The more I look, the more I don't see too much wrong apart from those annoying marks on the wall behind her head. Get the correction brush out.

[MJB DIGITAL]

Don't think they look bad at all. There is nothing wrong
Now I want to try adding noise like MJB DIGITAL.

For the shot I posted I added just a bit of noise....then i did it a couple of more times again, rather than just boosting the noise all in one shot...

good luck.


....and i dont think the originals are poor photographs either. i have a feeling that the OP can say, 'I only got a few, but would love to do another shoot after noticing a glitch in the system....'
and start working on a lifetime client: senior portraits, family portrait, engagement shots, wedding, preggo shots, kid portraits.....the list goes on with family stuff like this....

[MJB DIGITAL]

Looks Great, really!

PS...Played around a bit.
Ben

um thats a...err...thats a good...um.....

love the process ben.

8)

to the OP
go to the levels adjustment slider and slide the middle slider over to the side a bit....
and if the curve is not reaching all the way to one end, pull the slider on that end over to meet the curve...pm me if you dont know what i mean

mitch

[LaRee]

I once did something similar when I was cross processing. I should have checked the "Batch Number" of the film and assumed it would be OK. It was for an "Ad Campaign" in Paris. The whole image came out in purple hues. I went berserk. It could have turned in to a major fiasco.

BUT.

I called the client and Ad Agency and started raving about how cool the images were and being a large Music Store chain said "these are so KOOOOLLLLLL"

Planting that paradigm in to their mind set, when they saw the images they went "Wow, so creative and different, we love it..."

Whew....That saved my ass and about 6000€.

Ben

That is a funny story Ben. Makes me chuckle. It also makes me feel better. Thanks.

Another approach to using "botched" (ahem! ) files that sometimes works for me is to go deep into the "painterly effects" filtration or full-on painting programs. If you've got a good handle on these tools, you can sometimes take a file that really disappoints you and make a finished print that will really thrill your client/recipient.

Oh yes I love painting my photos and have quite a few good programs to use too. Exploring them that way could be fun and it is a good suggestion.

Don't think they look bad at all. There is nothing wrong with GRAIN/NOISE. Shoot the DS at 3200 a fair amount and the K20D at 3200-6400. Use more noise reduction - that will smooth the facial features even more. Sometimes photographers get too caught up in little things that the subject could care less about. Subject is usually more worried about how they look not the craft quality.
thanks
barondla
Now I want to try adding noise like MJB DIGITAL.

I think you are absolutely right. After working with the images a bit tonight I can see that they aren't half bad after all. I can nit pick the lighting and noise till the cows come home but the bottom line is I think that they will be happy after all.

The more I look, the more I don't see too much wrong apart from those annoying marks on the wall behind her head. Get the correction brush out.

That was bugging me too. The other times I've shot with this set up, it was dark outside. This was in the afternoon and the sun was coming through the window behind my two cheapo back drops. I'll make sure to block that window next time. I used a combination of techniques to smooth out the background and I'm pretty happy with what I'm getting. The next time around will be much easier post processing. I learned a lot this go-around.

For the shot I posted I added just a bit of noise....then i did it a couple of more times again, rather than just boosting the noise all in one shot...

good luck.


....and i dont think the originals are poor photographs either. i have a feeling that the OP can say, 'I only got a few, but would love to do another shoot after noticing a glitch in the system....'
and start working on a lifetime client: senior portraits, family portrait, engagement shots, wedding, preggo shots, kid portraits.....the list goes on with family stuff like this....

It is so true. Since I've been shooting my youngest son's baseball teams the past 3 years, and shooting for the drama troupe at the high school, all of a sudden I have a lot of people calling me. It is flattering, but unnerving at the same time. I feel like I have SO much to learn! My reaction inside is still, "who me? you want to pay me to photograph for you?" Tough to fit in with a family and a job. But I love it and it is kind of exciting at the same time.

[LaRee]

Now that I've had time to calm down (you guys helped a lot. THANK YOU!), I can see that it isn't *so* bad. At least I was shooting in good light.
Here is a couple more that I've post processed.






I used a portrait softening on the last shot. The thing I don't like about it is while it smooths the skin nicely, it also loses the sharpness and twinkle in the eyes.

