# Less of Kathryn...But somehow, More!



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

This is Kathryn, 

She came to me in August for a boudoir/sexy  shoot for her boyfriend who's currently serving in Afghanistan. I asked  her back then if she'd be interested in modelling for me, and we finally  got it together today. Here are a few of my favourites. Trying to get  away from white backgrounds that I use with the kids, although I still  have some in this shoot.

What do you think?




30-12-2012  Kathryn 2 by  CTS.Studio1, on  Flickr




30-12-2012  Kathryn by  CTS.Studio1, on  Flickr




30-12-2012  Kathryn 3 by  CTS.Studio1, on  Flickr




30-12-2012  Kathryn 4 by  CTS.Studio1, on  Flickr

Thanks


----------



## amolitor (Dec 30, 2012)

The first three are wonderful compositions. They feel a little dull, somehow. It feels like you're going for dim and moody, but they wind up feeling underexposed and flattish. The shadows on her face are, I think, not deep enough for your vision - I know you want to show the girl off, because, let's face it, she's ridiculously good looking. Trust me and have faith, she'll be even hotter when you bury parts of her in shadow  Plus, you'll get the visual pop back!

Something like this, I think. The curves adjustment did some unpleasant stuff to her skin, do I desaturated as a quick fix, etc. Note, however, that I pushed essentially NO tones up at all, the bottom range came down quite a bit, the upper range got left alone, which pushed contrast into the lower mids (sorry, skin..) and then I burned the shadows down a fair bit more.


----------



## amolitor (Dec 30, 2012)

I should clarify, by the way. I think the images are fine images, she poses well, you're shooting and lighting her quite well. It's only the post that I am quibbling with.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

amolitor said:


> The first three are wonderful compositions. They feel a little dull, somehow. It feels like you're going for dim and moody, but they wind up feeling underexposed and flattish. The shadows on her face are, I think, not deep enough for your vision - I know you want to show the girl off, because, let's face it, she's ridiculously good looking. Trust me and have faith, she'll be even hotter when you bury parts of her in shadow  Plus, you'll get the visual pop back!
> 
> Something like this, I think. The curves adjustment did some unpleasant stuff to her skin, do I desaturated as a quick fix, etc. Note, however, that I pushed essentially NO tones up at all, the bottom range came down quite a bit, the upper range got left alone, which pushed contrast into the lower mids (sorry, skin..) and then I burned the shadows down a fair bit more.
> 
> View attachment 30453



Agreed. That looks better. I will have a further play. The even better news is that she will come back and pose for me pretty much any time in the next 6 weeks while b/f is doing his tour. Plenty of practise! 



amolitor said:


> I should clarify, by the way. I think the images are fine images, she poses well, you're shooting and lighting her quite well. It's only the post that I am quibbling with.



No problem. I need the help to realise my vision of what I wanted. The GOOD thing is that this is the first directed model shoot I have done (as opposed to shooting kids and families) and it worked out well, I think.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

They look underexposed here... but just about right on Flickr's black background! Nice model.. nice work, BTL!


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> They look underexposed here... but just about right on Flickr's black background! Nice model.. nice work, BTL!



Thanks. I have seen a couple of reworks with the levels lifted...a couple look better, some not. Will have a play later. 

Cheers


----------



## Tony S (Dec 30, 2012)

I like the composition and posing, but the first ones are almost 1 1/2 stops under exposed. 

  I made a simple adjustment in PS using the exposure tool basing the exposure on the white of the eye.... brings it up quite nicely.. With the exposure it has, the first three look muddy.  If you wanted a darker mood or look you would need to modify your lighting some more to keep the exposure up on her.  Perhaps something that leaves a bit more shadow on the face from the hood effect of the wrap.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

Tony S said:


> I like the composition and posing, but the first ones are almost 1 1/2 stops under exposed.
> 
> I made a simple adjustment in PS using the exposure tool basing the exposure on the white of the eye.... brings it up quite nicely.. With the exposure it has, the first three look muddy.  If you wanted a darker mood or look you would need to modify your lighting some more to keep the exposure up on her.  Perhaps something that leaves a bit more shadow on the face from the hood effect of the wrap.



