# Pictures with flash...Did I light her up enough???



## TamiAz (Dec 16, 2011)

My daughter had greek and roman day at school.. How did I do with the flash?  I have a feeling they are still slightly underexposed... C&C.

1) 50mm, F2.8, 1/200s, 100iso






2) 50mm, F2.8, 1/200s, 100iso


----------



## marmots (Dec 16, 2011)

nothing photoshop can't fix







and just for fun...


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 16, 2011)

I don't know if it is bc I'm viewing from my iPhone or she has on makeup that's different but her skin tone seems off


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 16, 2011)

I especially notice it in her face tho. Specifically her right check.


----------



## TwoTwoLeft (Dec 16, 2011)

Don't really think those edits are improvements....


----------



## marmots (Dec 16, 2011)

TwoTwoLeft said:


> Don't really think those edits are improvements....



well the second one was just for fun

but not even the first one??


----------



## Destin (Dec 16, 2011)

marmots said:


> TwoTwoLeft said:
> 
> 
> > Don't really think those edits are improvements....
> ...



Nope, you pushed the contrast too far and fried her skin tones, imo. Not a fan of the edits. 

To the OP: The first one, the exposure is pretty close to being right, but it lacks contrast, and could use some MINOR tweaking in post. 

The second one, is actually slightly overexposed.. look at the white part of her dress... It's blown out and lacking detail.


----------



## marmots (Dec 16, 2011)

Destin said:


> marmots said:
> 
> 
> > TwoTwoLeft said:
> ...



ok guess ive been starring at them for too long...


----------



## photo guy (Dec 16, 2011)

her skin color is off in the second one and the white on her dress is blown out too much and in the first one the contrast is off a little.  Not bad though


----------



## michaeljamesphoto (Dec 17, 2011)

Don't understand why you edited her facial features. Actually I lied, I do understand, I do not support. Such is the condition of the world today, everyone wants to alter themselves and others to this plastic idea of perfection. Not a fan at all.


----------



## ConradM (Dec 17, 2011)

I think it's incredibly inappropriate to photoshop someones child like that.


----------



## marmots (Dec 17, 2011)

the only reason i did it was to challenge myself

i didnt think i  could do it


----------



## Natalie (Dec 17, 2011)

ConradM said:


> I think it's incredibly inappropriate to photoshop someones child like that.


+1, post reported.

On to the photos, I agree with what has been stated before that the exposure is correct, if anything a bit on the bright side. All that is needed is a bit of contrast to make it pop a bit more. Her skin tone looks OK to me in both shots.


----------



## marmots (Dec 17, 2011)

ok im sorry i didnt think it would be taken so negatively 

like i said it was the first time i did somethin glike that, and i ddnt think i was capable of making changes like that so i decided to challenge myself


----------



## ConradM (Dec 17, 2011)

marmots said:


> ok im sorry i didnt think it would be taken so negatively
> 
> like i said it was the first time i did somethin glike that, and i ddnt think i was capable of making changes like that so i decided to challenge myself



You can pull any random image off the web and challenge yourself.


----------



## Tiberius47 (Dec 17, 2011)

Okay, in response to the OP, I personally would have under exposed the ambient light on the background by a stop or so and increased the flash power to compensate.  What mode were you shooting in?


----------



## Tony S (Dec 17, 2011)

From what I can see there's plenty of light.  The problem now is your daughter is flatly lit with no modeling to give form or texture to her features from the direct flash.


----------



## designerfoo (Dec 17, 2011)

I think the photos are over exposed and the skin tone definitely is not right!


----------



## TamiAz (Dec 17, 2011)

Thanks, everyone... Marmots, I saw your edit last night and was too tired to respond. I was a little upset about the way you edited the one picture. My daughter is beautiful just the way she is. I don't care if someone does some minor edits, but to change her the way you did was not cool. You might have really been trying to help, but I would suggest not using someone's child. I didn't want to go all mama bear on you last night, so I didn't respond.

For those who commented on her skin tone...She was wearing some makeup with shimmer because she was a goddess, so maybe that's why it looks off. As far as her not being posed right...That's another thing I need to add to my list of stuff to learn. My biggest thing was having enough light on her. I've been hesitant using my flash and I'm trying to overcome my fear..LOL!!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 17, 2011)

TamiAZ, avoid on camera flash at all cost when shooting outside.  However, if you only use very little flash power and mix it with the sun sometimes it looks ok.  Personally if I did not shoot this with off camera flash, I would have set the flash to HSS/FP and use wider aperture to make your background blurrier (with shutter faster than 1/200).


