# Pup high key - C & C please



## CherylL (Aug 25, 2019)

Quincy was the same color as the concrete background.   The exposure is the same as shot.  I did raise the black point up a little and the lower midtones down a hair as a curve adjustment.  Used Nik's Silver Efex.  Too light?  Not light enough?  Contrast?  C & C please




Quincy - high key by Cheryl, on Flickr


----------



## SquarePeg (Aug 25, 2019)

Hmmmm - imo needs more contrast to separate him from the background.  Doesn’t really seem “bright” even though there are no dark tones.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 25, 2019)

I agree with the above sentiments. I kind of think this photo might look better if it were to be re-processed striving for more "punch!"

to me it looks a little bit low in contrast The brightness looks OK, but I think it looks a little bit washed out.


----------



## SquarePeg (Aug 25, 2019)

?


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 25, 2019)

Couple things that IMO are hurting the image. First the background being so close to fur color is causing a gray smudge of hair and background. A white background might have been a better choice. Second I know it's hard with all the hair, but eyes make the shot on dogs. Having the parts showing sharp and properly exposed would have been a nice improvement.


----------



## Jeff15 (Aug 26, 2019)

I agree with everything already said........


----------



## Fujidave (Aug 26, 2019)

CherylL said:


> Quincy was the same color as the concrete background.   The exposure is the same as shot.  I did raise the black point up a little and the lower midtones down a hair as a curve adjustment.  Used Nik's Silver Efex.  Too light?  Not light enough?  Contrast?  C & C please
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I agree with squarepeg, it does need more contrast but I had a quick go too.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 26, 2019)

Had a few mins with my coffee to look at this in Lr. In a properly exposed image the histogram will reflect data stretching from left to right (black to white) with shadows, and mid tones represented in the middle. Blacks and shadows are what create the contrast in the image. In a High Key most of the tonal range is pushed up into the lighter tones (the highlights), but that doesn't mean blow out the highlights, or delete the shadows and blacks, you still need "all" the data. IE:

Note there isn't much data in the blacks and shadows, but it still has some, all way from left to right.

Now, by comparison, here's the histogram from the OP


See the difference? You fell short on the left and right, resulting in an image without white or black.

Now lets look at your image. The first thing I note is what should be black, what should be white, and adjust accordingly. Now look what happens when we modify your image more like the first histogram example.

There's data all the way to the left reflecting the black I saw in the image, there's very little mid tone, which is what I'd expect to see in high key, and a lot of data loading up in the highlights. I know I've reached white, because I'm all the way to the right. Note also that the white is not blown, you don't gain anything when you blow the whites, and it's a lazy approach in a high key. Now here is the revised image.



I didn't touch the contrast or exposure setting. I did a radial filter to isolate the face and raise the exposure slightly on everything else in the image, and an adjustment brush to sharpen the eyes, and nose. Where most of the transformation took place was in the Highlights, Whites, and Blacks. With some minor adjustments to Texture, Clarity, and Dehaze. The Dehaze slider can work both ways for you. It can clear a hazy sky, but it can also add an element of haze to an image.


The only contrast adjustment was in the mild s curve.


----------



## paigew (Aug 26, 2019)

I like it! To add a little punch, play with clarity, dehaze, and/or texture sliders in Lr


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Tropicalmemories (Aug 26, 2019)

I really like the mainly white background and high key look - think it suits the subject.  Perhaps take the background to pure white to give a studio look?

But yes, a bit more contrast for eyes and other features.

Here"s a crude attempt at showing what I mean ....


----------



## CherylL (Aug 26, 2019)

Thanks everyone for the feedback!  By your responses I am gaining a better understanding of high key.  I will attempt this again after the next grooming to get the catch lights in his eyes and with a white background.  I have a trifold white presentation board.  Too reflective maybe?

@smoke665, thanks for breaking this down step by step with the histograms.  I think I am confusing monotone with high key.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 26, 2019)

CherylL said:


> I think I am confusing monotone with high key.



Even a monotone will have a range of tonal values across the board. High Key's tend to be a little more difficult (at least for me) then Low Key. With a LK I meter for the highlights and let the shadows fade to black, but with HK I start out metering the shadows/blacks, and bring up the white highlights to the point of blowing. I've seen a lot of advice to bump  1-2 stops overexposed "just to be sure they're white". IMO that's a cop out and automatically assures you losing any details you might have in your whites.


----------



## The Barbarian (Aug 26, 2019)

I think the very interesting textures of the fur could be further defined.   I did a very light tonemapping to better define the fur on the left side.




Personally, I like the OOF texture of the concrete behind the dog.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Aug 26, 2019)

I don't think this works at all. It just looks off. I don't know what the original looks like and wonder if the exposure was off. I'd scrap this and start over from scratch from the original I think.


----------



## CherylL (Aug 26, 2019)

vintagesnaps said:


> I don't think this works at all. It just looks off. I don't know what the original looks like and wonder if the exposure was off. I'd scrap this and start over from scratch from the original I think.



Here is the original.  Raw to jpg in ACR  with no adjustments.  I resized for upload.

 

The histogram in ACR.  I see now that it doesn't go to full white.


----------



## paigew (Aug 27, 2019)

CherylL said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think this works at all. It just looks off. I don't know what the original looks like and wonder if the exposure was off. I'd scrap this and start over from scratch from the original I think.
> ...


what about something like this?


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 27, 2019)

CherylL said:


> The histogram in ACR. I see now that it doesn't go to full white.



I don't always accomplish it, but I'm trying harder to plan ahead on shots. Knowing up front what I intend for the final image to be, keeps me on track. Was the intent of the shot a High Key, or was it an afterthought?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Aug 27, 2019)

It does work better I think Paige in the B&W you did.

For me this is one of those photos that unless it's something really significant I scrap it and move on, because otherwise it's going to take a lot of time and work to get anything worthwhile. If I knew the image is good, I'd work on it; if it's something maybe disappointing but not that important or easy enough to photograph again, that's when I am aggravated with myself that I messed up the exposure! but it's not worth it so I'll just try again.


----------



## CherylL (Aug 27, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> CherylL said:
> 
> 
> > The histogram in ACR. I see now that it doesn't go to full white.
> ...



I was taking photos of hornets and saw Quincy sitting.  This was a quick photo of him.  I'll reshoot with more intent based on everyone's posts.  Very helpful.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 27, 2019)

CherylL said:


> . This was a quick photo of him. I'll reshoot with more intent



I kinda thought so, I've seen enough of your "more intent" shots to believe you'll come up with something outstanding!


----------



## CherylL (Aug 28, 2019)

smoke665 said:


> believe you'll come up with something outstanding!



Wow, thanks for the confidence.  Or maybe you are trying to jinx me


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 28, 2019)

CherylL said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> > believe you'll come up with something outstanding!
> ...



Well you do keep me on my toes trying to top you with new ideas. LOL


----------

