General Critique#6 Please

[OGsPhotography]

Had to use 75% quality export in Lr. Full file probably too big for site. Can someone tell me the way to format the pic best for this forum in Lr Export setting?

Untitled by gibson.owen, on Flickr

 

[weepete]

1024-1440 pixels on the long edge is what I use for posting my images online. I usually upload to flickr then post a medium or large here with the BB code

 

[OGsPhotography]

Thank you.

 

[minicoop1985]

I find using Flickr works better than uploading attachments. YMMV.

 

[SquarePeg]

She looks like a cutie but very hard for me to see as I can't see the whole pic at once because it's so big.

 

[OGsPhotography]

Thanks
Shared with Flikr now.

 

[Derrel]

My browser has resized the large image and the post shows me a smallish image that's probably about 1,000 pixels high, but there is ALSO an option below, where I could click and have access to the image in its full, 2.3 megabytes size.

But I would agree, a 1,024 pixel-wide or 1,024 pixel tall-format is pretty good here. I would export it in Lightroom with the resize image box checked and with 1,024 pixels the value you type in, select Sharpen for "Screen" and "Glossy Paper" options, and hit the export button!

Here is how my browser, Chrome, has shown your post: the reduced-size image at the top, and then the link option below. Hope this helps.

 

[The_Traveler]

Also. Imo way too bright and harsh

 

[OGsPhotography]

Thanks! 1024. Check.

Now CC please! Shes teething so thats why I tell myself its OK I couldnt get a pic of her without a hand in the face, its the story!

 

[Designer]

Now CC please!

Looks a bit overexposed to me. Your crop is a bit too close to your subject. You should leave a little extra room all around, especially if you plan to print and frame it.

 

[sarah_19_nz]

I agree with it being a wee bit over exposed and harsh, not much dimension in that light. Maybe it could do with a touch of warmth also...

 

[The_Traveler]

Had to use 75% quality export in Lr. Full file probably too big for site.

The pixel dimensions as quoted (1024) above are fine but there is no reason to export at 75% quality. That is excessive for online images; images at 50 or even 40 are much smaller and the difference is imperceptible.

It is also not just a question of just being overexposed. The light has blown all the texture and fine color out of her skin.
Note the grey-blue cast in the whites of her eyes.
The image is not sharpened well. Note the difference in the eyelashes and eyebrows.

 

[Derrel]

Hand in the mouth when teething...that is, in itself, a part of real life, of the infant development and maturation process, just as are say, the portrait of the infant with two bottom teeth coming in. There's nothing really "wrong with" making a few pictures where she's gnawing on a finger, or a teething ring, whatever.

I would say she's looking a little bit too bright, say four-tenths of an EV too bright. What's making her look so bright is the background's key...the background is very dark, which makes her appear too bright. It's more a matter of difference between background and subject than a pure, unvarying "absolute", but here you have a dark background, so her exposure/brightness seems a little too high.

 

[The_Traveler]

I would say she's looking a little bit too bright, say four-tenths of an EV too bright.

four-tenths of an ev - Give me a break.

 

[OGsPhotography]

@The_Traveler Wow, I think I completely missed on the sharpening. You seem to also have made the skin tone less pink? Thank you for the critique.

@Derrel Perhaps if I lighten the background 6/10s will make her less shiny? Thanks for the CC.

@sarah_19_nz Thanks! As I re-edit her I will try a bit of warmth.

@Designer thanks for the CC! I tried to re crop the original but its a fail, her other hand gets chopped one way ir another. Try, try again.

Thanks everyone! I'll post a set up shot next time might help critique what I can to to do better.