First of many... Jill D. C&C Please?

[The_Traveler]

It looks like the photo was taken from a point slightly below her waist and it has the appearance of perspective distortion with her top half smaller and her bottom half larger. Her legs are firmly planted in a not typically feminine manner and look disproportionately heavy to me. There's a lot more bright skin visible there and my eye is drawn to her legs as opposed to her face.

my opinion only.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

It looks like the photo was taken from a point slightly below her waist and it has the appearance of perspective distortion with her top half smaller and her bottom half larger. Her legs are firmly planted in a not typically feminine manner and look disproportionately heavy to me. There's a lot more bright skin visible there and my eye is drawn to her legs as opposed to her face.

my opinion only.

No, not just your opinion. I totally agree.

Whatever is closest to the camera will appear larger and whatever is further from the camera will appear smaller. This can easily be corrected in painting and sculpture but, although doable in photography, the result is most often not very good because you distort other elements so can only be applied to very few images. Plus, if I know how to do it in the darkroom, I can't think of an equivalent way in the world of digital.

But that is only one of many problems here. Knowing what the goal of the shoot/exercise was would help in giving C&C.

 

[gsgary]

Another problem is the dress, it does not suit her body the way she looks over here she would be a size 12 which can still get modelling jobs

 

[sbakewell0508]

if i was fixing this i would using photoshop would be to zoom in on the legs.. add an adjustment layer, go to hue/saturation choose the blue or whatever color and get it to where the legs look less "cool" go to you layers pallete click on the mask press ctrl +I this inverts your mask and hides the hue saturation you just did, then i would grab a soft brush using white paint back IN the hue saturation.. maybe playing with opacity.. dodge.. etc....

thats just an idea of how to do it... might not be the fastest way to work it but thats what works for me is inverting the mask and painting in the effect where i want it.

 

[e.rose]

It looks like the photo was taken from a point slightly below her waist and it has the appearance of perspective distortion with her top half smaller and her bottom half larger. Her legs are firmly planted in a not typically feminine manner and look disproportionately heavy to me. There's a lot more bright skin visible there and my eye is drawn to her legs as opposed to her face.

my opinion only.

Gotchya. It may be 'your opinion only', but it's greatly appreciated. I understand what you mean now. I just needed you to explain further, that's all.

But that is only one of many problems here. Knowing what the goal of the shoot/exercise was would help in giving C&C.

I wanted to practice mixing strobes with natural light, since I've only ever used natural light for my "people" shoots, as well as going for a more "fashion inspired" kind of shoot... if that makes sense.

Another problem is the dress, it does not suit her body the way she looks over here she would be a size 12 which can still get modelling jobs

I'm kind of confused by the last part of your statement?

if i was fixing this i would using photoshop would be to zoom in on the legs.. add an adjustment layer, go to hue/saturation choose the blue or whatever color and get it to where the legs look less "cool" go to you layers pallete click on the mask press ctrl +I this inverts your mask and hides the hue saturation you just did, then i would grab a soft brush using white paint back IN the hue saturation.. maybe playing with opacity.. dodge.. etc....

thats just an idea of how to do it... might not be the fastest way to work it but thats what works for me is inverting the mask and painting in the effect where i want it.

I used curves and a mask to fix it. :sillysmi: