# Help me Salvage these Portraits!!



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

Hi, friends!
I'm shooting some Christmas sessions at a very low price for my neighbors. I've prefaced my offer to include that I am an amateur looking for experience. I got an amazing response and have quite a few sessions lined up. I say this so that no one on here thinks I am generating these types of images at an unfair cost.
I've included the images below from my first three sessions. I'd appreciate constructive criticism on all aspects as I do have several more of these shots at the same location coming up. The lighting in this area really is not ideal. It's either full sun or splotchy shade. Full sun is a bit easier for me to work with at this time, but it, too has its challenges.
So my primary question here is that several of my images turned out like the ones below - with undesirable lens flare - and I need to know if these are salvageable. I don't mind putting in a good deal of time and effort correcting them if it can be corrected. I have access to Photoshop CC and Lightroom CC but very limited knowledge of how to work in either. If anyone has any tutorials they'd recommend or would be willing to work with me on these, I would so greatly appreciate it.
You can see the lens flares in the attached images.
I'd also appreciate tips for eliminating this issue in my next sessions and how else I can improve the images in the next sessions.
I am shooting with a Canon ESO Rebel T2i and switched between Manual 1/250, f/5.0, ISO 200, white balance set to "shade", and AV f/5.0, ISO 200, white balance set to "shade".

Thank you all so much in advance!! I so greatly appreciate your help and respect your advice. And please don't be too tough on me (again, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated). I am still new and learning!!


----------



## fmw (Nov 22, 2016)

You want to expose for the subjects, not the background.  Your images are all underexposed.  You should be able to bring up the brightness in the software.  Get the faces right and let the rest go wherever it wants to go.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Nov 22, 2016)

The exposures are way off. It looks like your camera's meter was reading the light coming from the background. I think that's more challenging to try to have a subject in front of a brighter background (and i have yet to figure out where/how people are 'learning' to do that). 

Anyway, you need to go learn how to get proper exposures with your camera in various lighting conditions before you can take pictures for other people. Since you already committed to this I guess you'll have to try to fix these the best you can and get out to the next location and at least do some test shots ahead of time. 

I think it just ends up likely being unsuccessful for you and something of a disservice to the people who want family pictures for Christmas regardless of pricing being so low. It's going to take a lot more practice and learning - just you and your camera - before doing portraits.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 22, 2016)

If we fix the images, what happens to the fee?


----------



## SCraig (Nov 22, 2016)

Don't shoot toward the sun to eliminate flare.  Learn to use fill flash to help with the exposures.

Don't take on "Shoots" for others until you can produce professional results under any conditions.  It is a disservice to them and gives you a bad reputation.

That last shot will likely be difficult to salvage.  It is already noisy and bringing up the foreground will just make that worse.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

You guys are a tough crowd.
So I posted some photos I took of a newborn session that I did for free for a neighbor a few weeks back and received criticism for not charging. The alternative, best I could tell, was to charge a very small fee for a shoot ($25 for a 45-minute session with all images provided with print release). If this is not the correct way to go about it either, I'm not sure what is. I'm sure the absolute best thing to do would be to shoot friends and family for practice, but I live in a very rural area and honestly do not have close friends or family nearby.
Having said all of that, please understand these are not the only images and not all images turned out like this. By the standards of this forum, I'm sure my other photos are also terrible. But I made it very clear to those who wanted to participate that I was an amateur. If, at the end of the editing process, I am not happy with the images, they will still be provided to the clients, and the checks I was written will be destroyed, and the cash returned. That's how I do business. That's how I will always do business. 
However, I do appreciate the constructive feedback (e.g. not shooting into the sun) and on my next round of photos will take that note. I've also ordered a lens hood that, I have read (although, according to this forum, nothing I read is ever accurate), will help reduce lens flare.
I am here to improve. That's why I post photos that I know are not good. I'm asking for help. I am a fair person. The business side of things I have under control. I think people can respect me as a potential one-day professional photographer a lot more if they know that I was fair when I was a beginner. I hope you all can take a moment and remember when you were in the same boat, as no one is born a professional. 
Any further helpful insight, especially in regards to how I may be able to eliminate the lens flare that is in the existing photos through post-processing, would be very much appreciated.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

vintagesnaps said:


> The exposures are way off. It looks like your camera's meter was reading the light coming from the background. I think that's more challenging to try to have a subject in front of a brighter background (and i have yet to figure out where/how people are 'learning' to do that).



Do you have any suggestions for having my camera's meter not read the light coming from the background? Or working in this light? As I mentioned in my post, I knew this was not a desirable setting, but the location had limited lighting options. I was hoping I could correct this in post-processing.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

fmw said:


> You want to expose for the subjects, not the background.  Your images are all underexposed.  You should be able to bring up the brightness in the software.  Get the faces right and let the rest go wherever it wants to go.



Thank you. This is very helpful. Tips for exposing the subjects and not the background?


----------



## zombiesniper (Nov 22, 2016)

311Photo said:


> Thank you. This is very helpful. Tips for exposing the subjects and not the background?



There are a couple of ways.
 You could use a centre wighted average for metering or take a shot and see that the people are under exposed then adjust as required.