----------



## TwoTwoLeft (Dec 17, 2011)

Natalie said:


> ConradM said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's incredibly inappropriate to photoshop someones child like that.
> ...


 
Reported? Really? I think everyone got the point across to marmots. I really don't think it's your place the be the whistle blower. That's  kinda up to the OP on how they want to handle it. He's young and just learned this lesson the hard way. If he did it again, then I could see taking action. But still, that would be up to the OP... Not YOU!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 17, 2011)

Reported!  You are being a whistle blower to the whistle blower!





TwoTwoLeft said:


> Natalie said:
> 
> 
> > ConradM said:
> ...


----------



## redessa (Dec 17, 2011)

marmots said:


> ok im sorry i didnt think it would be taken so negatively
> 
> like i said it was the first time i did somethin glike that, and i ddnt think i was capable of making changes like that so i decided to challenge myself



Okay, if that was truly your reasoning, why would you have posted it here publicly for the world, and her MOTHER to see? I saw it last night too, and it was really tasteless to have put that up here.


----------



## TwoTwoLeft (Dec 17, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Reported!  You are being a whistle blower to the whistle blower!



I dont think I went running to the mods did I? Lemme check... NOPE I DID NOT.


----------



## Natalie (Dec 17, 2011)

What's the big deal? It was an offensive, distasteful image, not to me but to everyone, and I reported it. I'm guessing you don't know much about how online forums work (as evidenced by your use of caps lock), but that's what the button is there for, to bring spam and abusive posts to the attention of the moderators. And I did, and the post got deleted. Problem solved, no need for your little rants long after the fact.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 17, 2011)

TwoTwoLeft said:


> Natalie said:
> 
> 
> > ConradM said:
> ...



:thumbup: Thank you for speaking my mind. I couldn't find the words yesterday or I would have said it myself.





Natalie said:


> What's the big deal? It was an offensive, distasteful image, not to me but to everyone, and I reported it. I'm guessing you don't know much about how online forums work (as evidenced by your use of caps lock), but that's what the button is there for, to bring spam and abusive posts to the attention of the moderators. And I did, and the post got deleted. Problem solved, no need for your little rants.



The "Big Deal" to me is that we don't need any more cops in our lives. And frankly, do you really want to be part of the Offensive/Distasteful Police? Citizen cops are the worst too.

The kid had already apologized (kind of) for doing what comes naturally in the world of photography today. You want kids to be different, better, etc, raise better kids. Don't hit them over the head with a baton.

Bloody kids are *not* more intelligent.




Considering your number of posts I don't think you are going to be here very long. PC is mostly BS.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

I think the amount of flash used was a bit too much--it seemed to make the lighting feel a bit flat, and low-contrast, and the elimination of the shadows seems a bit un-natural. On the subject of the retouching, the original poster's profile says, "My photos are OK to edit" , which as I understand it, means JUST THAT. Period. Without exception, and without limitations, unless some are actually given. It seems to me that there's no need to rip on a high school kid when the OP posted the pics in open forum on the web, for literally hundreds of people to see, along with the blanket statement, "My photos are OK to edit." Oh, and Marmot...you are hereby required to show up at noon Sunday, in the town square, to be stoned to death. Natalie will be casting the first stone. Followed by Conrad...they will probably be aiming for your head for your commission of high crimes, I am sure.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 17, 2011)

Derrel said:


> I think the amou... ...ission of high crimes, I am sure.



Man you are such an a..hole but you are so lovable some times. :lmao:


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

c.cloudwalker said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > I think the amou... ...ission of high crimes, I am sure.
> ...



Right back at you cloudy!!! You too are a first-rate a..hole too! And at times, lovable, I guess...

It was weird...we both were responding at the same time. I didn't see your post until after mine was posted...it makes me worry when you and I agree on things...I hate when that happens! Makes me wonder if I have lost my mind, the same way you have!:lmao:

"We shall settle this score with a battle of the moustaches, at dawn!"


----------



## Natalie (Dec 17, 2011)

c.cloudwalker said:


> TwoTwoLeft said:
> 
> 
> > Natalie said:
> ...


Um, I guess you weren't actually on when it happened, but it was fairly obvious that this kid's apologies were insincere, since despite saying he was "sorry", he still left the picture up for everyone to see instead of deleting it. Additionally, I made my post before he posted any of his "apologies", but because I went back and offered some feedback on the images too, mine got posted a few minutes after Marmot's. The kid's age is no excuse... At age 13, which is the youngest this kid could be, I would certainly expect he would know that something like that was offensive.

