Well, here goes my first picture submission to this forum. I just want to hear what some of you real photographers can tell me to help me improve on my technique. This snapshot was taken in our home on Thanksgiving. I liked the picture of my niece and my daughter, but I didn’t like all the clutter in the background. Please, give me some ideas. The first picture is the snapshot. Click on the "next" button above the picture to see my edited photograph.
I am not sure what kind of suggestions you want as you seem capable enough to execute your own ideas. My initial thought was to blur the back ground rather than to delete it. That however would not get rid of the strong light coming in through the window.
Jim, it is an extremely nice image due to the rimlight on the hair of both girls. I love this light. Unfortunately this causes a problem as well, as there is a contradiction in the balance of lighting. You used the most boring main light ever invented: full frontal flash. This contradicts the rimlight on the hair as this rimlight is stronger than the main light.
Next time try to avoid this cluttered background beforehand as in the edited image the girls seem to be cut out in front of this new back ground. BTW, you did a wonderful job by "lighting" the background separately. Well done!
One more thing I don’t like in a formal portrait -you changed an informal shot into one that looks like a formal one- the hand and arm over the shoulder attract to much attention; next time place the hand behind the back of the left girl. Just cover this hand and you know what I mean.
Despite this negative critique, it still is a lovely image. And don’t worry too much; usually I critique images to professional standards and by bitter experience I know many "professionals" would have been very happy with a shot like this one.
I agree on the arm. it looks detached from the rest. I probably would have made the image smaller. The bottom half consists only out of cardigans where as the main attraction in the picture is the two faces of the girls.
Jim, looking at both images….I would say you did a fine job at editing the background out…However, ( don’t hate me ) I prefer the first image. I do not see the background as ‘clutter’…I see a warm, friendly home that portrays ‘Thanksgiving’. The softness of the orginal photograph, what it says…..is a keeper.
I’m no professionnal, but I believe there is something interesting in there : http://upload.pbase.com/image/24133822 I took the liberty of working on your picture and I’ve put it on my pbase account. Once you’ll have seen it, I’ll remove it.
I am a strong believer in that a picture is the reflection of what’s inside the photographer’s mind. Not every picture needs to be esthetically perfect. A quick snapshot may say more than a carefully planned shot. Take the arm (in this picture), to me, it indicates a mother who loves and cares a great deal for her daughter. The whole scene tells me something like "Look at Dad, he’s lovely with his new toy! Let’s share a moment of the fun with him!"
JIM, I suppose your name is not so unusual but I’ll ask anyway. Do you know any Hess’s in Southern Indiana? As for the pictures; It’s a very nice and neat ‘clutter’ and says a lot in itself. I often look at backgrounds in snapshots when the picture is over 20 years old. The only thing that bothered me did disappear when Ray put his caption on the picture … they were no longer looking at the camera! I look forward to seing more of your entries. Marty
Thank you all for your responses. They help a lot. I am especially appreciative of Leen’s comments. He provided some insight that I had completely overlooked. And Marty, no, I do not know any Hesses in Indiana. I live in a very small community of Richmond in northern Utah, . I am located just a few miles from the Idaho border. I will probably leave the pictures online for a couple of days, but then will probably remove them.
Thank you, Susan, for the kind words. It has been fun to read the responses from all of you. Now I will briefly explain why I REALLY did this project. I have been playing around with an older version of Photoshop for several years. I had just about convinced myself that I wanted to get Photoshop CS for Christmas. But I had purchased Photoshop Elements about a year ago. And I realized that I didn’t even know how to use everything in Elements, so how could I justify purchasing Photoshop CS? I finally just recently learned how to use the quick mask feature in Photoshop. And then to my amazement I found out that the same feature was available in Photoshop Elements, although it has to be accessed differently. So I decided to see if I could do what I did in Elements, and found out that I could.