----------



## KmH (Nov 22, 2016)

Spot meter your subjects to expose them properly.
But then the background will be way over exposed.

To shoot heavily backlit subjects _you have to add light from in front_ to balance the 2 extremes of exposure.
Ideally the subjects would be a little brighter than the background. A visual art truism is that "Light advances, dark recedes".
Using flash gives you more control than using a reflector or reflectors.

Using flash we control the flash exposure with the flash unit power setting and the lens aperture, while controlling the ambient light exposure with the shutter speed. Doing that is known as dragging the shutter.

If the background isn't really bright, to keep enough shutter speed you may need to use Canon's High Speed Sync (HSS) but would need flash units and a Canon DSLR that are HSS capable.

Basically you have the cart in front of the horse in that you don't yet have sufficient technical knowledge and skill to do what you're trying to do.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

KmH said:


> Basically you have the cart in front of the horse in that you don't yet have sufficient technical knowledge and skill to do what you're trying to do.



I understand. I have committed to several other families at this time, and if I end up doing every one of those sessions in essence for free, I would be fine with that, calling it experience under my belt.
Aside from that, what do you suggest to increase my technical knowledge and skill?


----------



## KmH (Nov 22, 2016)

Digital Photography Tutorials
Strobist: Lighting 101

Direction & Quality of Light: Your Key to Better Portrait Photography Anywhere
Off-Camera Flash: Techniques for Digital Photographers
On-Camera Flash: Techniques for Digital Wedding and Portrait Photography

Speedliter's Handbook: Learning to Craft Light with Canon Speedlites (2nd Edition)
Lighting for Digital Photography: From Snapshots to Great Shots (Using Flash and Natural Light for Portrait, Still Life, Action, and Product Photography)

Minimalist Lighting: Professional Techniques for Location Photography
Photographic Lighting Equipment: A Comprehensive Guide for Digital Photographers


----------



## Derrel (Nov 22, 2016)

SCraig said:


> Don't shoot toward the sun to eliminate flare.  Learn to use fill flash to help with the exposures.
> 
> Don't take on "Shoots" for others until you can produce professional results under any conditions.  It is a disservice to them and gives you a bad reputation.
> 
> That last shot will likely be difficult to salvage.  It is already noisy and bringing up the foreground will just make that worse.





KmH said:


> Spot meter your subjects to expose them properly.
> But then the background will be way over exposed.
> 
> To shoot heavily backlit subjects _you have to add light from in front_ to balance the 2 extremes of exposure.
> ...



Lot of great, free, on-the-nose advice there. Some of these look tricky to salvage friom a technical standpoint, but luckily, the subjects in family photos tend to evaluate the shots NOT on tchnical strength, but on expression of loved ones, so even technically-challenged shots are often met with acceptance, especially if loed ones look even halfway nice, friendly, or have good emotion. "Emotion" might be a half-smile from a stern or dout person, or a big laugh from an normally quiet person, etc..


----------



## SquarePeg (Nov 22, 2016)

Since you have already committed to more families in the immediate future and there is really so much still to learn, I think you would be better served to find a location that is not quite so challenging.  That background is going to give you trouble if you are shooting on a sunny day.  Look for somewhere that you can be in full but open shade.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

KmH said:


> Digital Photography Tutorials
> Strobist: Lighting 101
> 
> Direction & Quality of Light: Your Key to Better Portrait Photography Anywhere
> ...



Thank you so much. I really appreciate this!!


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

SquarePeg said:


> Since you have already committed to more families in the immediate future and there is really so much still to learn, I think you would be better served to find a location that is not quite so challenging.  That background is going to give you trouble if you are shooting on a sunny day.  Look for somewhere that you can be in full but open shade.



Will do!


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

Derrel said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> > Don't shoot toward the sun to eliminate flare.  Learn to use fill flash to help with the exposures.
> ...





Derrel said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> > Don't shoot toward the sun to eliminate flare.  Learn to use fill flash to help with the exposures.
> ...



You're absolutely right.
The people who have "booked" with me, have made it clear that they had not had photos taken in a long time, if ever, could not afford regularly-priced photographers and otherwise would not be getting photos this year, etc. I don't feel like they're looking for quite the technical composition that most on this site are capable of nor do they have the eye that even I, as inexperienced as I am, have. Not that I don't want to get there and still provide them with quality well beyond their expectations. And make the appropriate amends if I cannot do that. But I have not "tricked" anyone into a session with me. All who have booked have viewed my work that I have available on my Facebook page and have exhibited a tremendous amount of gratefulness. I'm aware I'm a bit beyond my skill set here, but I have appreciative neighbors and I'm able to get experience, so it's not the disservice that people here are alluding to. And if anyone is just super unhappy and had Christmas card photos in mind, there is still of time to get photos for Christmas cards.
Anyway, I don't intend to get on a rant or defend myself. I try to take criticism with thick skin and get the most out of it, and I'm appreciative of everyone who takes the time to comment. Especially those who offer truly informative and useful information.