And I'm not sure what you mean by me not being here long. You've only been here slightly longer than me. I'm sorry I don't have nearly 5000 post like you do, some people just have more important things to do than sitting on an internet forum all day every day, like going out and taking photos. I'm done with this conversation, my actions were correct and I have no need to further defend them. Now excuse me, I have to go out and take some photos.


----------



## dylanstraub (Dec 17, 2011)

But from my limited experience the OP could use a bit of saturation to fix the complexion and the faded reg in the dress. Just sayin.....FWIW. Don't send the POlice after me. I'm at work so no edits.


----------



## GreatPhotoRace (Dec 17, 2011)

There's definitely something off in her skin tone. Perhaps she was wearing bronzer? And overall, they seem a little flat. Maybe it was the combination between what seems like a sunny day and the flash. What time of day were these taken? Maybe if you could take them in a setting with more dramatic natural light, the flash might balance a little better.


----------



## marmots (Dec 17, 2011)

Natalie said:


> Um, I guess you weren't actually on when it happened, but it was fairly obvious that this kid's apologies were insincere, since despite saying he was "sorry", he still left the picture up for everyone to see instead of deleting it. Additionally, I made my post before he posted any of his "apologies", but because I went back and offered some feedback on the images too, mine got posted a few minutes after Marmot's. The kid's age is no excuse... At age 13, which is the youngest this kid could be, I would certainly expect he would know that something like that was offensive.
> 
> And I'm not sure what you mean by me not being here long. You've only been here slightly longer than me. I'm sorry I don't have nearly 5000 post like you do, some people just have more important things to do than sitting on an internet forum all day every day, like going out and taking photos. I'm done with this conversation, my actions were correct and I have no need to further defend them. Now excuse me, I have to go out and take some photos.



the apology was sincere when i first did the edit i didn't realize that it was the persons mother posting this

and i did delete it immediately after the apology


----------



## TamiAz (Dec 17, 2011)

Can we close this thread?? I don't want it to continue. I'm over it and I think Marmots gets the point. It was a mistake and I don't think he'll do it again..Let's stop the bickering, please!!


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 17, 2011)

Man did this thread go down hill. 

To the op keep on shooting chica!  and happy holidays


----------



## Ballistics (Dec 17, 2011)

I'm bored so I want to say something before the thread gets closed. I didn't see the picture, but the guy said he was sorry. To go above and beyond and declare his insincerity and say that's not enough is doing nothing but dragging out the issue. The pictures are gone, he said he was sorry, build a bridge and get over it. Also, saying someone doesn't have a life because they have a high post count is absent minded garbage. We live in the age where the internet is with us @ all times and you go ahead and make a block headed blanket statement like that? C'mon mannn.


----------



## Crollo (Dec 17, 2011)

I didn't see the image, but what did he post that was so extremely offensive?


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

Crollo said:


> I didn't see the image, but what did he post that was so extremely offensive?



He slimmed down her face a bit in post. Probably using the liquify tool. If you were not paying close attention, you might very easily have missed it. He also boosted the saturation, which sort of changed the look of her makeup. Bennie_Lou went on and on and on for pages and pages about how clients expect this type of post-processing of portrait and wedding images. Then this kid tried it, and got royally reamed, repeatedly.


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 17, 2011)

He had thinned her out a lot. Like half the size of herself. He did a good job on experimenting with it  and did apologize. Just didn't realize that it was the op's daughter.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

RebeccaAPhotography said:


> He had thinned her out a lot. Like half the size of herself. He did a good job on experimenting with it  and did apologize. Just didn't realize that it was the op's daughter.



Isn't that maybe a bit of an overstatement Rebecca? I looked at that post twice before the pics were pulled...I didn't think it was that extreme.


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 17, 2011)

Maybe not half but she was smaller and I thought it was the whole picture just not her face.


----------



## Dominantly (Dec 17, 2011)

Meh, I am on the fence about whether or not it is bad form to edit the shape of a person in a photo, if they declare their photos are ok to edit (SO I pretty much agree with Derrel). Can it be offensive if done distastefully, oh yeah.

Side note, I have on occasion used Portrait Professional and it will alter the shape of the face, it's just usually very subtle.


----------



## RebeccaAPhotography (Dec 17, 2011)

I've done for some kids I knew in their senior portraits but they asked if I could do it. I cheated and used picnik lol


----------