I have been playing around with photography for decades, but I have never really caught on to seeing and capturing the moment. I have very few photos that I consider to be very good at all. I just don’t seem to have that "eye" for the picture. But I am fascinated with working with Photoshop Elements just to see what I can do with some of my images. Most of what I have done previously has been done with adjustment layers primarily, and I was just stepping into some new territory for me. So while I might try to answer a few of the questions and enter into some of the discussions on the forum, don’t take anything I say too seriously. Just remember that I’m the "old guy" who really doesn’t get it when it comes to photography. 🙂 🙂
Jim, I’m one of those old guys too. Just have a look at my portrait in this month "Featured artist" and you will know what I mean. (I never expected to be so famous once in my life that even an Iraqi dictator tried to look like me) 😉
I’ve been working with Elements now for just only a year and the longer I use it, the more I ‘m amazed about how endless its possibilities really are. And I only use it to enhance my photographs and don’t have the time to create snowflakes and other illustrative images. So to me there is a whole new world to be discovered.
I’ve made a mistake in judging your image. I supposed I saw a rimlight, but it wasn’t there. It was the edge of your selection. My way of writing a critique was based on your final image as I supposed you wanted to create a rather formal portrait by means of removing the background and replacing it by a studiobackground. But I prefer the image the way Ray enhanced it.
Welcome to the most friendly forum on the entire internet. They even haven’t kicked me out yet. 😉
Have no fear Leen if the try to get rid of us we will lash ourselves to the mast and go down fighting. \
The truth of it all is this is a great place supplied by the generosity of our host, Adobe. It is great because of all those that hang out in this lounge and all the camaraderie and help we share so freely.
Jim, I agree with Jodi. I like the original, with the "clutter"…which I don’t view as clutter at all! I think it adds to the picture, which is beautifully framed. It gives a nice feeling of "homeyness." I would be proud to have taken that picture! Bert
OK, you have all convinced me that it is a lot easier to leave well enough alone. I guess what I really need to concentrate on is learning to see the moment and capture it. Thanks again.
I have read all that has been said so far. Leen has given you some excellent information and coming from a pro the price is right. While I do agree with everything that Leen said I also have a second point of view. As well as portraits we all should also keep records of our love ones in familiar surrounding. The familiarity of the pose does suggest to me a family record type image. Now that said I think the two ladies are, and should be, the center of importance. So I do agree with the rest on toning down the back ground. When the photograph is taken you can do this by opening your aperture. Once the photograph has been taken you can correct this by masking the ladies and applying a blur, or desideration to the background, also you can do both.
I took the liberty of doing this. As well I made the background a layer and once I got the blur and the saturation to what I liked I decreased the opacity slightly to give a hint of a mystical lens flair to the image. To me it retains the comfort of the home while bringing the two ladies out front
Brother Grant, I agree with you, as usual, but with exception of this image. Now the background is in soft focus (due to the bright window) and the subject isn’t. I can live with that, provided you add a little soft focus to the faces as well.
But extremely important is another part of your message: the importance of preserving family images to record the past. Unfortunately most people don’t print their images in a way they will last for a long time. Even worse, most images will never be printed, but recorded on media that will be difficult to read after some decades. This way a considerable part of our visual history will be lost for the next generations. This is a pity for the people recording the family history like Beth and others. (Yes, AFAIK she seems to do something else in addition to resetting preferences) 😉 I think this will be a serious problem.
Leen, I am also working on a family archive very similar to Beth’s. We have talked about the issue of unreadable old obsolete media. We have agreed that as long as we are alive and able to do it, we will migrate our archive database to new media formats every few years…whenever it seems appropriate. For that reason, I am not that worried about longtime archival data integrity on CD-Rs. They only have to last three to five years…by then I’ll have migrated to DVDs or DVD-Blues or whatever the "next big thing" is. The hooker, of course, is what happens after I am no longer here to maintain the archive? It will all be lost in a few years if I can’t find someone to take it over. In my case, I don’t think that’s a problem. My son is very computer-literate, and I’m sure I can convince him to take it over. But then, he has to find someone… Bert
I apologise profusely but I disagree with your last statement about blurring the girls as well because the background now is blurred as per Grant’s image. IMHO Blurring the girls may take the image too much in a romantic area.