----------



## SquarePeg (Nov 22, 2016)

Are the photos you posted for salvaging representative of your usual work or did  you only post the ones that you needed help saving?  Please take this in the kind way that it's intended - I don't think any of those should be something you would charge someone for - especially a friend or a neighbor.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

SquarePeg said:


> Are the photos you posted for salvaging representative of your usual work or did  you only post the ones that you needed help saving?  Please take this in the kind way that it's intended - I don't think any of those should be something you would charge someone for - especially a friend or a neighbor.



I absolutely agree with you. Those are the worst shots out of the ones I took. I was just hoping they could be salvaged. Those are not representative of my usual work. I intentionally posted the worst ones for two reasons: 1) to illustrate the issue I needed correcting very clearly and 2) wanting to make overall improvements on my worst shots so that even my worst are not so bad.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

These are some others I took the same day. As I said, I'm sure by the standards of those on this forum, these are not good either. But I think $25 is reasonable for 15 +/- these types of shots. Of course, I'm willing to also accept critiques on these and any feedback on whether or not that is indeed reasonable. 
I'm most disappointed by the fact that the shots that were "Christmas-themed" did not turn out as I'd like and I'm not sure if they can be salvaged. If that's the case, even with several of these types of photos, I still would not charge, as it was set up to be a Christmas mini.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 22, 2016)

Look for good lighting conditions. Think about how much light hits the eyes, but does not cause squinting. Try for good expressions. Your work will get better if you keep trying to refine your craft. Get some books from the library--even older books, from the pre-digital era. The soft skills, the working with people, posing, expression, direction of the people...all of that stuff will trump the hard skills of f/stop and shutter and focus. Work on the soft skills of photographing families. Within a few months, you will be better.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 22, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Look for good lighting conditions. Think about how much light hits the eyes, but does not cause squinting. Try for good expressions. Your work will get better if you keep trying to refine your craft. Get some books from the library--even older books, from the pre-digital era. The soft skills, the working with people, posing, expression, direction of the people...all of that stuff will trump the hard skills of f/stop and shutter and focus. Work on the soft skills of photographing families. Within a few months, you will be better.



Thank you so much, Derrel! I absolutely will take your advice. I know it takes time, hard work, and dedication. 
It's nice to finally get an encouraging comment on here!!


----------



## chuasam (Nov 22, 2016)

oh dear...I hope you didn't charge very much. The framing is not ideal, the exposure is off and the background is...not pretty


----------



## photo1x1.com (Nov 23, 2016)

Hi, people have already commented on many aspects of your first images and I felt they are spot on. The second images look way better, I´ve also checked your facebook page.
Anyway, here´s my 2c:

Did you shoot those images in RAW? You can definitely not save those jpg files.

There is nothing wrong with sunflare these days, but your sun is too high up to create a really nice backlight shot. You have to wait until it is very low. Then you use spot metering at the peoples face as others have suggested, and find something that will bounce your light - doesn´t have to be a reflector, in the example below I had a wall and the rather bright tiles of the floor. I had a reflector with me, but didn´t even have to use it.


 

Most of your images are shot with a rather wide focal length (21mm), while portraits are usually shot at much longer focal lengths, starting at 50mm Minimum (which is a rather modern length, but 85mm-135mm being the standard for portraits).
Longer focal length would blur the background more and that will reduce the distracting effect. However, keep in mind that the reduced depth of field (the area of focus seen from front to back) will make it more difficult for group portraits to have people in the foreground and in the background sharp, like in your first image. Aligning people in three layers like that for portraits with less than 15 or so people is rather risky, even though it is more natural and creative.

Your images have a lot of what is called chromatic aberration - you can usually easily fix that in lightroom.
Try to get a little more creative with your christmas decoration. For me it rather distracts than adds to the image. It is difficult to do that in this environment. You could go further into the woods in the background though to have a more christmassy feeling 

The little girl image on your facebook page needs a little cropping btw. Her left hand (from her point of view) is cropped, so you´ better crop it much closer on the other side too.
I wouldn´t have had the young man standing in the first image - he looks like a superhuman.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

photo1x1.com said:


> Hi, people have already commented on many aspects of your first images and I felt they are spot on. The second images look way better, I´ve also checked your facebook page.
> Anyway, here´s my 2c:
> 
> Did you shoot those images in RAW? You can definitely not save those jpg files.
> ...


This is all tremendously helpful. Thank you! I appreciate your taking the time to look at the other images and provide such detailed feedback.

The images were shot in RAW but I honestly don't know what to do with them beyond that, if that makes sense. I learned from another post here to shoot in RAW but I haven't entirely figured out why exactly. How should I save if shooting in RAW? 

The photo you posted is beautiful. I have also read that sun flare is a desired look but not in the way I captured it. I did have a white poster board for a makeshift reflector, but it didn't do anything at all (obviously). I'm sure I was not using it properly. High wind and shooting by myself made it a little difficult. I need to break down and get a reflector. Thank you for posting a shot so similar to what I was trying to achieve. 

On the focal length that you mentioned, is this something that can be achieved in the 13-55mm lens I have, or will I need a new lens for this? 