Yes, I am realising this. Will be working on these again later tonight. 

Thanks for the input.


----------



## nycphotography (Dec 30, 2012)

I agree w/ tony... expose fixed, but possibly mood broken ;-)

Maybe try more directional light, maybe w/ a bounce to keep from creating falloff on the scarf across the frame?


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

nycphotography said:


> I agree w/ tony... expose fixed, but possibly mood broken ;-)
> 
> Maybe try more directional light, maybe w/ a bounce to keep from creating falloff on the scarf across the frame?



Yes, know what you mean. I have one grid, which was to my right. I need more grids I reckon so I can "focus" the light a little better. 
Thanks


----------



## unpopular (Dec 30, 2012)

Spot meter her forehead, increase exposure by EV +1 to +1.6


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Spot meter her forehead, increase exposure by EV +1 to +1.6



Thanks.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 30, 2012)

that's ofcourse assuming you have a flash spotmeter .. duh.

sometimes I forget people are working in studio.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

unpopular said:


> that's ofcourse assuming you have a flash spotmeter .. duh.
> 
> sometimes I forget people are working in studio.



I figured you meant to take a meter reading on the forehead, then increase my exposure by a stop or two from the reading. Is this not what you meant?

Also, could I use the camera in spot meter mode to take a reading from there, and do likewise?

Always willing to learn, so if I am wrong, please explain. 

Cheers


----------



## tirediron (Dec 30, 2012)

Your Steve McCurry phase?  

To me, these just seem under-exposed.  I think with another stop or two of exposure the colours would really pop!


----------



## o hey tyler (Dec 30, 2012)

Bend The Light said:
			
		

> I figured you meant to take a meter reading on the forehead, then increase my exposure by a stop or two from the reading. Is this not what you meant?
> 
> Also, could I use the camera in spot meter mode to take a reading from there, and do likewise?
> 
> ...



Your camera doesn't meter for strobed light (unless you have TTL flashes). Only incidental. You'd need a flash meter to trigger your strobes and give you a reading based on only their output.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

tirediron said:


> Your Steve McCurry phase?
> 
> To me, these just seem under-exposed.  I think with another stop or two of exposure the colours would really pop!



Yes indeed! With a lily-white english girl with freckles. 

Agree about the exposure. 



o hey tyler said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Got you, of course. 
I have a meter, and can trigger the flash. With the meter at the forehead measuring incident light, yes?

Cheers


----------



## o hey tyler (Dec 30, 2012)

Bend The Light said:
			
		

> Got you, of course.
> I have a meter, and can trigger the flash. With the meter at the forehead measuring incident light, yes?
> 
> Cheers



No, you'd want to meter for strobed light. What meter do you have?


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

This:




How to use light meter small by http://bendthelight.me.uk, on Flickr

annotations from when I was "learning" to use it. :/


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 30, 2012)

Thanks folks. I had another play:




30-12-2012 Kathryn 1 rework by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

Any better?


----------



## tentwo (Dec 30, 2012)

Much! Just remove the fly hair from the right eye and golden! Did you try this in black and white?

Also maybe bringing color back to her eyes and lips... or just the lips...  hmmm.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

tentwo said:


> Much! Just remove the fly hair from the right eye and golden! Did you try this in black and white?
> 
> Also maybe bringing color back to her eyes and lips... or just the lips...  hmmm.



NO... PLEASE... do not selective color this... it would kill it! lol!


----------



## ronlane (Dec 30, 2012)

I agree with Charlie, NO SELECTIVE COLOR!. The rework looks very good to me.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

Bend The Light said:


> Thanks folks. I had another play:
> 
> 
> 30-12-2012 Kathryn 1 rework by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr
> ...



BTL.... GORGEOUS! I love it.. love her... SIGH! There goes my heart again.....    Very nice!


----------



## tentwo (Dec 30, 2012)

I agree I love it too, was just qurious if he played around with it. Sorry for the suggestion.

With all the contrast,it just appears like a good B/W to me.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

tentwo said:


> I agree I love it too, was just qurious if he played around with it. Sorry for the suggestion.
> 
> With all the contrast,it just appears like a good B/W to me.



