Back Versions (1)
Modifications (2)
Views: 90 (49 Unique)  Award Shortlist   

Bride and Groom 2

By STEVELIN
another shot from wednesday wedding, adjusted shadow highlights in csc 3 dress was a bit(a lot) blown out and still is in my opinion any help on this would be most appreciated . method i used was to create a new layer and adjust highlights which i could see was making a difference in the detail of the dress but i was losing colour and contrast grabbed the only option i knew how to use and clicked on multiply and then changed opacity down to 50% and ended up with this.
a bit of advice on the use of the shadows and highlights tool box in cs3 as in ratio aspect,midtones and all them little sliders you can adjust black point white point and all that.
thanks for taking time to look and comment.
iv uploaded the original shot for comparison v2
steve

Tags: Wedding Bride Groom Portraits and people

Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


USA Landscape Photographer of the Year 2016 open to entries NOW!
This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.

Comments


3 Nov 2012 4:35PM
Personally, if it was me, I would try the dodge tool at maybe 2% to lighten the skin tones of the bride and groom and repeat as necessary. I wonder if there is a tool in cs3 that protects (like with liquify) certain parts on an image. I only have PS elements 10 so there may well be! good luck with it! It's a beautiful dress.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

iancrowson Plus
6 211 142 United Kingdom
3 Nov 2012 5:00PM
Better than the last one. Good detail on the dress with this one. Either person could be cropped to become better stand alone image. They don't look like a happy joined up couple.
Faces look a bit orange which is what is being said by Margaret. They may have spent some time getting fake tans, if so, sorry to you Mr Photographer!
I thinks Frank's comment on the last photo about you being the secondary photographer and the couple never really facing your way applies here too.
My experience of weddings is limited. Where I am not the main photographer, which is usually, I stick to reportage style catching pics of people mainly unawares. Aunt Flo with the giggles, kids pinching cakes stuff.
regards
Ian
STEVELIN 8 161 3 Ireland
3 Nov 2012 5:22PM
thanks margaret just had a go with the dodge tool certainly does work for skin tones thanks.
steve
banehawi Plus
12 1.4k 3494 Canada
3 Nov 2012 6:00PM
Assuming V1 is your original here Steve, theres some issues I can see. First, - you have not tagged the image with the sRGB colour profile, so any browser, except Firefox with one config setting changed from the default, will see this image as very saturated, and quite red. Most viewers are lilely using Explorer, Chrome or Safari, - all will see this image incorrectly. The original on your screen, open in Photoshop, should look a lot different, and better. So, when uploading, always ensure you have the sRGB colour space attached. The original from the camera will have either sRGB or Adobe RGB depending on how youve set it up. So in your processing, youre dropping the colour profile someplace. In Photoshop, its Edit>Assign colour profile>then select sRGB from the menu. To show what I mean, I have uploaded mod2, which is your V1, with absolutely NO cnages, except the addition of the sRBG profile. It will look different.


Back to the shot. Its exposed perfectly for the brides dress. Your V2 has wiped out the detail in the dress. So starting with V1, you need to so a couple of things. First, is increase exposure on a layer, so that you can undo the exposure on the dress; then you need to reduce the red channel, - use colour balance, and slide the cyan/red slider towards cyan, about 30. Do this on a layer so you can apply this colour change ONLY to the faces. What you end up with is similar to the mod that Ive uploaded.


Hope this helps,



regards



Willie
STEVELIN 8 161 3 Ireland
4 Nov 2012 12:12AM
hi willie you have lost me there tagd the image? dont know where your going there mate? thought epz sorted all that out when you upload your shot what are you talking about? browsers don't think it really matters which one you use its all the same when it is put up on the net.
v2 was the original shot v1 was my adjusted shot run it by me again willie totally lost the plot with that comment willie.
steve
Focus_Man 6 481 631 United Kingdom
4 Nov 2012 10:41AM
Yes this is a far better and a far more acceptables hot as far as image quality is concerned, but like Ian states, my original comments still apply regarding getting some eye contact. A friend of mine is to be married next year and we discussed my few extra pics as I am no longer interested in being the official photographer. All I asked them is when they see me, on occasion, to look towards me in between the official guy taking his shots, so that I can use eye contact which I do believe to be important - but not paramount. Other shots will be as Ian described, the candids, which although not often being the subjects of prints in an album, act as complementary pictures in the description of the day.

Frank
banehawi Plus
12 1.4k 3494 Canada
4 Nov 2012 1:06PM
Steve, EPZ dont sort anything out when you upload, apart from the dimentions if they are too big.

YOU need to ensure your image has a colour profile attached, or tagged. Browsers are not all the same as Ive mentioned, and are supposed to respond to colour profile tags in web images. A cxolour profile is a small piece of information attached to the image the browser reads to tell it how to display your image. if you use Photoshop, and have it set up properly to pop up a warning if an image doesnt not conform to the working colour space that Photoshop is using, downloading your V1 and opening it should pop up a warning saying, "this image does not have a colour profile" and give you an option to ignore of assign one.

Heres a link to show how browsers work with colour profiles: http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html

For Photoshop, assuming you use it, under edit, theres an option down the list called colour settings. Click this. The option box that opens has some areas that should be check marked. One is, Profile Mismatches, - the box should be checked for ask when opening; and the other is Missing Profiles, the box should be chedked for ask when opening. If these are not checked, youre workflow is not colour managed, and you will have problems just as youve seen with the image you uploaded.

If you are serious about wedding shooting, its very important you understand this Steve. Check out the Ballard link with your browser, and set up Photoshop as Ive mentioned. And always assign the sRGB profile to a web image, eben if you find this confusing, or, you will get incorrect feedback from people using browsers that dont interpret non tagged (colour profile assigned) images.



regards



Willie
STEVELIN 8 161 3 Ireland
4 Nov 2012 10:56PM
thanks willie see what you mean now kind of understand what your saying just need to edge up on it a bit more but what your saying makes sense
steve

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.