A portrait of Dawn

Hippy-Di · #11 (**permalink**) 12-03-2008, 10:57

Hi Paul.....although the first is really striking I must say that I prefer the second one a lot more......it has a more natural look, Dawn look's totally relaxed under the glare of your lights and camera. And as Merv said, her eyes are stunning! Great shot!

**Paul** · #12 (**permalink**) 12-03-2008, 12:16

Thanks for the comments Merv, I had great fun photographing Dawn and my time in photoshop afterward. The action I used in the first image did take the detail out of her right eye and this will be another thing for me to watch for in the future when getting carried away in PS

**Paul** · #13 (**permalink**) 12-03-2008, 12:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hippy-Di

Hi Paul.....although the first is really striking I must say that I prefer the second one a lot more......it has a more natural look, Dawn look's totally relaxed under the glare of your lights and camera. And as Merv said, her eyes are stunning! Great shot!

Many thanks for the comments Diane. I have another 8 different variations that I did of this photo each one very different from the others. I just can't resist experimenting

Tco · #14 (**permalink**) 12-03-2008, 12:59

You married a model!!!! You jammy git! How the hell did you manage that?

Nice pic mate. For me the eyes are top, really good work on the eyes amazing clarity and nicely done. Blown bit has been covered by the other guys. I like the less edited version for the rest of the face but the eyes look a bit out of place in that one. Did you do anything different to the eyes between the two versions? They are both good and she is a belter mate. But the skin is too soft compared to the eyes for me in the first, I would just bring the distance between sharp and soft that little bit closer and less apparent.

Nice image, beautiful wife (you lucky old dog!)

**Paul** · #15 (**permalink**) 12-03-2008, 13:16

Dawn's going to really enjoy reading all these comments later

You're spot on about the eyes and well done for noticing the skin softness and eye sharpness. When I sized down the images, I did sharpen the eyes for the web, not sure why but I think it's just my lack of experience but I did nothing different in sharpening between the two. The processing of the first image added more contrast which is why the same sharpening may have affected it more than the second image I attached. That's my theory anyway

I'm still experimenting and have always admired the sharpness you get with your images and if you have any advice on sharpening portraits, I'm all ears.

Thanks for you comments mate!

Tco · #16 (**permalink**) 14-03-2008, 23:41

Sharpness advice? Buy canon!!! JUST KIDDING!!! sorry bud could not resist it.

In P/shop i'll do all the work needed for the shot then i'll do a sharpen layer (unsharp mask not high pass or smart) with quite a tight setting. About .3 or .4 about 150% and this is just for the eyes. Paint them in as usual using quickmask or whatever method you choose. Then i'll sharpen the image overall with a .7 or .8 setting unless its really bad then i'll hit 1 or even 2 but reduce percent and adjust threshold until halo's are minimum. If I can't get rid then i'll try the high pass method and failing that i'll go into smart sharpen.
All that said mate...you did real good buddy. I am looking forward to some new landscapes from you because I know you have an eye for it and with that new cam confidence.....woooohooooo!!!!

**Paul** · #17 (**permalink**) 16-03-2008, 19:32

I'll give those settings a try, thanks Andy. Still getting my head around all these different sharpening methods

will get there one day!