That’s why I didn’t blurr the background myself, I thought it would make this picture too romantic. I only tone down the window, saturated the girls a little more and removed the flash spot in the younger one.
My grand father was the chief of the fire department in Westmont Montreal and he claimed that after family and pets the most often saved item in a fire was the photo albums. While you are too young to worry about this I suspect when the time comes they will be saved.
Leen has made a very good point here. While I was aware of this short fall I should have pointed it out as it was not all that obvious. I did the soft focus in the background for an effect. for better or for worse it was an artistic decision and it does go against some rules. Just so you can get a feel of background de-focusing I have posted this.
In response to comments from a couple of posts back, what I have been starting to do (in addition to making sure I take good care of whatever original pictures I have from waaaay back) is to have some of my most prized pictures printed commercially. Due to the techniques they use now on digital image files, not even those can be expected to last as long as some of the oldies from 130 or 140 years ago, but I hope they’ll at least last long enough until some descendant can use the most current technology and try again!
What I’m waiting for is improvement in the technology that allows relatively inexpensive books to be printed from digital files. I found a site a week or so ago that can/will print a single book containing approximately 70 pages for less than $150. Right now the limits in terms of numbers of images and amount of text is still pretty small, but this has to be ‘coming’, doesn’t it? The trick will be for me to stay functional long enough so I can take advantage of it! 🙂
Well, this is going to sound like I’m running for office but…
Leen is right. Grant is right. And all the rest of you are too! It all depends on what your purpose is. Leen does beautiful, artistic things. Sometimes, a simple, clear print is the best choice to document a family group, event, etc. I guess because of my "family archive orientation" I favored the original for that reason. If you wanted to make a portrait out of it, then Grants blurring of the background would be appropriate. If you wanted to make a work of art, then Leen’s approach would be best. The French have an expression for it: chacun a son gout Everyone to his own taste. Bert
Bert, I’m glad I’m not the only one who doesnot know how to type an "accent circonflexe" on "gout". Another expression with the same problem: "Autant de tetes, autant d’avis".
Now I suppose the next posting will be from Canada. 😉
To compose accented letters, use the ALT key with these combinations (press and the left ALT key, release when numbers are completely entered) : ê = 136 à = 133 â = 131 é = 130 û = 150 î = 140 ë = 137 è = 138
Voilà! I think it covers the most common.
Otherwise, if under Windows XP, install the Canada French language pack (not the France language ‘coz your keyboards will never look the same again!)
Ray, thank you for fulfilling my prophesy, but I don’t think I will remember this after a few days. BTW, you forgot the "cedille". 😉
Maybe this is common knowledge, but the accent circonflexe in French replaces an "s". That’s the way I learned my French at school (for 7 years!). This was easy to remember as "maître" is the same as "master", "prêtre" is "priest" etc.
Leen, there’s more to it than the ‘S’… It’s the way words are pronounced. It can’t be explained over a board like this but, believe me on this one. It does seem like this for en English speaking point of view, but several other words do not fall in this category "raffraîchissant" (refreshing). mulâtre (mulatto), prêt (loan), etc…
Leen…I was lazy, and you caught me. I did learn how to do that, but I don’t use it often enough, and I forgot. So…I tried to sneak it past you but you were too sharp for me. 🙂 Bert
Ray, Well, I can’t judge that, having never learned French, but from ESL (English second language) people I have known, they have a terrible time with English. Words like "read" can have different meanings and pronunciations, depending on context. Letter groups like "ough" can sound completely different in similar, or even identical words…like slough, which can be pronounced "sluff" or "sloo" depending on context. There is a wonderful commentary on the vagaries of English floating around the Web. I’ll see if I can find it. I grew up with it, studied it for years in school, used it every day, so it seems natural to me, but when I think about it, English seems like it would be a nightmare to learn. Bert
Although you’re right about all of this, there are far less of these "bizzare things" in English than exist in French. French has an exception for just about everything. There are some things not easily mastered in English (the ough, for starters), but there are fewers of these. Generalities are more "general", if I can say so, in English than in French.
