What Kind of Post Processing Do You Do To Outdoor Child Portraits?

[PeK77]

What are the post processing steps that you do for every outdoor child portrait (or even family portrait). I'm not talking so much about making photos look vintage - I'm talking about the basics: exposure, touch ups on faces, color modifications, sharpening? Does anybody have a process they typically follow?

Thanks for your guidance! I find that I'm often performing a bunch of adjustments and some may not even be necessary. For instance, I soften facial feature in Lightroom to make the persons skin look balanced but then I end up sharpening the overall image. Sometimes I feel like I'm over sharpening etc....
Any guidance you can provide is greatly appreciated!!!

 

[tirediron]

I do the same as I do for any portrait. I correct them 'til I am satisfied with the result. This is generally minor exposure and WB adjustments, light localized adjustments to tweak shadows, and skin treatment to reduce minor blemishes, etc. If you think you're doing too much, you probably are. Posting some examples would allow us to provide opinions.

 

[PeK77]

Here is the one I was thinking about - its a mother's day shot. Too sharp?

 

[PeK77]

I'm guessing my next purchase should be something to calibrate my monitor. I have a Macbook Pro and I'm always adjusting up and down etc...

 

[PeK77]

I do the same as I do for any portrait. I correct them 'til I am satisfied with the result. This is generally minor exposure and WB adjustments, light localized adjustments to tweak shadows, and skin treatment to reduce minor blemishes, etc. If you think you're doing too much, you probably are. Posting some examples would allow us to provide opinions.

Hi tirediron, I've added an example for you!!! Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[tirediron]

A little hard to tell on such a small image, but it does appear to be rather over-sharpened; to be honest though, I would be much more concerned about the serious case of racoon eyes that everyone has. The sharpening can always be undone.

A calibrated monitor is absolutely essential to quality workflow - Mac displays are some of the better consumer displays, but they still need regular calibrating. As well, it's critical to ensure that you're looking at the monitor at the correct angle; when I'm working on a laptop, I have a zone-system strip chart that I bring up and make sure I can see all ten graduations; then I know my screen is at the optimum angle.

 

[PeK77]

A little hard to tell on such a small image, but it does appear to be rather over-sharpened; to be honest though, I would be much more concerned about the serious case of racoon eyes that everyone has. The sharpening can always be undone.

A calibrated monitor is absolutely essential to quality workflow - Mac displays are some of the better consumer displays, but they still need regular calibrating. As well, it's critical to ensure that you're looking at the monitor at the correct angle; when I'm working on a laptop, I have a zone-system strip chart that I bring up and make sure I can see all ten graduations; then I know my screen is at the optimum angle.

Thanks! By raccoon eyes, do you mean the fact that you can't see the inside of the eyes? The sun was coming from in front of the tree and the subjects were kind of shaded by it so I flashed them to make sure they were lit. Is there anything else I could have done with the eyes in that situation? I was shooting with 50mm lens 1.8.

Its funny - I come here thinking I'm getting there and getting better and there's always a spot that humbles me and reminds me I need to study/practice more.

 

[KmH]

Raccoon eyes = dark eye sockets.

You didn't use sufficient flash power.
Were you using the flash in a TTL mode or were you controlling the flash manually? Did you use a hot shoe flash unit or the little, and not very powerful, built-in flash unit?
And what light metering mode were you using?

Part of the problem is because you used the horizontal framing you had to be further from your subjects. Light falls off rapidly with distance.
In fact the light falls off as a square function - if you double the distance only 1/4 as much light (not 1/2) falls on your subjects.

 

[PeK77]

Raccoon eyes = dark eye sockets.

You didn't use sufficient flash power.
Were you using the flash in a TTL mode or were you controlling the flash manually? Did you use a hot shoe flash unit or the little, and not very powerful, built-in flash unit?
And what light metering mode were you using?

Part of the problem is because you used the horizontal framing you had to be further from your subjects. Light falls off rapidly with distance.
In fact the light falls off as a square function - if you double the distance only 1/4 as much light (not 1/2) falls on your subjects.

I was using the SB700 manually. I dialed in the settings for the tree and background to be well exposed and then dialed in the flash by trial and error. I'm guessing I may be better off using my kit 18-55mm lens for this type of shoot and be closer to the subject?

 

[Designer]

Here is the one I was thinking about - its a mother's day shot. Too sharp?

I think I can guess as to why you chose to frame horizontally, to get the flowers in the frame, but IMO you don't need the entire branch, especially if your main subjects are the people.

Here's a vertical crop showing some flowers, and other contextual features:

 

[PeK77]

Here is the one I was thinking about - its a mother's day shot. Too sharp?

I think I can guess as to why you chose to frame horizontally, to get the flowers in the frame, but IMO you don't need the entire branch, especially if your main subjects are the people.

Here's a vertical crop showing some flowers, and other contextual features:

View attachment 73664

I have to agree - looks much better! Mom wanted the large tree branch!!!

I'm trying to improve my skills. I see so many photographers being offered child portrait work based on capturing the moment vs. getting the right levels, exposures etc.... Finding the right balance is a tough nut to crack. Any thoughts on this one?

 

[Designer]

Here is the one I was thinking about - its a mother's day shot. Too sharp?

I think I can guess as to why you chose to frame horizontally, to get the flowers in the frame, but IMO you don't need the entire branch, especially if your main subjects are the people.

Here's a vertical crop showing some flowers, and other contextual features:

View attachment 73664

I have to agree - looks much better! Mom wanted the large tree branch!!!

I'm trying to improve my skills. I see so many photographers being offered child portrait work based on capturing the moment vs. getting the right levels, exposures etc.... Finding the right balance is a tough nut to crack. Any thoughts on this one?

The other posters have addressed the issue of light, particularly to properly illuminate the subject's eyes, so I'll continue with an explanation of the composition.

The branch full of blossoms is indeed attractive, and I understand why she would want the branch in the photo, but as I wrote; you don't need the entire branch. I think your composition has framed the subjects well, with a tree limb on one side and blossoms on the other side creating a "frame" around the people. So far, so good.

By stretching the frame out to the right you have included the blossoms, but the people are not the primary subject because the tree branches are competing for attention.

There are other ways to feature the blossoms. Have one or both children stand close to the branches and look at the camera. Keep the flowers and the child's face in focus.