No big deal! lol! Just most of us here agree that 99.9% of all selective color use is terrible! It is way overdone!


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

Actually.. I agree that B&W might be fun here. I played with it.. and went for the Mata Hari look...lol! BTL.. Hope you don't mind!


----------



## tentwo (Dec 30, 2012)

See... Should I say it....lol. I think the heavy contrasting colors in the photo did do an excellent B/W... I gotz a little skill. 

I probably wouldn't have gone that dark with it, but it does look cool. It, to me gave it a timeless look. maybe add a little softening and who knows


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 30, 2012)

tentwo said:


> See... Should I say it....lol.   I think the heavy contrasting colors in the photo did do an excellent B/W...  I gotz a little skill.
> 
> I probably wouldn't have gone that dark with it, but it does look cool.



I was playing.. and I love the emphasis on those eyes!


----------



## tentwo (Dec 30, 2012)

Me too!  It is almost enchanting.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

tentwo said:


> Much! Just remove the fly hair from the right eye and golden! Did you try this in black and white?
> 
> Also maybe bringing color back to her eyes and lips... or just the lips...  hmmm.



I did seee that hair, but left it...not sure why. 

Not tried black and white yet...on my list. 



cgipson1 said:


> tentwo said:
> 
> 
> > Much! Just remove the fly hair from the right eye and golden! Did you try this in black and white?
> ...



No plans to do that. 



ronlane said:


> I agree with Charlie, NO SELECTIVE COLOR!. The rework looks very good to me.



Nope. Thank you.



cgipson1 said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks folks. I had another play:
> ...



Oh dear...



tentwo said:


> I agree I love it too, was just qurious if he played around with it. Sorry for the suggestion.
> 
> With all the contrast,it just appears like a good B/W to me.



And it does, but not with spot colour. 



cgipson1 said:


> tentwo said:
> 
> 
> > I agree I love it too, was just qurious if he played around with it. Sorry for the suggestion.
> ...



Once in a while it can work. Not here though. 



cgipson1 said:


> Actually.. I agree that B&W might be fun here. I played with it.. and went for the Mata Hari look...lol! BTL.. Hope you don't mind!
> 
> View attachment 30557



Like it very much. I would have gone dark with the eyes as focus...Thanks.



tentwo said:


> See... Should I say it....lol. I think the heavy contrasting colors in the photo did do an excellent B/W... I gotz a little skill.
> 
> I probably wouldn't have gone that dark with it, but it does look cool. It, to me gave it a timeless look. maybe add a little softening and who knows



Maybe. On my list to do. 



cgipson1 said:


> tentwo said:
> 
> 
> > See... Should I say it....lol.   I think the heavy contrasting colors in the photo did do an excellent B/W...  I gotz a little skill.
> ...



Yep.



tentwo said:


> Me too!  It is almost enchanting.



She's lovely in the flesh too. And she will come back and model for me, gratis, whenever I want, so plenty of practise time.


----------



## Granddad (Dec 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Actually.. I agree that B&W might be fun here. I played with it.. and went for the Mata Hari look...lol! BTL.. Hope you don't mind!
> 
> View attachment 30557



Damn! Now I'm in love, too.  :heart: :hail::heart:


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Actually.. I agree that B&W might be fun here. I played with it.. and went for the Mata Hari look...lol! BTL.. Hope you don't mind!
> 
> View attachment 30557



Any chance of a couple of lines to say what you did here? I'm going to have a go myself, but love this conversion. 
Also, do you mind if I post this elsewhere (I know it's my original, but the edit is yours and I want Kathryn to see it (amongst others)).


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

Granddad said:


> Damn! Now I'm in love, too.  :heart: :hail::heart:



She seems to have that effect. And she's coming back soon for another session.


----------



## manaheim (Dec 31, 2012)

Bend The Light said:


> Thanks folks. I had another play:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It's always fun when someone has REALLY good base material that leaves open a bit of room for interpretation.  I mean these pictures are stunning, but you can see where a little change in look or adjustments on some sliders can have a very different effect.

Like charlie's... so cool.  Nice edit, man.

For me, I thought your re-do was excellent, but it lacks POP... now that may well be a style choice, and I can't argue with that... and I think you did an EXCELLENT job of it if that was your intent, but to me just a little bit more work on the curves and a little sharpening and bam...








