Can you edit this to your liking?

[Rosy]

Hi there, this is Jackie, my daughter. Is she kinda bluish to you? Want to make sure my monitor is correct, Isee her bluish
Also, the lighting, what would you do? I used OCF, camera left 45 degrees from subject. Is it too flat?


.facebook_442519371 by casualapproach, on Flickr

 

[bhop]

I'd bump up the exposure, seems a little under exposed, add some contrast so it's not so flat, and warm up the colors and see how it looks from there.

 

[Ysarex89 83]

Definetly blue. The processing is flat/dark and your lighting is on the flat side as well, but arguably appropriate for the subject.

Joe

 

[tmjjk]

I am new to photography and new to editing... I am not even sure how people pull these images off here to edit them..lol but one thing is for sure... your daughter is beautiful. I just left clicked and saved the image, but it seemed grainy when I opened it, so I am sure I did something wrong...

 

[Rosy]

View attachment 10548I am new to photography and new to editing... I am not even sure how people pull these images off here to edit them..lol but one thing is for sure... your daughter is beautiful. I just left clicked and saved the image, but it seemed grainy when I opened it, so I am sure I did something wrong...

MAYBE?? Because it is a small image?? Let me see if i can post the original one, but it would have to be later tonight. Good catch - I'll make sure not to post reduced facebook images on here Thank you for the 'beautiful' comment

 

[Rosy]

Definetly blue. The processing is flat/dark and your lighting is on the flat side as well, but arguably appropriate for the subject.

Joe

View attachment 10549

So flat is good??

 

[The_Traveler]

and check the color profile, which PS reads as c2 (?).
It should be sRGB for the web.

 

[Ysarex89 83]

Definetly blue. The processing is flat/dark and your lighting is on the flat side as well, but arguably appropriate for the subject.

Joe

View attachment 10549

So flat is good??

Flat isn't good if we're referring to the tone response of the photo. In your original posted photo, if you examine it's histogram, you see that it's compressed with the data falling far short of the right corner -- this is bad flat. The lighting contrast on your daughter's face is flat -- full in the face without strong shadows. This is good flat considering the subject. There's a cultural element involved as this photo is of an attractive young woman. If it was Clint Eastwood wearing a Stetson and chawing on a cigar we'd expect higher contrast lighting with darker, crisper shadows.

As a general rule full in the face light isn't a best choice, shadows add shape and modeling to the face which is desirable.

Joe

 

[jdsfighter]

I have strange tastes

 

[WhiskeyTango]

Here's my take. I significantly upped exposure, shifted white balance, added some contrast, and a touch of sharpening. I also dropped saturation a bit on the greens and blues.



Interestingly enough, the pic in my post looks "slightly" greener than it does on-screen in Lightroom. I'm guessing that has to do with color management in my browser.

 

[GnipGnop]

Whiskey don't you think you lost her skin tone by over exposing? Looks like it to me. JDS you added too much contrast/saturation IMO. Her forehead looks like a cooked ham. In between Ysarex and tmjjk is best to me.

 

[DiskoJoe]

You might get better results if you host the photo from somewhere besides facebook. Just saying.

 

[Rosy]

You might get better results if you host the photo from somewhere besides facebook. Just saying.

definately, lesson learned

 

[graecyn]

Here's my attempt