I was put on a special learning program when I was in school where I was learning English as a second language from grade 2 (instead of the usual grade 4). Perhaps this has clouded my judgement over it and made it easier to me 😉
As for the meaning of "read" (something that has been read, red the color, to read, etc.), I could come up with a thousand of these in French. Examples :
Voix (voice) Voie (way) Voit (he sees) Vois (look, as an order).
Verre (glass) Ver (worm) Vers (towards) Ver (rime)
Les (The) Laid (ugly) Lait (Milk) Je "l’ai" (I have it)
Although they should, most Americans don’t distinguish between the sound of the first vowel in "Mary", "marry", and "merry".
"its" is a possessive, but "it’s" is a contraction.
Of course all languages have their exceptions. We just came back from our Irish Gaeltacht Christmas/Holiday party last night, at which some of us students were discussing why "m" sounds like an "m", but "mh" is always "w" or "v" depending on the vowels on either side of it. And there’s a thing called "eclipsis" in which one letter is added to the beginning of a word which hides the second letter. In fact, some students did a skit where they sang The Twelve Days of Christmas in mock-eclipsis, which resulted in a "partridge in a bear dree". 🙂 Irish is like French in that you can have 10 letters strung together which only makes a single syllable/sound.
And in Spanish:
¿Si como cómo como, cómo como? ("If I eat how I eat, how do I eat?")
"Sopa" isn’t "Soap" "Ropa" isn’t "Rope" And "butter" is "meant-to-kill-ya"
1) The bandage was wound around the wound. 2) The farm was used to produce produce. 3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse. 4) We must polish the Polish furniture. 5) He could lead if he would get the lead out. 6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert. 7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present. 8) I did not object to the object. 9) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row. 10) They were too close to the door to close it. 11) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear. 12) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend? 13) I shed my clothes in the shed. 14)A duck grows up before it grows down. 15)You chop a tree down before you chop it up.
Let’s face it – English is a ridiculous language. There is no egg in eggplant, nor ham in a hamburger; neither apple nor pine in a pineapple.
English muffins weren’t invented in England, nor French fries in France. Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren’t sweet, are meat.
We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
And why is it that bakers bake, but grocers don’t groce?
If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn’t the plural of booth beeth?
One goose, 2 geese. So one moose, 2 meese? One index, 2 indices?
If teachers taught, why didn’t preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? We ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell?
How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites?
You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on.
English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the creativity of the human race (which, of course, isn’t a race at all).
That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the lights are out, they are invisible.
And finally, how about when you want to shut down your computer you have to hit "START"
As an aside, eggplants were originally white and small and did look a lot like eggs. When agribusinesses wanted to ship them long distances and hide the inevitable bruising, they developed the darker purple varieties.
On the other hand, there are very systematic rules for English and it’s not quite as chaotic as some would believe. Take a look at this: http://www.zompist.com/spell.html
I had to learn English, French and German. German is rather close to my native language (Dutch); that’s why the exceptions are rather difficult. I did 7 years of French and 5 years of English. When you start English is much easier as it is a German language too, but French is stricter to the rules, so after a few years correct English is more difficult. It takes some time to learn al these french verbs and how to use the right form ("que je eusse…"), but afterwards this is rather structured.
I’m very lucky -thanks to my parents who provided me with an excellent education- to be able to speak 4 languages and most people are very forgiving when I make mistakes. And I know I do make many mistakes.
BTW, in english, who invented the pronounciation of "sergeant". 😉 Especially names of villages in the UK sometimes are a riddle to me; who knows how to pronounce the name of a village like "Widecomb in the Moor"? It seeems to be like: "Widdeeecom"………
The worst thing I ever noticed was in the Channel Tunnel. Leaving France a Frenchman tried to explain what to do and what not to do in French and in some kind of English that could just only be understood by other Frenchmen that had tried to learn english. The British travellers didnot. Leaving the UK an Englishman tried to do the same thing, hoping British travellers would understand his french. The French didnot. It took several years before anyone understood you could make a tape with an Englishman speaking english and a Frenchman speaking french.