Those eyes jump right off the page.

BTW, I wouldn't look at this in IE.  IE handles color very poorly these days.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks folks. I had another play:
> ...



I think I am always erring on the side of caution when it comes to colour/pop. I quite like a good mono, dark, moody, and forget that it doesn't always translate well  into colour. Again, your edit is great, and I am playing with various from this set, messing with "pop" and with vignetting, with mono, etc. 

Hope everyone knows I am taking all this in, and playing some more. I enjoy doing the "weekend warrior" studio work with the kids and so on, but it's nice to get a "model" in and just do it for doings sake. 

BTW, not used Interweb Exploder for a long long time - poor colour and bloated. Firefox is my browser of choice (despite it getting "bigger" it still works well and is colour managed.


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

Here's a couple of "plays". 

Possibly overdone skin on this:




30-12-2012 Kathryn 8 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr

And I like the darkness. 




30-12-2012 Kathryn 9 by CTS.Studio1, on Flickr


----------



## manaheim (Dec 31, 2012)

And you're talking to a guy who always pushes sharpening/contrast to the breaking point, so you need to take what I say with a grain of salt... frankly I would have pushed the one I did a bit further on the sharpening, but was trying to keep some of your softness in.

On your new ones, I think your analysis is right on.  Too much correction in the skin.  The b/w one I think you may have pushed a bit too far... she looks somewhat like a street urchin to me.


----------



## manaheim (Dec 31, 2012)

I need to stop using IE... these look terrible in IE...


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 31, 2012)

Bend The Light said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Actually.. I agree that B&W might be fun here. I played with it.. and went for the Mata Hari look...lol! BTL.. Hope you don't mind!
> ...


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...


----------



## Bend The Light (Dec 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Bend The Light said:
> ...


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 31, 2012)

Bend The Light said:


> Thanks folks. I had another play:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nominated for POTM!


----------



## Bend The Light (Jan 1, 2013)

cgipson1 said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks folks. I had another play:
> ...



Is that because it's a nice pic, or because you are madly in love with her? ha ha!


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 1, 2013)

Bend The Light said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Bend The Light said:
> ...



Because it is a nicely shot image of a beautiful girl... and you captured that Beauty!


----------



## tentwo (Jan 1, 2013)

Bend The Light said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Bend The Light said:
> ...


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 1, 2013)

tentwo said:


> Bend The Light said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...


----------



## tentwo (Jan 1, 2013)

Yeah I might have went a little heavy on the white overlay on the eyes.


----------



## Ray12 (Jan 1, 2013)

Hi Blend,

Im brand new here at the forum.   Im a Professional Photographer and also a Photoshop Trainer.  This is my very first post...so if im doing anything wrong please PM me.

I think that there are about 5 more F-stops of light hidden inside these images.  With the fairly simple use of Photoshop I think its possible to bring these images up to almost normal again.  I can remember having images that were under exposed myself in the past...so Im very empathetic with any photographer who has to put up dark images.

I d like to offer a video example so you can see what I mean.    I will leave a link below to a short 7 min Video to illustrate the basic steps in Photoshop in real time.  I can remember my own fair share of under-exposed images.   So, I thought id share some of what I know now...hope its OK here.

Here is the Video Tutorial LINK:


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 1, 2013)

Gotta be spam... Ray, if you seriously want to join.. do so. Join in the conversations... share your knowledge... that's great. 

EDIT: I hit the link, and you look like you are trying to help.. so maybe not spam.... the mods will decide. We see so many spammers... that maybe I jumped the gun!


----------



## Ray12 (Jan 1, 2013)

Hey Charlie... Im Ray.

Yea...I dont mean to be spam.  

Im just trying to join in on the subject at hand, to be right on task with the OP's thread, and to be as highly relevant and as helpful as I can.  I hope it was on target OK.

Thanks for the edit:  

Ray


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 1, 2013)

Ray12 said:


> Hey Charlie... Im Ray.
> 
> Yea...I dont mean to be spam.
> 
> ...



