Butterfly Princess. Did I mess this shoot up somehow? C+C Needed.

[OGsPhotography]

Working on this photo and I am worried that perhaps the resolution is too low? I wish there was more fine detail in her face. Did I just miss focus?


100 iso, f5, 1/250, 27mm

butterflyprincess by gibson.owen, on Flickr

StudiosetupOctober2016 by gibson.owen, on Flickr

 

[pixmedic]

maybe? just a little?
i dunno...
ultra sharpness is overrated in people photography.
I think this looks fine.
if it IS a little soft focused, its not enough to really fuss over.

 

[Derrel]

maybe? just a little?
i dunno...
ultra sharpness is overrated in people photography.
I think this looks fine.
if it IS a little soft focused, its not enough to really fuss over.

Exactly. I looked at it large on Flickr....seems okay to me in terms of detail. PERHAPS the ambient light exposure and the flash are close; I think I see a slight bit of blurring in the wand's end thingamajig, so perhaps there's a TINY bit of a ghost image caused by ambient and flash together? Or, maybe not quite the perfect focus placement for f/5? Or is this maybe a bit of flaring of the lens due to the backdrop reflecting light into the lens? I dunno....looks very,very close to me. Overall, the picture is fine though. Maybe if it is a slight bit misfocused, it still does NOT hurt the picture.

 

[OGsPhotography]

Thanks guys,

I didnt want to edit much further if its not going to print properly and I got a bit confounded.

Thanks again I'll get back to work now.

 

[Derrel]

if you are worried about fine detail in a printed image, I might be tempted to just select her face and chest areas with the selection tool in PS, then hit Unsharp Mask, something like 110% at .4 pixel, threshold of 4, and then FADE that with the Filter>Fade control, and repeat that three times, then send the file to print.

Selectively sharpening, or adding more clarity to the face could also be done, thus visually creating the impression of "more detail" in a print.

 

[Granddad]

GORGEOUS child, beautifully posed and the expression on her face is to die for! IF it's a little soft (I pick up my new reading specs tomorrow) it doesn't hurt the image. Don't forget to process out the stray hair across her left eye, and possibly another across her right eye... the fact that I can see those strays suggests it's not as soft as you thought it might be.

 

[Advanced Photo]

I know a lot of people here will say too much! and it is for most subjects, but for a magical portrait like this I think it's ok, and I bet she will get a kick out of it too.
Making the little ones feel special is worth a bit of ridicule from some folks imo.
Without further ado, I present...

 

[OGsPhotography]

Its better than I could have imagined, its honestly close to what I was doing ( at least the in head version, my Ps file isn't close to that), gradients, starburst wand, shadows, d+b etc is perfect. Thanks so much @Advanced Photo thats truly awesome.

All it need is a few butterflies coming out of the wand! Haha

I see photographs the opposite of Hasselblad. I can't understand not intermingling art into everything, not just photos.

Made my day thanks again.

 

[The_Traveler]

So bright and so flat that it looks soft
just changed the levels a bit.