And superhuman was not what I was going for! Posing and angles is (obviously) something I'm very much still learning (well, along with everything else). But I did notice that once I began post-production. Live and learn. I actually learned a lot about posing just from looking at the photos I took. 

This is super helpful. Again, thank you so much for your time. I come here to get feedback and learn from people like yourself. 
I'm going to further research all of this, and I hope you can see marked improvement and evidence of my taking your advice in the next set. 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## photo1x1.com (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> photo1x1.com said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, people have already commented on many aspects of your first images and I felt they are spot on. The second images look way better, I´ve also checked your facebook page.
> ...



Glad I could help.
when shooting in RAW you need to use a software to make adjustments - like lighten shadows, reduce highlights, adjust saturation, white balance, etc. etc. For example with lightroom you have a lot of options to even make local adjustments like lowering the brightness of the background only, etc. etc. A RAW file has so much more information that you can work on the file, without introducing too much noise or damage it otherwise.
You probably didn´t know that if you open a jpg, edit it, and save it again, you continuously add compression artifakts and the file gets worse and worse and worse. There are many tutorials out there on lightroom, or on other software. Just walk your way through - it is absolutely worth the time you invest into it.
When I use sunflare as in the image posted, I usually don´ shoot before the sun is maximum 1 hour before sunset or 1 hour after sunrise (the image above was sunrise btw.). It is much darker then and you can much more easily fill the shadows.
A reflector isn´t necessarily better than a white poster board. And I bet it did brighten up your shots. Do a comparison with and without next time - bring it as close to the people as possible without letting it enter the frame. Also it usually has to be on the opposite side of your light source. Comparison and trial and error are two of the most important factors of learning photography. I´d try it out with friends first though .
Regarding the focal length: use 55mm to begin with, and the largest aperture (I guess that´s 5.6) you can select with your lens. Compare that with another shot, taken at around 21mm - just as you did before and see the difference. There is always and excuse for getting new lenses  but first of all work with what you have to understand what you would like to improve. Otherwise you wouldn´t know what lens you really want.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

photo1x1.com said:


> Try to get a little more creative with your christmas decoration. For me it rather distracts than adds to the image. It is difficult to do that in this environment. You could go further into the woods in the background though to have a more christmassy feeling



Are the decorations that I have even necessary. I thought about, for next time, just using a blanket and the banner (not pictured) that says "Merry Christmas" that I have. I agree that the decor I have is more distracting than anything. Can you do a "Christmas session" with no Christmas "stuff"?? Not having all of that laid out would make me much more flexible to move around as the sun moves and play with different areas.

I actual did take several "test" shots before anyone came out and had my camera settings correct (I thought), but the addition of people and the constant movement of the sun made it so that that just did not work out.


----------



## chuasam (Nov 23, 2016)

Picture Perfect Lighting: An Innovative Lighting System for Photographing People: Roberto Valenzuela: 9781937538750: Amazon.com: Books this would be a great book to get and study


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

chuasam said:


> Picture Perfect Lighting: An Innovative Lighting System for Photographing People: Roberto Valenzuela: 9781937538750: Amazon.com: Books this would be a great book to get and study


Thank you, I appreciate that! 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## Designer (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> I understand. I have committed to several other families at this time, and if I end up doing every one of those sessions in essence for free, I would be fine with that, calling it experience under my belt.
> Aside from that, what do you suggest to increase my technical knowledge and skill?


Read a lot.  Practice what you've read.  Look at examples of good photography.  Learn the basics at the very least.

There are many would-be professional photographers who don't have as many subjects waiting for portraiture as you've got.  While some start-ups may consider that a blessing, what you're doing is essentially wasting people's time, and establishing a reputation for your being a not-very-good photographer.  

Yes, I know you've told them, and they are not expecting professional results, but frankly, the examples you posted are so bad that I would not be at all surprised if none of your present families will come back.  If they do come back, you'd better be able to do much better.


----------



## fmw (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> > You want to expose for the subjects, not the background.  Your images are all underexposed.  You should be able to bring up the brightness in the software.  Get the faces right and let the rest go wherever it wants to go.
> ...



There are plenty of articles and books about photographic exposure.  No need for me to repeat the techniques.  Perhaps you have a library in your area that can help.  Personally, I like having a blown out back ground.  I wouldn't have used fill flash.  I would just have exposed for the subjects.  A properly exposed background would just be a distraction.  You did fine other than underexposing the subjects.

I don't think you are ready to charge people money for your photography.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

Designer said:


> 311Photo said:
> 
> 
> > I understand. I have committed to several other families at this time, and if I end up doing every one of those sessions in essence for free, I would be fine with that, calling it experience under my belt.
> ...


Are basing this statement on the three photos in the main post? Because that is a bold statement to make based on my three worst photos from three sessions. I feel like everyone has bad shots they would like to salvage. Maybe I'm wrong. 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

fmw said:


> 311Photo said:
> 
> 
> > fmw said:
> ...


Likewise, this is a bold statement to make based on my three worst photos. I've not asked for opinions on my business endeavors but on how to correct the three worst images I shot. 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## Designer (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> Are basing this statement on the three photos in the main post? Because that is a bold statement to make based on my three worst photos from three sessions. I feel like everyone has bad shots they would like to salvage. Maybe I'm wrong.