Cool.. I reported it before I checked your site... I didn't see any way you could make a buck off of that! So it was nice of you to do that! Nice edit also.. still seems a little bright to me, maybe I need to recalibrate my monitor.


----------



## manaheim (Jan 1, 2013)

nice edit, ray.

Way to go, Charlie... beat up the new guy trying to help.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 1, 2013)

manaheim said:


> nice edit, ray.
> 
> Way to go, Charlie... beat up the new guy trying to help.



Darn it.. we don't have a "hiding under the bed" smiley!! If we did, I would use it!  lol!


----------



## manaheim (Jan 1, 2013)

lol...


----------



## tentwo (Jan 1, 2013)

Don't judge the book by its cover! lol

Ray thanks for the vid. That is what I did too just not as high. Also if you get the PS6 it is ever better. I just got the ps6 and I am loving it!

I like the statement, "painting with light" I call it "Painting light in PhotoShop" lol


----------



## Bend The Light (Jan 2, 2013)

Thanks guys, and thanks Ray.

I haven't yet followed the link, I will do so, however, as all help is welcome. For your edit, I do think it is too bright for me, but as Charlie said a few times in the past, there comes a point when it's pretty much "to taste". I do prefer less bright, but acknowledge that my originals were very underexposed.

And thanks to other for comments.


----------



## LesFraser (Jan 2, 2013)

Great shot! 

Ray, great video and edit. Can i just say thank you, I've learnt something very valuable.


----------



## Bend The Light (Jan 2, 2013)

LesFraser said:


> Great shot!
> 
> Ray, great video and edit. Can i just say thank you, I've learnt something very valuable.



Thanks.


----------



## Granddad (Jan 2, 2013)

Ray12 said:


> Hi Blend,
> 
> Im brand new here at the forum.   Im a Professional Photographer and also a Photoshop Trainer.  This is my very first post...so if im doing anything wrong please PM me.
> 
> ...



Welcome to the forum, Ray and thanks for that very useful and easy to understand video tutorial. I learned from it.   :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## ronlane (Jan 2, 2013)

Thanks Ray. That was a really good video tutorial. To me you have improved this photo.


----------



## Bend The Light (Jan 2, 2013)

Ray,

I just watched the tutorial - thanks for that. I will have a play with that later today, whether I like brighter or darker images, the coupld of simple steps you used are going to be helpful in my PP of any photo.

Many Thanks

Craig


----------



## Ray12 (Jan 2, 2013)

Hi Craig,

I agree.  The image in my post WAS very light.  I left it that way On Purpose... to show that you can rescue a terribly dark image from darkness...so much so...that you would then be complaining about just the opposite problem...the image is too light!!  

The beauty of the methodology you saw... is the fact that EVERY layer and EVERY adjustment you make... automatically has an opacity slider placed on each layer!!   What this means for you is: that you can apply an effect where you want it...and then be able to infinitely and repeatedly control it without penalty.   You should be able to paint on light into any image...and then be able to artistically balance out the image just the way you like it.  The mask part of the procedure allows you to selectively paint in the light exactly where you want it to be...and the opacity slider part allows you to have complete control of the strength of the newly added light.

In my case, I can shoot in the streets of New York City (at midnight) at ISO 100 and end up with an image that has great visibility in all parts of the image... by using Several layers of levels adjustments... and Several layers of curves adjustments.  These adjustments are also "non-destructive"... which means that they are completely transparent and you can use as many layers as you need.   Because I can now selectively paint on light exactly where I want it...and completely control its intensity...I can now get to be quite creative in my photography!!! 

Try this technique with a landscape image or a travel image too...the principle works great with any kind of image!  

Cheers,

Ray


----------



## Bend The Light (Jan 2, 2013)

Ray12 said:


> Hi Craig,
> 
> I agree.  The image in my post WAS very light.  I left it that way On Purpose... to show that you can rescue a terribly dark image from darkness...so much so...that you would then be complaining about just the opposite problem...the image is too light!!  This technique can work just as well with a portrait, a landscape, an architectural interior, or a group image.
> 
> ...



Indeed I will do. None of the actual methods are beyond my ability in Photoshop, but knowing which method to use when is all important. That's what I got from the video. 

Many thanks again.


----------

