richingr
Registered: October 2010 Posts: 1,511
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 9:37am
|
|
|
Not sure on this one. Love the pose but to me face seems to bright.
Would love to see the face toned down slightly but keep that checky sparkle from the eyes.
Still a really excellent picture this is just my opinion as i see it
|
|
tvanags
Registered: October 2008 Posts: 219
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 9:43am
|
|
|
Thank you so much for the feedback! I have darkened sown the face, hands. Better?
|
|
richingr
Registered: October 2010 Posts: 1,511
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 9:47am
|
|
|
Looks better already .
|
|
tvanags
Registered: October 2008 Posts: 219
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 9:51am
|
|
|
Thank you. For some reason, it still looks a lot brighter on here than it does in photoshop? Hmmm, I wonder why?
|
|
richingr
Registered: October 2010 Posts: 1,511
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 11:09am
|
|
|
Thank you. For some reason, it still looks a lot brighter on here than it does in photoshop? Hmmm, I wonder why?
I have exactly the same problem with photshop .Pictures look great until you upload .I uploaded a picture the other day that i thought was good and showed loads of faults on picture when uploaded and looked at on another PC.
|
|
|
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 3:20pm
|
|
|
It could be a simple mater of using the correct colour space with photoshop.
|
|
Kev
Registered: February 2008 Posts: 2,722
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 5:15pm
|
|
|
Tvanags, yes often NEF produced images will not look 100% great in photoshop (even the TIFFs converted from NEFs)...so it's always best to go back into NX2 after processing your workflow TIFF file in PS, to double check exactly how the final output file will look.
I always do my basic edits and conversion to TIFF in NX2 first...and then work in PS...then go back into NX2 for the final scrutiny...as the images never look "clear" or great quality (IQ-wise) in Photoshop. This is simply because Nikon will not share it's propriarty algorithm codes with Adobe and therefore the PS rendering of the NEF to TIFF conversion is not 100%.
I like this shot, even tho the face is a tad bright - it works. The expression is great and the image is crisp n clear. I would crop some of the backdrop away tho and make it into a square format ratio.
|
|
richingr
Registered: October 2010 Posts: 1,511
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 5:24pm
|
|
|
DRD what do you mean by colour space in Photoshop
|
|
|
|
|
richingr
Registered: October 2010 Posts: 1,511
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 8:07pm
|
|
|
Cheers DRD but seems to be pictures shown on diffrent PCs show diffrent things not just in photoshop.
I can look at 1 picture on my main Pc that i have Photoshop etc on and looks great in any picture viewer.Same picture on my laptop looks Sh*t and if i upload it it looks better on my main pc than on my laptop. Hey Ho
This picture looks spot on on my main Pc but far to bright on my laptop and works pc
|
|
|
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 9:50pm
|
|
|
yes I agree the same thing while viewing on my laptop and pc, though it can be a reason why some peoples images are not the same after uploading to the net as they do in Photoshop I was just giving one of the many reasons why it happens.
|
|
Beth
Registered: May 2010 Posts: 1,601
|
|
Thu January 13, 2011 10:37pm
|
|
|
Very nice job! I think it looks great!
|
|
kbirdd
Registered: October 2008 Posts: 590
|
|
Fri January 14, 2011 1:56am
|
|
|
Cute, T. I like the background...
|
|
tvanags
Registered: October 2008 Posts: 219
|
|
Fri January 14, 2011 10:39pm
|
|
|
WOW, thanks for the feedback everyone. Kev, thank you for the detailed explanation! DRD, I thought about the color space too. The original color space was Adobe RGB and then before I uploaded it, I converted it to sRGB.
|
|
Kev
Registered: February 2008 Posts: 2,722
|
|
Sat January 15, 2011 7:26am
|
|
|
Tvanags...you shoot with a Nikon D700...which uses the Nikon sRGB 4.0.0 3002 colour working space....therefore, you should set your Photoshop workspace to the same. You may not notice much (if any diff) to the regular sRGB....coz they are almost identical....
|
|