Oh, sorry if I've misread your intent.  Just trying to help.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

Designer said:


> 311Photo said:
> 
> 
> > Are basing this statement on the three photos in the main post? Because that is a bold statement to make based on my three worst photos from three sessions. I feel like everyone has bad shots they would like to salvage. Maybe I'm wrong.
> ...


I apologize and appreciate your help. It is hard to determine one's "heart" on the Internet and how they intend what they say. It is just that nearly every person who has commented has made their primary statement that I should not be charging, when I posted only three of my worst photos for help, not criticism. If I determine that I cannot get $25 worth out of the images I took, I will reimburse each client's payment. I did not post all of that because I didn't think I needed to just to get some help on a few images. I have another session at 4 and am completely discouraged based on this forum. 
In any case. I do appreciate the feedback and the help that has been offered. I just need thicker skin for this. 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > 311Photo said:
> ...


Hey, don't be discouraged though I know it's is easy to be. You have been totally honest with people and that is what is important and I'm sure you have a few images that people will be pleased with. Like you said you've posted your worst on here. I'm quite new to photography and have found Mark Wallace's 'one on one photography' free tutorials on you tube really helpful, he has an episode on metering too. I feel like I have learned quite a bit from him. He made the exposure triangle really click for me in understanding how changing one thing affects another. When I first started a few months ago I took some shots of my daughter in the back garden when it happened to be dusk and the photos came out so nice, it really is a good time to take pictures, other wise on a sunny day I would head for shade. Good luck with your next photoshoot!


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

I've just seen your other images, they are loads better and the subjects look relaxed with genuine expressions. It would be nice to have a bit of bokeh so the attention is more on the subjects or framing them under the bow of a tree or something. Maybe you could try mistletoe if you haven't as that would be a simple, fun and easy Christmas prop that totally tells you it's Christmas and it would hopefully catch a nice connection between a couple.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think you are ready to charge people money for your photography.
> ...



No, he is saying this because it is very clear that you really don't know much about any part of photography.
While you are willing to learn, what you are getting are not 'tips' but hints of the basic knowledge that you should have - and don't.
What you are doing essentially is pressing the shutter button and letting the camera do its work and you don't seem to have much, if any, knowledge beyond that.
Your 'best shots' are being done by the camera and you have no clue how to do anything when the camera isn't smart enough to compensate for non-ideal conditions.


----------



## Designer (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> (again, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated).


Let's see if we can get a new start.

#1 Pose your subjects facing the light.  Pose your subjects more evenly. Don't let someone's face be hidden by someone else.  Ask the standing man to sit or kneel.  Frame to eliminate extra stuff in the frame.

#2 Pose your subjects facing the light.  Frame to eliminate extra stuff in the frame.

#3 Pose your subjects facing the light.  Pose your subjects more evenly. Frame to eliminate extra stuff in the frame.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

This is the part I don't understand. I keep reading this but then read don't do that because the light will be too harsh and cause squinting. 
Are we really starting over because I feel like that post was teeming with sarcasm?

And I don't at all feel like I know nothing about photography and am getting lucky. I have learned a great deal about lighting and exposure, and I'm sorry you do not feel my images reflect that. I would never say I don't still have a lot to learn. However, if that were the case (that I'm merely holding a camera and hoping to get lucky), that's why I'm here - in the beginner section of the forum. 
Is this merely the section for professionals to degrade beginners? I was hoping to find mentors with a sincere interest in helping. 
No one has answered my question yet - whether or not these images can be salvaged. But that is fine. I will call them a loss. I feel confident I am building a portfolio as a beginner, charging a fair price, setting clear expectations for my clients. If you don't agree with the way I do business or feel that because I cannot produce images as a beginner that are of caliber that many of you are as professionals and that bothers you, that is your prerogative. 
I will not explain nor defend my method of charging money for my work again. 
Again, much of what has been shared here has been so beneficial, and I used what I have learned in my most recent session this evening. Are there still some bad ones I'd like help with? Absolutely. Will I be posting them here? I absolutely not. 




Designer said:


> 311Photo said:
> 
> 
> > (again, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated).
> ...




Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## zombiesniper (Nov 23, 2016)

I think you received the best natural lighting advice from Darrel in your other thread. Another thing that can aid in lighting the subject is a reflector to bounce the light awards the subject. Reflectors are cheap or free if you have one of those car windshield reflectors.


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

zombiesniper said:


> I think you received the best natural lighting advice from Darrel in your other thread. Another thing that can aid in lighting the subject is a reflector to bounce the light awards the subject. Reflectors are cheap or free if you have one of those car windshield reflectors.


I agree. 
I have a white poster board that I'm currently using as a reflector but the problem is that I shoot alone and wind has been heavy lately since I can't prop it up against anything. This has been my biggest reservation in getting anything more or even really trying to use reflector. Advice on this? 

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## tirediron (Nov 23, 2016)

311Photo said:


> I have a white poster board that I'm currently using as a reflector but the problem is that I shoot alone and wind has been heavy lately since I can't prop it up against anything. This has been my biggest reservation in getting anything more or even really trying to use reflector. Advice on this?


