Let Me Have it Part !!!

[Overread35]

One thing that comes to my mind with such a shot is if you are using a screen calibrator (such as a spyder) to calibrate your working screen. Monitors (esp LCD ones) are often very bright when used with default settings and that might account for why your first edit looks so dark to many of us.

 

[oldmacman]

I tried in my shot and in my pp to bring some 'color' and form into an otherwise flat scenario with white light. Unless its high key to me its a flat white and pretty boring. I was going for somewhere in-between to bring color without over exposing the guy who was closest to the light(s). I intentionally challenged myself with the white shirt to see what I could get. On my screen I opened up the BG for a flat white light there, but the subjects had some color to them. I was not able to duplicate in the image link here on TPF to my liking, but will move one to print to see what happens there.

Not sure what I could have done different in the shot or in pp...that's what would help the most...knowing what more to do in the shot...followed by what I can do with what I have now.

Ok, well to summarize:
- a hair light will add some highlights to the hair and create separation from the background.
- in PP - it was a one stop exposure compensation and then masked to maintain the background.
- you are right, the lighting is pretty flat. Don't have the left and right light set to the same intensity. Use one as a key, directional light and the second to fill the shadows on the other side or use a reflector for the second side.
- I like the idea of the spotlight effect against the white backdrop. You could try opening up the light a bit so the arc is more defined through the three figures.

Anyway, cheers and Keep shooting.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

A different angle to consider: One thing about posed photos is that attire can be a distracting focus. I find the Man with what appears to be a palm with Christmas tree ornaments and the Girl with a deer hunter buck type shirt to be much more compelling foder for thought than the technical matters of the photo. This can be fine and of no consequence in most candids but overall I think posed photos should not have these kinds of attire flairs. I know these are not intended to be pro work "for sale"

Correct. This is a not for sale photo. Man in shirt with Palm Tree and ornaments. Girl in TeeShirt with Winter Deer, other girl in Vintage Necklaces to augment bronze theme of companion attire. It's all tied in for Holiday, just not in nerd shirts/sweaters. They could have done that....

 

[GeorgieGirl]

I like it! except...at first I thought that was spider on his shirt...Jesus..

Thanks. Its late...I'll give you a pass...

 

[GeorgieGirl]

One thing that comes to my mind with such a shot is if you are using a screen calibrator (such as a spyder) to calibrate your working screen. Monitors (esp LCD ones) are often very bright when used with default settings and that might account for why your first edit looks so dark to many of us.

I am using spyder 3 express. The original, without any pp is posted too, and its kind bright to me to begin with...which I why I don't like white bg's.

 

[clanthar]

How did you determine exposure in the camera? -- hang on more to come.

Joe

 

[GeorgieGirl]

How did you determine exposure in the camera? -- hang on more to come.

Joe

I use a Sekonic 358 to measure individual light and incident lighting to set the cameras aperture and ISO.

 

[clanthar]

Your lights are strobes then? Your primary exposure is determined by pointing the meter dome toward the camera lens?

And you're shooting RAW files?

Joe

 

[GeorgieGirl]

Your lights are strobes then? Your primary exposure is determined by pointing the meter dome toward the camera lens?

And you're shooting RAW files?

Joe

Yes strobes. No, not shooting RAW files. But yes, incident reading after pointing dome toward lens an triggering.

 

[clanthar]

Got it! hang on a second.

Joe

 

[clanthar]

Hi,

The people in your photo are underexposed -- as was noted. You did the right thing in the way you measured the exposure and set up the lights.

However you let the camera and it's image processor take over from there and process the photo.You have a 7D (nice camera) but the DIGIC IV image processor in that camera sucks. I know, I have one too.

You're next big step is to start shooting RAW and bypassing the camera's software. Canon would make it work if they could; so would Nikon, Olympus, etc.. -- they can't.

So when the camera processed your exposure it included the background in its calculations and compressed the exposure for your subjects. Here's a file:

I inset the histogram for your original in the upper corner with the original. It tells you what's going on here. The point I marked as the problem is where the background begins. In order to have room for that background the camera pushed everything else to the left.

If you have a section of a photo that is underexposed it will also be flat (lacking contrast) and have lower color saturation. An exposure correction alone will not address the contrast and saturation errors. A Levels adjustment is indicated. I corrected the tone response error in Photoshop using Levels. This simultaneously raised the contrast and saturation. To do this I had to use a mask to protect the shirt.

Post processing can remedy much of what your camera's image processor will screw up -- but the real answer is to bypass it.

You're almost there. You set your lights up well and metered correctly. You got a great camera; flip that switch to RAW.

Take Care,
Joe

 

[oldmacman]

Have you put your edit beside the earlier edit in post 9? You have red and yellow clipping in the skin tones which, imo, is not flattering.

Notice the detail in the dark sweater of the woman on the left and the detail that is visible in everyone's hair? In your edit, the man reads as if his hair is black and it looks like the girl in denim has a black hair band.

 

[mrpink]

This is a good edit.

Nice job Mac.





p!nK

 

[GeorgieGirl]

Let me go back and work on the edits to see if I can end up in the same place. What I don't care for is how white the faces are once the detail gets pulled out and opened up. Thanks!

 

[gsgary]

3 seconds in PS

but next time you need to light your backdop 1-2 stops above your subjuct