Thank you all for your help and support. I sure learned a few lessons!

[christinelandon]

LaRee, that middle photo is a winner!

[little laker]

LaRee, Those photo's all look good to me

Plus I wanted to thank you. It's looking like I'm shooting an event on Saturday, although it isn't confirmed. And I was playing around in ISO3200 with my K100D today. Which is my choice camera for tomorrows event at the moment.
I would have forgotten all about it if it wasn't for your post

[fula6]

I feel your pain, LaRee.

This is why I now have the ISO showing in the VF all the time as I have fallen for this mistake many a time and it was driving me to distraction.

I am in the same boat as well LaRee - did half a wedding in ISO 1600!! Oh when I realised we were half way through the informal wedding party shots and did I get such a sick feeling in the stomach! I had taken ALL the formals @ 1600!

Like others have suggested - B&W, sepias and other effects ended with me receiving an extra job from the married couple so don't think that all is lost!

Another time I did some sporting club teams and totally stuffed the focus - it WAS the lens truly! so I told the club executives that the card was corrupted and redid those particular teams - no worries. Like Lance I also now have the ISO setting in the viewfinder.

[barondla]

Laree, I have seen pros select the eyes and lips to selectively sharpen them and to then soften the remaing skin. It gives the pop of a sharp shot and the creamy smooth skin tones that people crave. Have never tried it myself (not that much into PP yet). Should be in any PP book.

MJB DIGITAL, thanks for the tips on adding noise in stages. Have never tried that. Sometimes I really like grain/noise. Used to shoot Agfa slide film and push it to 3200 or more.

Funny grain/noise story. For class shot the DS at iso 200 and 3200 to show people the difference in noise. Was trying to simulate the difference in look between dslr and P&S. More than half the class couldn't tell the two still lifes apart in 8.5x11 prints! Was amazed. Needed a bigger difference. So reshot the whole thing and underexposed the 3200 by about 2 stops then "fixed" it in PP. Could never get the underexposed color to perfectly match the other print. People now notice the difference (finally) but many still notice the color more than the noise. Need to try underexposed iso 6400 on K20D. For fun.

Often photographers get such a strong preconcieved photo notion in their head, they just freak when it doesn't pan out. This is art, there are many ways to handle a subject. If your main idea isn't working out shelve it and come up with something else. Exploration is great.
thanks
barondla

[Photo Tramp]

To tell you the truth LaRee I don't find anything you have shot unable to be used or corrected. That is the beauty of PP with the right program all can be corrected. Bring up your lighting and deepen the colors. You have some very good poses and some great shots there.

[Workingdog]

It sounds as if YOU are unhappy with the results. The client may not see it the same way (they look OK to me, too) but nonetheless you will always know that the work is not up to your personal standards. I'm sure it makes no difference to you that they were not paying clients. I say, give them the choice. Explain that there were some "technical problems" and that you would be happy to shoot over again if they want. Maybe even say that you would prefer a do over.
1. It's free so the client has nothing to lose.
2. You get to redeem yourself (in your own mind)
3. The non-paying client will recommend you to other (paying clients) because you don't want to put your name on anything that is not up to your personal standards. That smells like INTEGRITY, something that is often not seen these days.

I can tell you want to do it over, so go for it.

[Pentaxtic]

Is the way to set the ISO on the Viewfinder fixed on all modes?

If so, how may I ask, do you set the ISo on the viewfinder? I thought it was a fight between the ISO and the amount of JPG's left to take.

[MJB DIGITAL]

Laree, I have seen pros select the eyes and lips to selectively sharpen them and to then soften the remaing skin. It gives the pop of a sharp shot and the creamy smooth skin tones that people crave. Have never tried it myself (not that much into PP yet). Should be in any PP book.

this was my first try at that....and then i never tried it again....

[Dale]

To see an online demo of applying the same technique in a very subtle way, have a look at this Lightroom 2 beta demo, round the 22min mark or so. (link best suited to fast connection, not dial up!)

Very effective, and not garish at all.

Dale

[OniFactor]

this was my first try at that....and then i never tried it again....

yikes..


that's about as subtle as a lead pipe over the head..