Yes.  Get the proper equipment to do the job.  A very common misconception is that shooting with ambient light only is easier and/or produces better results than using supplemental strobed light.  This is patently untrue.  The problem with only using sunlight is that you can't control it.  The sun makes a decent main light (usually), but only in certain circumstances is going to produce acceptable, never mind good results, without some help.

A couple of inexpensive monolights, umbrellas, stands and triggers will take  your lighting into a whole new area.  You can keep hitting your head against a wall and trying to do this without the right tools, and, occasionally getting lucky, or you can get the right tools and learn how to do it correctly.

FWIW, facing your subjects into the light will often cause unattractive squinting.  Is that better than under-exposure?  Hard to say...


----------



## Derrel (Nov 23, 2016)

I pulled the images into Lightroom tonight. First off, image 3656.JPG appears to me to have been hurt by "Portrait Sharpening" in Lightroom; this is recongnizable by the reticulated faces (see the father's face and forehead for what I mean by reticulated)...this is very difficult to work with when trying to salvage a file. If you want to salvage these, there are professional retouchers who will clean your *camera-ORIGINAL* images up, for $4 to $10, per file.

I decided to process these all using a Warm & Fuzzy, heavily filtered look, to camouflage the bad lens flare on two, and the poor sharpening that had been applied.

If you want somebody to salvage these, give them the camera-original images, and they can do the best work on those. The shot of the kids has terrible chromatic aberration in it, from a very poor lens. As mentioned, two have atrocious lens flare artifacts...again....lens quality when shot toward the light is very poor. This lens needs a BIG lens shade, or simply to be swapped out a more flare-resistant lens when shooting contre-jour like this.

Here's my quick savage attempt on the man and wife shot, using the Warm & Fuzzy basic starting point, from *already-edited images*, which is always a poor place to start. The others are too large to upload here. AGAIN...if you need to salvage these, the salvage work MUST be done on _straight from the camera_ images; the ones you provided are badly down-sized, and have bad sharpening artifcats and blockiness...


----------



## Derrel (Nov 23, 2016)

If you sent the above file to print, it would look better than it appears on-screen. Again--avoid Lightroom's "Portrait Sharpening". You need a much better lens in order to shoot these types of shots, or a massive lens shade, or a person holding a clipboard or hat well in front of the lens: see that horrific circle on the husband, from internal lens elements reflections? This is a bad lens.


IMAGE 3656 is at    Dropbox - IMG_3656_Warm&Fuzzy.JPG

Image 4222 standard is at  Dropbox - IMG_4222_1904x.JPG

IMG_4222 Warm&Fuzzy is at Dropbox - IMG_4222_Warm&Fuzzy.JPG

4233 standard at   Dropbox - IMG_4233_1904x.JPG

4233 Warm&Fuzzy is at   Dropbox - IMG_4233_Warm&Fuzzy.JPG


----------



## dennybeall (Nov 23, 2016)

You commented about adding a lens shade. That just helps eliminate light coming from an angle not behind the subject. It's even more important to help protect the front of the lens from bumps!!!


----------



## 311Photo (Nov 23, 2016)

Derrel said:


> If you sent the above file to print, it would look better than it appears on-screen. Again--avoid Lightroom's "Portrait Sharpening". You need a much better lens in order to shoot these types of shots, or a massive lens shade, or a person holding a clipboard or hat well in front of the lens: see that horrific circle on the husband, from internal lens elements reflections? This is a bad lens.
> 
> 
> IMAGE 3656 is at    Dropbox - IMG_3656_Warm&Fuzzy.JPG
> ...


What exactly is meant by a "bad lens"? Bad for this application or bad period? If the former, what is ideal for this application? 
I am more than willing to get the appropriate equipment but I want to be careful not to get unnecessary equipment. 
One person says I have everything I need and another and just lack skill and another says I'm working with a lack of resources. Gees, this is a confusing field. I imagine it's a mixture of both. But before I go buy a ton of stuff, I want to make sure it's the right things. 
I apologize for not providing raw, unedited images. The images I posted had already been played with some, indeed, before I decided I needed help. 


311Photo said:


> zombiesniper said:
> 
> 
> > I think you received the best natural lighting advice from Darrel in your other thread. Another thing that can aid in lighting the subject is a reflector to bounce the light awards the subject. Reflectors are cheap or free if you have one of those car windshield reflectors.
> ...




Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Nov 23, 2016)

Bad lens, as in Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5~5.6: each shot has a massive flare in it. This lens shoots very poorly toward the sun, and at the wide-angle end, such as at 21mm in the shot of the kids, it has a lot of chromatic aberration in the images it shoots. This is a very low-cost "kit zoom" that cannot be shot "*against the light*" without high risk of flare. This is an issue with many zoom lenses: poor ability to shoot 'against the light' as most say.