That zompist link was a very interesting read. Still, 56 rules that only cover 59% of the language isn’t heartening.
And what causes a Great Vowel Shift? Would the same thing cause a Great Hue Shift that would make people 100 years from now think blue is green, green is red, and red is blue? 😉
When I travel in Europe, I always feel like an idiot. Everybody in Europe is multilingual, switching easily from German to French to English, etc. Very few Americans are multilingual. I always feel like I am imposing on everyone, forcing the language to English. Of course the main reason for this (besides our provincial nature) is geography. With the exception of Mexico, and parts of Canada, we have no neighbors speaking foreign tongues, so there is no incentive to learn them, And most people live far from the foreign-speaking borders we do have, as compared to Europe, where the exposure to other languages is much higher. Still, it is humbling to converse with Europeans who can switch languages with such ease. Bert
Bert I thought is was that few Americans were unilingual … would you like to buy a vowel we have a sale on Canadian (U)s The come it two sizes and can be used in all sorts of places …. they change color into a much more exciting colour…. just think of all the possibilities
Grant, LOL…….by the way, I made th old mistake of calling US citizens "Americans." Canadians are Americans too, and may not like bein lumped in with all those south-of-the-border unilingual types. I apologize. Bert
When it comes to speaking other languages the British are bottom of the league … most of us never learn another language or if we do it tends to be either Ancient Greek or Latin.
Wendy, I have known quite a few of you Brits who speak French or German. But, I suppose to some extent, the UK suffers from the same problem we do…separation from countries speaking other languages. I s’pose those Aussies and Kiwis have the same problem. I have always wanted to learn other languages…only laziness has prevented me from doing it. 🙂 Bert
Hmmmm. What did I say wrong? Canadians are not Americans? I thought they were. Mexicans too, for that matter. And then there’s the South Americans…and the Central Americans…
"Americans" is short for the unwieldy and probably grammatically incorrect "United-States-of-Americans". I mean, what are you going to call us, United Statesians? (No, because then if the EU changed its name to the United States of Europe, they’d complain that we couldn’t use "United States" anymore because we’d have to specify which one.) What else could we call citizens of the USA–USAians? 🙂
Canadians and Mexicans, like Americans, are also North Americans. But they are not Americans. Unless Canadians want to be lumped in with us for the phrase "Ugly American".
Yes, as a Canadian( grew up there and still a citizen despite my U.S. legal habitation ) I have always considered myself ‘ North American ‘… This is the continent of America.
Hey, I didn’t mean to start a donnybrook! I was just trying to keep from offending the Canadians participating in this thread. Ah well…the road to oblivion is paved with good intentions… 🙂 Bert
I’ve learned to speak and write English with an English teacher (one that came from England). It was always colour, humour, centre, etc… (oh, and that very Brithish accent that came along with it, "I can’t" said the British way, etc..) Later, I learned to write those the american way (i.e. color, center, etc.). But still, many times, I have to re-read my text and make corrections 🙂
Ray, I really LIKE that British accent. Our niece, who grew up here in southern California, married a guy who grew up on the Isle of Wight…or the IOW as locals call it. We have visited many times, and now have many friends in the UK. I really have great affection for the British people. I have never failed to have a great time in that country…mainly because the people are wonderful. Bert
I agree on the accent thing. Down here in the mountains, you get all kinds of accents from deep south to appalachian. Throw into that a large english, scottish and irish population and it’s pretty interesting.
I get a big kick out of some of the British colloquialisms. "spot on" and "Bob’s your uncle" are just a couple.
What about "they get on like a house on fire" or "that went down like a lead balloon" or "couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery even if he/she wanted to". "the best thing since sliced bread" and on and on.
About 40 years ago quite some black baseball players from deep of one of the southern states came to Holland to teach us how to play the most wonderful game ever invented. They trained me 6 days a week for over a month during my summer vacation and, one of the results: I never scored so badly in english the next months at school. But at least I could boast for about a month a wonderful "jojo"-accent nobody at school could imitate. And I was the captain of our school baseball team! No cheerleaders unfortunately, although we were pretty good. ;-(
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
