areas of the monitor, and then the calibrating takes place, when it's done your all set..
I've use a couple different brands and found that the X-Rite is the best!!!!
and if you don't believe in them, pull up one of your favorite pictures you done before you calibrate your monitor then do your calibration and then pull up the picture again and you will see a noticeable difference.. just about 99% of all monitors are off on calibration, but most people don't care they are not that picky because most are not doing any photo post production. But if your a photographer and specially doing wedding gigs, you want to calibrate your monitor before doing any post production..

 

[donny1963]

To be honest, this looks like the portrait style 15-20 years ago when the over softening of the face was popular. I have bunch of those taken of me throughout my high school.

I had a softening filter attached to the lens.. that's it..

 

[Vtec44]

<-- wedding photographer


Portfolio
|
V

 

[table1349]

Dear Playboy,

One of you out of work photo editors has escaped the compound now that Hef has decided to take the magazine to an articles only format. You will find him above.

p.s. He seems cranky without any thing to do.

 

[pixmedic]

Personally speaking, the after shots look too soft. Theres very little detail left on the face. Whether from the software, or the filter you mentioned, I do not know.
I also think your MUA is a little too heavy handed on the foundation and blush.

I'm not saying some people aren't partial to that look...I grew up on 80s glam rockers so i get it...just not anything I would hand to clients myself.

"Quick" software fixes are no substitute for knowedgable and deliberate editing.
You might as well shoot with your camera on auto too.

Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

 

[Vtec44]

first off that last picture was not edited,

Just to clarify, are you saying that his image was NOT edited?

 

[donny1963]

first off that last picture was not edited,

Just to clarify, are you saying that his image was NOT edited?

right, Not with portrait pro or Photoshop as far as making up the face, I did do some changes in white balance and stuff like that but never used any brushes..

 

[donny1963]

now obviously my style is not Jimmy Williams, A lot of the work I do is soft, most of it any way, not all..
Now as far as photographer Jimmy Williams, that guy is probably the best photographer out there, all his stuff is perfect..
Jimmy Williams Photography

I like his natural look in his work and 99% of it looks perfect and probably Un-touched with any digital editing, maybe i'm worng, but doesn't look like it has been..

 

[The_Traveler]

I had a softening filter attached to the lens.. that's it..

I think I wouldn't use those.
Not only does it look too soft to me, it also removed her neck - and I like females with necks.

 

[donny1963]

I had a softening filter attached to the lens.. that's it..

I think I wouldn't use those.
Not only does it look too soft to me, it also removed her neck - and I like females with necks.

LOL she has a neck, you can't see it because of the way she posed, her head is turned and her chin is on her shoulders, so that would be why lol

 

[zombiesniper]

Dude let me get this right.
You come on a forum FULL of photographers. Some of which have a GAZILLION shutter cycles to their credit. Then proceed to get pissed when they don't bow down this amazing piece of software (which some say they have tried and dismissed) that you suggest does just as well as hiring a makeup artist.

Are you as eager to accept that I can shoot a wedding just as well as you with my cell phone and Instagram? Didn't think so.

You like the software and thinks it does a good job. Awesome. Now stop trying to sell your belief to everyone else. Do what you like to do and let the pics fall where they may.

I'm Zombiesniper and I approve this message.

 

[donny1963]

Dude let me get this right.
You come on a forum FULL of photographers. Some of which have a GAZILLION shutter cycles to their credit. Then proceed to get pissed when they don't bow down this amazing piece of software (which some say they have tried and dismissed) that you suggest does just as well as hiring a makeup artist.

Are you as eager to accept that I can shoot a wedding just as well as you with my cell phone and Instagram? Didn't think so.

You like the software and thinks it does a good job. Awesome. Now stop trying to sell your belief to everyone else. Do what you like to do and let the pics fall where they may.

I'm Zombiesniper and I approve this message.

now see, that's arrogant, you can shoot a wedding just as well with your cell phone, Ya ok,, and first off, how would you know how many shutters cycles I have, first off you have no idea, how long I been doing this, #2 you have no foundation of information to tell me what my skills are and what I have done, or to claim you do anything as good as I can, I get a kick out of idiots who put them self up so high like they are all that and a bag of chips, and never met some one and claim who can do what as well or better.

right there tells every one your arrogant, have no idea what your talking about when you say something like that, you simply have nothing to work with to make a statement like that at all, and your wrong I didn't get upset because people didn't like the software..
don't come on here and put your self above me like your some guru photographer and I should bow down to you, that ain't gonna happen.
claim anything you want, you don't know me, or have any idea of what I have done in my life i'm 52 years old, so if I been doing photography since I was 14 I think I have quite a few shutter cycles under my belt, mr.

not only that, I go way back in the film's and slide days, yeah where you don't have the luxury of looking at a digital screen or histogram to check your exposure.. how many shutter cycles you got on that?

As the old saying goes, if you don't have anything nice to say, or have any respect for some one you don't even know, then get lost I don't need your arrogant comments.