Do you have a lack of resources? Yes, and no. For example, a really GOOD lens, like say a 35mm prime lens, with its own dedicated lens shade, could have shot these images, and not given that big flare spot, and could have created much higher image quality. The tiny little lens shade that comes with am 18-55mm kit zoom is sort of an afterthought, a marketing ploy. The hood is NOT optimal for all focal length settings; one,single hood can, in fact, NEVER be able to provide optimal shade from the sun; that is where single focal length lenses, and LONG, full-shading lens hoods come into play. To optimally make the 18-55 kit zoom work its best in this type of tough situaton, you need *a lens shade solution that WORKS*; meaning, something like an assistant with a clipboard or piece of black-painted cardboard throwing literally,* a shadow*, onto the front element of the lens. Or a compendium lens shade.

You know the orange-eared shot of the boy, in the other thread? That same strong sunlight, when it strikes the front element of a zoom lens, either directly, or at a glancing angle, can cause lens flare, or ghosting; your 18-55 lens created one, or two BIG, round flares. Not tiny, hard-to-see,little flare spots, but BIG flare spots. That's what I meant by bad lens....and it has terrific levels of chromatic aberration (_color fringing_ is another common name for this optical defect) at the short end of its zoom range: this is VERY common with 18-55 lenses that cost $99. But-this is the issue: a photographer MUST be aware of lens flare, at all times. Lens flare is the ditch for the driver. The gopher hole to the pastured horse. The sniper to the common soldier.

Reflector, reflector stand or grip solution; ancillary lighting gear (flash units), lighting modifiers...these are lacking to some degree. Even one, single, medium-power speedlight flash could have made these family sessions better, by far, by creating better lighting in the field. Photography is a big, broad field, and there are a lot of things for you to learn. You really do not have the knowledge or ewuipment needed to make this "easy"; you're at a place right now with low-cost equipment, and NOT much of it, and not a lot of knowledge about the skills needed to shoot for money and not have the possibility for big errors to creep in. The first thing would be gaining knowledge. I'd suggest book-learning, or some of the links KMH has provided. AND, this is the thing...if you qant to be able to shoot toward the sun, or to shoot in strongly back-lighted situations, you need to get a lens that performs better than the 18-55 does, and that lens needs a fully-working lens shade on it, and an optical design that RESISTS sun-flaring to a high degree.

I do not want to discourage you. And neither do the majority of posters here. But there are a lot of things you need to learn how to do; theory, and practice, and also, equipment that many other people have, and use, for similar photo sessions. I started taking photos in 1975. There is plenty to learn. You can learn rapidly, or slowly.


----------



## Dave442 (Nov 23, 2016)

Your initial images with the lens flare are ones that I would not try to salvage. These are sort of like those extra shots or just trying something out after you already have some other shots that you know are good. You had mentioned that you had taken some initial shots and they were good before the people were added. I expect in those initial shots that the area in the shade was still very dark, and you were putting the people in that shaded area so that is what you had to expose for.

I often have this issue with a light background as I am near the beach and people always want their photo with the beach and a bright blue sky in the background. Generally the choice is to add some fill lighting or just blow out the background when you give correct exposure to the face. And then you move the subject and yourself around so you have a darker background and those are usually the better shots in the end. 

When you do the photo session you are the one controlling where the people are and where you are so just make it easy for the camera and don't try and push the limits on what it can do.  

I suggest you do your next photo session and post a couple of your favorite shots from that.  Do that over the next year and you will be able to see what you have accomplished.


----------



## fmw (Nov 24, 2016)

311Photo said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> > 311Photo said:
> ...



I wouldn't call it bold but rather obvious.  I'm not criticizing your interest in photography.  I'm not criticizing your desire to earn from it.  I'm just suggesting that this too early in the journey to be charging people.  Perhaps you should be paying your models to sit for your portraits as you figure out what you are doing wrong.

When you post in a public forum you open up things that may go beyond what you asked.  It is the nature of the beast and it is true of any public forum.  I promise to stop offering opinions to you.  You don't like what you read.  I'll save the effort and try to help people that are open to feedback.


----------



## Peeb (Nov 24, 2016)

311Photo said:


> You guys are a tough crowd...


I learned early on that if you want folks to post comments like: "Wow, that's awesome" or "So sweet!", you should post to facebook, not here.

Some of our most helpful poster here will be ... blunt.  Having read this thread all the way thru, you seem to be thickening your skin (good) and listening (great). 

Best of luck in pursuing your passion.  This is a great resource towards that goal if you'll check your ego at the door and absorb some knowledge.


----------



## Designer (Nov 24, 2016)

311Photo said:


> This is the part I don't understand. I keep reading this but then read don't do that because the light will be too harsh and cause squinting.
> Are we really starting over because I feel like that post was teeming with sarcasm?


You don't know me, but I'll tell you this; sarcasm doesn't work on the internet.  My post (and all of my posts) are intended to offer HELPFUL criticism.  

We seem to remember that the earliest "helpful hints" for a photographer using his new Kodak Brownie camera a hundred years ago was to keep the sun at your back.  This did two things; 1.) it usually got the subjects facing the sun (to light up their faces) and 2.) it would keep the sunlight from entering your lens (which causes the lens flare that you see).

There are other tricks to keep your subjects from squinting from sunlight, but they are beyond the scope of this post.

