Lighting and Editing - Am I doing this right?

ElNico · May 26, 2019

If this thread ought to be in the People Photography forum, let me know. I put it here because I'm primarily asking for feedback on a specific aspect.

These photos are from a number of shoots I did late last summer which I'm finally getting around to dealing with. This shoot is the first one I've done using my own lighting equipment (a reflector in this case); it's also the first time I've put a lot of time into fixing any deficiencies in lighting in post-editing, which is what I want to talk about. The editing software I used is one which came with my operating system; so obviously there are better tools out there, but for now I'm interested in whether I'm making proper use of the tools I have, or if I'm doing it wrong.

The first of these photos was taken using a gold-tinted reflector, and is unedited except for cropping. I thought this photo and the rest like it looked fine at first, but after editing the others I feel like they, particularly the second batch, make this look bland by comparison.

I think that the second photo and others like it were taken without a reflector, due to being taken lying/sitting down on the side of a hill making the reflector difficult to use. It initially looked a lot worse than the first photo, but after editing it I feel it might be better than the first, making me wonder if the first one ought to be edited after all; at the same time, I wonder if I've edited this TOO much.

The third photo was taken using the same reflector, but came out a lot more golden-looking; possibly because the ambient light had decreased, possibly because of the change in location, possibly both. I'm not sure how I feel about this group of photos; I again think it looks good when viewing it in isolation, but when comparing it to the other two groups I fear it's making the model look like she has jaundice or something. (If so, I suspect the basic problem is that the gold tint of the reflector is combining with her skin tone to produce too much of a good thing.) If that is the case I think I know how to fix it, but I'm not sure whether it needs fixing.

The batch of photos that the third example is from is the one that gave me the most trouble. For the second group I was able to apply most of the same modifications to each one and get basically the same effect, but I spent a lot more time fiddling with the third group trying to find the best look. If the third photo isn't a non-starter, I'll probably post some more photos from that batch later on to see whether they are also okay, should be edited differently, or are unsalvageable.

So, as to specific questions:
-These three photos look distinctly different from one another. Are all of these looks valid but different, or are some of them not good?
-Does the first photo look too dull?
-Do either of the second two photos look unrealistically colorful, or otherwise over-edited?
-Does the third photo look "too yellow?"

Thanks a lot!

DSC02325 by El Nico, on Flickr

DSC02375 by El Nico, on Flickr

DSC02418 by El Nico, on Flickr

Derrel · May 26, 2019

Your first photograph is the best by far I think. Photos two and three have some issues with Camera height and focal length and don't look as flattering tothe subject does the first photo.

ElNico · May 27, 2019

Do the colors look wrong though?

By issues do you mean bad or just less good? I probably agree that the first pose is the best one, but am I doing something wrong in the other two?

What's wrong with the focal length? Do you think the model is out of focus? Should the depth of field be shorter so that the background is less focused? Remember this is a point and shoot camera.

tirediron · May 27, 2019

Here's my take: I agree with #1 being the strongest, but I still think it could use a little work. In particular the face seems about 1/3 stop below the skin on her ribcage; with few exceptions, the face should be the brightest part (or contain the brightest areas) of the image since the eye is naturally attracted to bright over dark. I also wish she was a little further from the background; I don't really like the "echo" shadow of the lines; they seem a bit distracting to me.

In #2, the greens/yellows do seem a little strong, but that's easily corrected. The exposure on her face is much better, but the camera angle really doesn't work. Remember that when we shoot from above, we're putting the model into a subordinate position. A little above for a shot like this would be fine, but it feels to me like you must have been standing up. As well, there's the cropped left hand... leave surgery to doctors!

#3 doesn't work at all for me. While you've balanced the light very well, it looks to me like she's been composited into the scene. Again, as with #1, your key light was too low. She has an attractive rib cage, yes, but it's not what the image is about. The background just kills this one.. WAY too much detail; if you shot this with a long lens and wide open it would have saved it, but the short focal length, giving the model a rather 'unusual' stature, and all the distractions (Including the tree 'growing' out of her left shoulder) are just too much.

Overall, it's a good set, and you've done some good work with the lighting. A little more refinement on the posing and positioning of your lights and you'll have some winners!

Derrel · May 27, 2019

See Tirediron's Comments for a pretty good rundown on some of the issues. I see the slight excess yellow you are talking about, but am not overly worried about it.

I would say your edits are overall good, But I can see what T means about Brightening the face in the first photo.

Jeff15 · May 27, 2019

I agree, number one for me too........

