Meet Lyndsay (May be NSFW)

[Bend The Light]

Another "boudoir" and "Sexy" shoot came my way. This lady wanted to do this for herself...just wanted to look great. She absolutely loves all the images, so job well done. But I just wanted your opinion on some of the shots.

I know the white BG is not really considered "boudoir", but it does seem to work well for certain things and the ladies do like the shots that come with that. Hence my reference to "sexy" as well as "boudoir".

Anyway, tell me what you think...

1.

11-10-2012 Lyndsay 11 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

2.

11-10-2012 Lyndsay 10 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

3.

11-10-2012 Lyndsay 29 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

4.

11-10-2012 Lyndsay 2 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

Thanks.

 

[tirediron]

Nice job. A couple of VERY minor niggles: In #1 her face seems about 1/3 stop under the rest of her body. Some cloning to hide the strap marks would not go amiss, and I wish she were looking toward the camera in #2.

 

[480sparky]

Another minor 'niggle': You lopped off her right hand in the last one.

 

[jwbryson1]

Her eyes all look dark...

 

[Bend The Light]

Nice job. A couple of VERY minor niggles: In #1 her face seems about 1/3 stop under the rest of her body. Some cloning to hide the strap marks would not go amiss, and I wish she were looking toward the camera in #2.

Thanks. Yes, her face was underexposed...worse than that. I already bumped it up some. I think I was concious of not getting her light hair blown out, so moved light away from her head. Will watch that next time. I processed the skin somewhat to mitigate the tan lines, they were worse than that. Again, I didn't want to go TOO far and botch the job. I full appreciate what you say though, and would have liked to have sorted it fully. A professional model may well have not got the tan lines in the first place...this lady was just a mum wanting to look good (which I think she really does! ).

Cheers

Another minor 'niggle': You lopped off her right hand in the last one.

You know, I never noticed before, but it disappears into the bed doesn't it?

 

[Bend The Light]

Her eyes all look dark...

Hmmm, they are a bit maybe. Her face is a tad dark anyway.

Thanks

 

[Big Mike]

I agree, she is a tad underexposed, especially the face. It's hard, I know, with that bright blonde hair.

 

[gnorknik]

Use a shallower depth of field, and you won't need to use the blur tool.

 

[IgsEMT]

Lighting is a bi flat, not flattering and makes her look bigger then she really is.

 

[Derrel]

I don't mind the tan lines at all...some people think they're sexy...her face does appear a bit dark in these shots...my concern though is the under-eye lines; MANY people have them, but the camera can make them worse than they appear in "real life", so I would be very tempted to zoom in on the face, and either use the clone stamp tool and a 10- to perhaps 20-pixel diameter, soft-edged brush, and "paint in" a cloning pass (well, probably two light passes, actually) at about 50% opacity, 85% flow, sampling the skin right under the eye bags for my "source"...this will leave the "realness" of her face, while minimizing the shadow that the photographic lighting has made in the under eye crease that sooooooo many of us have! I think is shot #3 you've hit upon a great expression for her...she looks pretty fine in that pose too...just sayin'...

Here is a quick retouch under the eyes with a 17-pixel soft edged clone tool brush, three passes, at 50% opactity, 85% flow, and then a tiny bit of cloning on the black shadow on the eye-socket/nose juncture with a 5-pixel hard-edged brush on the eye camera left, and also a few quick Zaps! of a 45-pixel soft edged brush on that main crease in the purple backdrop, and a couple other little backdrop creases.

 

[Bend The Light]

Use a shallower depth of field, and you won't need to use the blur tool.

Thanks for the tip.

Lighting is a bi flat, not flattering and makes her look bigger then she really is.

Interestingly, the lady herself commented on how good she looks in the photos. So that's ok then.

 

[Bend The Light]

I don't mind the tan lines at all...some people think they're sexy...her face does appear a bit dark in these shots...my concern though is the under-eye lines; MANY people have them, but the camera can make them worse than they appear in "real life", so I would be very tempted to zoom in on the face, and either use the clone stamp tool and a 10- to perhaps 20-pixel diameter, soft-edged brush, and "paint in" a cloning pass (well, probably two light passes, actually) at about 50% opacity, 85% flow, sampling the skin right under the eye bags for my "source"...this will leave the "realness" of her face, while minimizing the shadow that the photographic lighting has made in the under eye crease that sooooooo many of us have! I think is shot #3 you've hit upon a great expression for her...she looks pretty fine in that pose too...just sayin'...

Here is a quick retouch under the eyes with a 17-pixel soft edged clone tool brush, three passes, at 50% opactity, 85% flow, and then a tiny bit of cloning on the black shadow on the eye-socket/nose juncture with a 5-pixel hard-edged brush on the eye camera left, and also a few quick Zaps! of a 45-pixel soft edged brush on that main crease in the purple backdrop, and a couple other little backdrop creases.

View attachment 24355

Thanks Derrell. I will have a go at those ideas and try to work them in when they are needed next time. Obviously these image are delivered already and the lady is very happy with them. I need to work the lights some more and try to get more correct on the day, too.

Love the edit, and I really should iron the backdrop!

Cheers

 

[2WheelPhoto]

#3) another niggle for the sake of cc - fingers are awkward, perhaps have her put them together. Having them look like chicken claws or such is a distraction

 

[Bend The Light]

#3) another niggle for the sake of cc - fingers are awkward, perhaps have her put them together. Having them look like chicken claws or such is a distraction

Yes, I see what you mean. Good spot, thanks.