By learning the most basic of the basics, you will probably get better photographs than the three you posted here, and then as you learn and progress, you keep getting better.  There is nothing magic about photography, it's just learning a skill and then applying that skill in an artistic way.  

Your camera is not a magic box.  It's actually as dumb as your computer.  You have to know how it works, what it can do, what it cannot do, and know how to make it do what you want it to.

As for "fixing" the three photographs, Derrel has indicated that it won't be easy, and they might never be "good".  This is why I offered the helpful hints that I did; to help you get better shots next time.  

Good luck, and keep shooting!


----------



## Raymielke (Nov 30, 2016)

Wow, after reading through theses posts its easy to see there's lots to be appreciated by everyone. I'm an advanced amateur so you can take what I have to say and use it however you want, but here goes. 

Can these images be salvaged? Probably to some degree but they will never be great. First, start over with the originals and work with the basic RAW files to allow the software to do its best work. All RAW files need the basic adjustments but once those are better understood you can then move into other software adjustments with skin, blemish and color correction with layers. You need to know how to do these beginner adjustments if you are ever going to attempt to fix anything.

Don't get me wrong here. You can do a lot with post processing but you're not going to be able to accomplish this before your Christmas deadlines. Its takes time to learn LR and PS so my advice is to let these go until after the holidays when you'll have more time to play around, or find a mentor in your area that will do the work for you, while you watch. Right now I think you would be better served by not reproducing that type of image on your next outing. 

As for the relatively harsh posts about your level of understanding, they are probably right but they offer little corrective benefit. My impression is that you are trying to take portraits in a less than ideal environment, something that takes experience, with equipment that is made for beginners, with an understanding of your equipment and photography that matches your equipment. Harsh, yes, but this is what I am gathering from reading through everything. There's a lot to be learned from all that has been said and I want you to print out everything that was posted, file it away and some time in the future pull it out and re-read everything and see if your perspective has changed. I think you'll see things a little more clearly as to where some of these posts are coming from. 

Now for some CC that might help you. First off, make sure that regardless of what kind of equipment you hold in your hands, you know how to use, and for what purpose, every single button that's on your camera. If you don't, there's no point of ever thinking about better equipment!

Secondly, I think you need to be more restrictive and less challenging in your shooting local. Find an area that is evenly shaded without a distracting background, unless you want the background included. My advice, for most portraits, the background should be minimized unless it adds to a story somehow. Study composure and learn how to shorten your depth of field. As to why you think you can shoot better in full sun, I'm at a loss for agreeing with you. You obviously need light entering your lens but having it bounce around doesn't add much to the image but trouble, and harsh shadows offer about the same benefits when it comes of most portraits. 

So, I think you need to better understand lighting and how your camera reads and responds to it. You need this understanding before ever thinking about more gear like reflectors. When its time, you still won't need a lot of expensive gear but you should look into a flash that can be used off camera and learn the difference between soft and hard light. Check out the recommendations made on prior posts and use your access to the web to watch video after video on this. As to future shots like those posted, make sure you are metering your subjects, not the entire environment. Your manual is a good place to start to understand this. You'll soon learn how to lock an exposure and recompose. I also believe that with the little I've seen of your work, you would benefit from more of a woman's touch to be a bit more creative with the posing and composition but a man can tell you how to pose small groups or turn someone's body as well as a female. 

Next, your equipment. The T2i with the kit 18-55 can do a lot but I think it would be pretty accurate to say that it wouldn't be a pro's first choice. If you are serious about pursuing photography, save a couple hundred bucks as fast as you can and upgrade. New to you can be someone's spare backup. Shop for a used body a few years old and then add the best medium length lens you can afford. Nothing wrong with either a medium length zoom or prime but do a little study about the benefits/restrictions of each. But remember that bodies get cheap and the lenses you keep! With your lens you are pretty much limited to one focal length, fully extended so if that's where you want to be, go find a used f/1.8 nifty fifty. 

Get a flash! I personally would not recommend a new one unless you go with something other than a major brand for no other reason than the price. Good used brand named flashes are out there but for the price of a used Canon flash you can get a better new off-brand for less money. Buy the best you can afford because if you don't, you'll soon wish you did. 

Also, right now you don't need umbrellas or soft boxes. Nice to have but I don't think they are where you need to be right now. But you do need to get the flash off camera and you do need to diffuse the light somehow. Videos will show you how to do this. 

And lastly, please don't let the straight forward comments posted here get all the way under your skin, part way is good enough. It takes a lot of time and practice to learn to take good photos if you are trying to do it without guidance, as it appears you are tying to do. And its a lot easier to fix a good photo than it is to fix a bad one. So keep learning, keep reading, keep watching, and start analyzing and constructing your own images and deconstructing those of others.

I'm not sure where you are with your understanding of all photography factors and you most certainly will not pick it up in an afternoon or two, but I can see that you are jumping in head first. I hope my offerings are anything but new for you but I'm pretty sure there will be a lot of challenges, a lot of learning, and a lot of time spent looking for answers. It doesn't have to cost you much but you need to keep going, or you'll grow moss! Good luck to you.  

A mentor would be a great place to start!

Ray


----------