ElNico · May 27, 2019

Thanks for the input!

tirediron said:
In particular the face seems about 1/3 stop below the skin on her ribcage; with few exceptions, the face should be the brightest part (or contain the brightest areas) of the image since the eye is naturally attracted to bright over dark.

Again, as with #1, your key light was too low. She has an attractive rib cage, yes, but it's not what the image is about.

Do you mean that the light (reflector) itself is too low and should be shining at more of a downward angle, or do you mean that the spot it's pointed at is too low? If the latter, I can definitely watch for that in the future, but I'm not sure if the control of the reflector's tilt is fine enough to distinguish between the model's face and chest. I can definitely try, but I remember controlling the reflector's tilt being a pain already.

...Actually, looking at my other pictures, I can see this difference in most of the pictures I have of her, including in another session with her where I was using a diffused lamp. I think her skin might actually be lighter on her chest than on her face; possibly due to an uneven tan or her makeup?

EDIT - Looking at the light reflected off the wall in the first photo, the brightest part is actually level with her head. Also in the same photo, you can see a difference in shade between her chest and her hand. I can see the problem you're talking about, but the more I think about it, the more I think that the level of the light source isn't the cause of it.

I also wish she was a little further from the background; I don't really like the "echo" shadow of the lines; they seem a bit distracting to me.

The idea here was to have her shoulders and hips touching the wall, to emphasize the curve of her spine. Isn't that a thing? My main reference book talks a significant amount about the gap between the small of the back and the wall. Can I do this without creating the problem you mention?

In #2, the greens/yellows do seem a little strong, but that's easily corrected.

Okay... the program I'm using has a slider for "Color," and then one for green/purple balance and one for blue/orange balance. So when you say you think the greens AND the yellows are too strong, do you think the colors are too saturated overall, or just the balance? That is, if I adjust both of the latter two sliders it would just change the balance towards purple/blue, but if I decrease the Color that puts the image relatively closer to being black and white.

Spotting distractions in the background is indeed something I need to work on.

The exposure on her face is much better, but the camera angle really doesn't work. Remember that when we shoot from above, we're putting the model into a subordinate position. A little above for a shot like this would be fine, but it feels to me like you must have been standing up.

Is this one better?

DSC02374 by El Nico, on Flickr

JBPhotog · May 27, 2019

Agreed #1 is the best of the bunch but could use some work as already suggested. It needs some contrast too.

#2 Watch for colour contamination when using reflected light, placing someone on green grass will yield green reflecting back into the subject, sort that out in post.

#3 Yes, camera angle and focal length is not flattering, do you really need to see every detail in the background? Fill is too harsh, try white rather than a shiny gold one and hold it higher. Not sure why it looks like the walkway curb is showing through her shin

ElNico · May 27, 2019

JBPhotog said:
Agreed #1 is the best of the bunch but could use some work as already suggested. It needs some contrast too.

#2 Watch for colour contamination when using reflected light, placing someone on green grass will yield green reflecting back into the subject, sort that out in post.

I can increase the contrast in #1 and change the balance away from green in #2, but don't have time ATM. I'd also like to hear tirediron's response to my previous post before messing with #2.

#3 Yes, camera angle and focal length is not flattering, do you really need to see every detail in the background? Fill is too harsh, try white rather than a shiny gold one and hold it higher.

I can see how a white reflector may have been better than gold given her skin tone, especially in #3.

What difference would holding it higher make in #3? Is the angle of the light too direct? Do you think that making the distance between the light source and her body more even would have made her face brighter in comparison to the rest of her body? Again, look at the difference between her midsection and her hands; I question whether it's the light that's causing this.

Not sure why it looks like the walkway curb is showing through her shin

O_O I did not notice that before and have no idea what's causing it. What the heck?

JBPhotog · May 27, 2019

ElNico said:
What difference would holding it higher make in #3? Is the angle of the light too direct? Do you think that making the distance between the light source and her body more even would have made her face brighter in comparison to the rest of her body? Again, look at the difference between her midsection and her hands; I question whether it's the light that's causing this.

Look at the nose shadow, it is actually tilting up slightly which indicates more light is coming from below her face, it also creates a hard shadow from her collar bone. Human perception on pleasing light most often comes from above, even slightly makes a difference.

