Reading mode: Light Dark

R1. A portrait. RAW file, ACR conversion.

Go to last post
Mediterranean light

Mediterranean light

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
333
Reaction score
2
Location
Barcelona, ES
Some PP with CS2 - shadows & highlights, smart sharpen, color balance.
Natural, diffused lighting, handheld.

I don't particularly like the present oversharpening trend, and I do mine conservatively.

A new edition of the R1 will be missed, as it is a great camera for portraits and lancscapes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/orlando_henriques/251991247/?edited=1
 
Wow, it's impressive.
pretty, as in beautiful
young girls, the subject of your photograph.
I didn't mean any harm. I'm sorry if I was inappropriate.
The photo can't be viewed now.
John Dunn
 
zackiedawg said:
to Yahoo to see the pics. I don't like signing up to things just
to see...maybe there's a setting you can change?

--
Justin
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg
Click to expand...
Me also.
--
Bob,

' We don't make a photograph just with a camera; we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard, the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams

Great Pro1
Casio Z750
 
Ok, guys: I'm extremely sensitive to these things and react instinctively to any remote possibility of an improper comment. Many of us make public family pics, I know. For reasons I wouldn't want to share now, I seldom do it.

Because of that, two-thirds of my Flickr pics can only be seen by family&friends. I do regret it because almost all of them are portraits, many of which I really like and would love to share.

I understand that it could be taken as an overreaction, given the fact that we are members and that we've had many exchanges - or perhaps it was just a question of punctuation, for which I would highly recommend a book on the subject: Eats, shoots and leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation, by Lynne Truss... ;o)
 
Mediterranean light said:
Ok, guys: I'm extremely sensitive to these things and react instinctively
to any remote possibility of an improper comment. Many of us make
public family pics, I know. For reasons I wouldn't want to share now, I
seldom do it.
Click to expand...
Which is fine...but that also means the photo you DID want to make public for us to see is locked away behind the security gates of your site, and therefore inaccessible!
Mediterranean light said:
Because of that, two-thirds of my Flickr pics can only be seen by
family&friends. I do regret it because almost all of them are portraits,
many of which I really like and would love to share.
Click to expand...
That's fine too...but this picture you posted seems to be filed in the 2/3 section of your gallery that can only be seen by family & friends! If you move this photo to the other 1/3, we can check it out!
Mediterranean light said:
I understand that it could be taken as an overreaction, given the fact
that we are members and that we've had many exchanges - or perhaps
it was just a question of punctuation, for which I would highly
recommend a book on the subject: Eats, shoots and leaves: The Zero
Tolerance Approach to Punctuation, by Lynne Truss... ;o)
Click to expand...
Not really. Perfectly normal! I wouldn't want everyone to see my family pictures either!

Ridzdesign and jrdu seemed to have been able to see the picture you posted, then suddenly nobody after that was able to see it.

I can completely understand and respect your desire to keep certain photographs private - not receiving critique where it wasn't requested.

The problem here is that you posted a picture seemingly with the intent of having it viewed by all the members of STF, but it shares the same level of security as all of your other pictures. Meaning: we can't see it!

I don't know if you initially allowed ridz and jrdu to access your gallery, or if they are already members of the site and were able to access them. But for the rest of us, who just want to see your picture that you tried to post here, we are in the dark!

I don't want to peruse your family archives...I just want to check out your picture that was linked in the first thread. And the title of that book bothers my every fiber, despite it's noble intentions! I've never felt the need to be corrected nor guided by self-help and social-observation rant books, primarily because I am one of those snobbish protagonists trying to fight the good fight against the decline of grammar and punctuation. ;) (that was in jest...not meant to be taken seriously!).

I hope you solve the mystery and release the original photo for public perusal!

--
Justin
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg
 
Allright, then.

Although I love doing both landscape and portraits, I see the R1 at its best with portraits; the fine, film-like detail is all there. The RAW writing time doesn't bother me most of the time; I don't usually shoot in burst mode (for JPEGs, that is). That's probably why some people characterize some of my pics as "old school": I learned from Cartier-Bresson's work that there's a way to capture that special moment; and I almost never crop.

I'm also learning how to use CS2 better, but I'm still a beginner. It's fun; not so much as the old school mess with chemicals, temperature, trial-and-error with different types of paper but still as time-consuming...

I'm going to turn that link on again.

BTW, the book is a blast: great entertainment and very well written.
 
It's a very nice portrait indeed...lighting well-handled...and the silver paint on the girl's eyes which might have presented a problem with reflected light was nicely handled.

I like the tight crop there too...it works in this type of shot, as it feels more 'carnivalesque'...appropriate to the festival setting and atmosphere of a carnival or faire where face-painting would be common.

Since you shot in RAW, you may want to process a few different versions of the shot to see which work out best in print...right now, young children might not appreciate photographs of themselves (I don't know these two children's preferences, but most tend to hate their own photographs), but later in life, they may want to look back at a fun time in life, enjoying the playfulness of youth and innocence, and want to frame the shot.

I might try a version that uses just a teeny bit more contrast - though nicely lit, there really aren't that many sources of black in the shot to provide visual contrast...so a bit more emphasized shadow on the space between or at the curve of the faces might make the photo feel a bit more three-dimensional...and might come out better in print.

Thank you for re-opening the shot. It's a good one, and you should be proud to share it.

--
Justin
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg
 
Thank you, Justin! I'll try to pp in different ways and post the results here, in the next few days. I'll have a busy weekend, so it'll be sometime next week.
zackiedawg said:
It's a very nice portrait indeed...lighting well-handled...and the
silver paint on the girl's eyes which might have presented a
problem with reflected light was nicely handled.

I like the tight crop there too...it works in this type of shot, as
it feels more 'carnivalesque'...appropriate to the festival setting
and atmosphere of a carnival or faire where face-painting would be
common.

Since you shot in RAW, you may want to process a few different
versions of the shot to see which work out best in print...right
now, young children might not appreciate photographs of themselves
(I don't know these two children's preferences, but most tend to
hate their own photographs), but later in life, they may want to
look back at a fun time in life, enjoying the playfulness of youth
and innocence, and want to frame the shot.

I might try a version that uses just a teeny bit more contrast -
though nicely lit, there really aren't that many sources of black
in the shot to provide visual contrast...so a bit more emphasized
shadow on the space between or at the curve of the faces might make
the photo feel a bit more three-dimensional...and might come out
better in print.

Thank you for re-opening the shot. It's a good one, and you should
be proud to share it.

--
Justin
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg
Click to expand...
 
--
Brighteyes

I am on the same trail as you are, but just a little bit behind you (or it may be that I just never seam to be that pleased with my own work). CS2 is a work in progress for me. There is just so much you can do with it. I try something new every day or two. My list of PS book marks is very long. It's just now that I'm starting to read Camera RAW w/ Adobe PS CS2 by Bruce Fraser. I have both the H5 & R1, but love working with PS more that taking the images. Some day I may post something. If you have not done so, take a look at the retouching form. It's a whole new world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top