# How would you edit this photo?



## dearlybeloved

First of all, *I am allowing you to edit this photo.*

Here's my first edit, but I'm interested in seeing if anyone would like to take a stab at it. The original .NEF fill can be downloaded below.

Thanks!




https://www.box.com/s/71usu20q1ikf8dsjj9q5


----------



## Derrel

I just downloaded the .JPG file, and made only two adjustments: an exposure adjustment of 1.45 f/stops, and a recovery adjustment of 45 points. That's all. I think if one wanted to make it most-appealing, one would clone in some fake catchlights in her eyes, which look a bit...odd....to me at least.


----------



## dearlybeloved

I don't understand what you mean by recovery adjustments of 45 points. Could you elaborate a little bit for future reference?


----------



## KmH

Camera Raw/Develop module (ACR) using PV 2003/2010 has a Recovery slider that recovers details (if any) in the highlights.
Make color and tonal adjustments in Camera Raw
When Derrel added 1.45 EV of exposure, the highlights in the image likely maxed out (no detail) and hence the use of Recovery.
The sliders in PV 2012 were updated, and the Recovery slider was eliminated.


----------



## Derrel

Yes, KmH is showing the "recovery" feature's slider control. Nice screen caps, Keith!@!@ Directly above the big red arrow he drew, is the exposure control, which is where I added the 1.45 EV "plus" exposure. This AM, I came back to the thread, downloaded the NEF, and opened it, and did a very simple conversion and added Matt's Edge Darkening #1 to the shot, added about 1.35 EV of exposure, and recovery of 42 points. Looked okay to me. I DID see however that the ORIGINAL .NEF file had catchlights in her eyes!!! To me, that was the single most-critical problem with the JPEG you put up yesterday--the missing catchlights in her eyes!!!

Here is the conversion I made this AM. I hope you enjoy that fine new camera! The large-sized,revised image is located at this URL: D800 sample revised.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com


----------



## KmH

A quick and dirty edit - crop away background distractions, addressed severe under exposure, selected the background, refined the selection edge, and added a neutral density gradient from the top to the bottom of the image.


----------



## HL45

I took a couple stabs at it.......

Used some presets on this one LR4





Used sliders on this one





She has a nice smile! Wish my teeth looked that nice lol


----------



## lonerunner

Here's my edit in lightroom, i raised a bit contrast and exposure, crop and rotate, turned hilights and whites down a bit, and added a bit of clarity, used a lightroom preset for sharpen faces, pumped up luminance on her eyes, and used red eye correction on her eyes. I noticed that you added black spots on her eyes removing reflection which make's it really bad. Keep reflection just use some tool to remove fringe from reflection. Im not good at it so my image still have some fringe in eye reflection.


----------



## bianni

My edit. Selected subject, inversed selection and applied blur, removed the harsh shadows below nose and chin, cropped.


----------



## cgipson1

I wouldn't bother.. I would reshoot it!

And why did you clone out the highlights that exist in the raw file?

Also.. I would recommend in the future putting the focal point on an eye, not her nose.


----------



## DarkShadow

@ Derrel,I am new here and a beginner at digital but my eyes tell me that's a perfect edit as the subjects contrast - exposure is just right along with the back ground.Also some good shadow detail.Nice edit work IMO.


----------



## Ysarex

Joe


----------



## ryanwaff

Slightly more saturated look. Done with vibrance adjustment, as well as curves, contrast and levels adjustments. With the aim of darkening the background while giving her face - particularly the eyes some more punch.
This one was basically the same as above, except I added a B&W layer ontop setting the blend mode to overlay and dropping the opacity to around 30%


----------



## TannerHarrisonPhotog

Here's how I would edit it. I like the more muted tones. In LR4 I use the Kodak Porta 400 preset by VSCO. I happen to love film.


----------



## PropilotBW

:lmao: It's amazing to see the different edits people prefer.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

KmH said:


> Camera Raw/Develop module (ACR) using PV 2003/2010 has a Recovery slider that recovers details (if any) in the highlights.
> Make color and tonal adjustments in Camera Raw
> When Derrel added 1.45 EV of exposure, the highlights in the image likely maxed out (no detail) and hence the use of Recovery.
> The sliders in PV 2012 were updated, and the Recovery slider was eliminated.



Wow @ KmH with the LightRoom going on!


----------



## Nahin

I made a ghost


----------



## Sw1tchFX

Beat me to it!



I cannot believe what some of these color corrections have been...oh my god.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

Also, this picture _is not_ worth spending time on. It's a snapshot. As long as the color and tone aren't totally jacked, it's fine..


----------



## The_Traveler

This picture will never be more than a documentary snap for several reasons first that on the camera or overhead flash gives her that dreaded 'flash beard' shadow. The flash has blown out all the microshadows and let only ugly surface texture. She is straight on to the camera in a totally undynmaic un flattering stance.

As others have siad, toss this and reshoot it.


----------



## cgipson1

PropilotBW said:


> :lmao: It's amazing to see the different edits people prefer.



I would have to agree... there are only one or two that are even close to being keepers... some are off the charts!


----------



## The_Traveler

I looked at the EXIF from your picture.
Shooting portraits at 31 mm focal length is a real no-no unless you are quite skilled at handling shot focal lengths.
What will happen is what did happen, there is perspective distortion and her nose looks big, the on-camera flash very up-close blew all the detail out.

You had a zoom, you could have, and should have, stepped back and used the long focal length.


----------



## George Griffeth

I like lonerunner's edit the most.


----------