Only you know how she looked in person, maybe her face with makeup is darker than her mid section, if so then don't process it so her face is darker. The size of your reflector in relation to the distance from the subject determines soft or hard light and whether it is big enough to fully light the subject if that is the goal, if not then expect it to look that way. The fill is just too strong, that's what happens with specular fill surfaces such as gold or silver, it doesn't diffuse the reflected light.

smoke665 · May 27, 2019

Expanding on what's already been said. On all of these it's important to understand WB and the quality of light before you start adding reflectors that will change and possibly conflict with that ambient light. In number one, there are several issues, first being exposure. Tired iron called it pretty close with 1/3 under. A low resolution JPEG, is not the best to edit, but to show you, I raised overall exposure +.39 in this edit. Second is WB, just a tad to warm based on the white in the eyes. Shadows needed to be bumped up,(this is where you needed a white reflector to bring light into the eyes and face) increased the White, contrast and changed the crop.

Now on the others, sitting her on Green grass in the sun, didn't do her any favors. The exposure on background is excessive, your WB is off, and the green grass clashes horribly with the blue of her outfit. If you aren't familiar with Color Theory here's a basic read to get you started Basic color schemes: Color Theory Introduction

ac12 · May 27, 2019

#1. What bothers me is her shadow on the wall. It is not obvious next to her body, but it is to the right of her head and arm.
As with TI, I think her face needs more light. It looks like her face is in shadow.

As with TI, in general, I do not like downward looking portraits. Call me old fashioned.
I would experiment with different camera heights relative to the subject's face, to see how the difference in relative height changes how the subject looks.

#2. I can see a reason for #2, if you are trying to eliminate a distracting background; you angle down to get the grass rather than the distracting background. Personally I would try to get the camera lower, to her eye level.
But in studying the pic, I can see a reason for that downward angle, it forces the eye to look down her body from head to waist.

#3. To me, the look is a result of using too short a lens, getting too close to the subject, and looking down; the legs and feet look odd. You are looking at the top of her foot.

#4. Some/many women do not look good with their body/shoulder flat on to the camera, which makes their shoulder look wide. But it does call attention to her cleavage.
Background; what is that long white thing to the right of her head?

Derrel · May 27, 2019

A quick face-dodge, two passes at + 0.72 EV on face, and one pass on wall shadow.

I like smoke's crop!

tirediron · May 27, 2019

i mean that your lights need to be positioned such that the key light is illuminating her face from above. We're used to light from above; the sun, ceiling lights, streetlights, etc... 99% of the light we see comes from above. While there are indeed lots of reasons NOT to have the light above, in general the key light should be in such a position that the catchlights are around the 10/2 position in the eyes.

If her skin tone is the cause of the face appearing darker, than that is something that should be addressed in post.

The ideal way (IMO) to have dealt with the shadow would have been to bring a fill light with a strip box image right. You're spot on with your intent; emphasizing curves is something we almost always want to do, BUT.. in such a way that you don't add bulk through the shadow.

Not sure what program you're using, but you need to be shooting raw and working with a proper processing software such as Adobe Lightroom. The issues you have with colour almost all relate to white balance. The starting point for this is of course, shooting a white balance target, and then correcting to that in post. That way, (assuming you're using a corrected monitor) all your colours will display as seen.

This is a better angle; still too high for my taste, but we're into preference more than anything now. Maybe clone away the stick on the grass?

Derrel · May 27, 2019

Jens Heidler said:
Hey Everyone,

I want to share the most creative and easiest ways to get great macro shots in the kitchen.
The possibilities are really unlimited!
I created a video showing a lot of cool shots you can easily get just by using
a macro lens a standard prime with extension tubes.
Have you ever tried to get those? And if not, will you?

ac12 said:
#1. What bothers me is her shadow on the wall. It is not obvious next to her body, but it is to the right of her head and arm.
As with TI, I think her face needs more light. It looks like her face is in shadow.

As with TI, in general, I do not like downward looking portraits. Call me old fashioned.
I would experiment with different camera heights relative to the subject's face, to see how the difference in relative height changes how the subject looks.

#2. I can see a reason for #2, if you are trying to eliminate a distracting background; you angle down to get the grass rather than the distracting background. Personally I would try to get the camera lower, to her eye level.
But in studying the pic, I can see a reason for that downward angle, it forces the eye to look down her body from head to waist.

#3. To me, the look is a result of using too short a lens, getting too close to the subject, and looking down; the legs and feet look odd. You are looking at the top of her foot.

#4. Some/many women do not look good with their body/shoulder flat on to the camera, which makes their shoulder look wide. But it does call attention to her cleavage.
Background; what is that long white thing to the right of her head?