Twice...wasn't it?Originally Posted by clemmb
And how many people here have had their images published in Popular Photography
Denise...you could have a pinhole camera and take photos worthy of posting.....com' on, stop depriving us.....
Twice...wasn't it?
And how many people here have had their images published in Popular Photography
Denise...you could have a pinhole camera and take photos worthy of posting.....com' on, stop depriving us.....
Mark, perhaps try to find an old forest with wide trunks, and just change the aspect a bit in post, to thin everything out.
Denise, your post-processing and texture work is usually quite good. As others said, don't sell yourself short.
@Mark - I'm the last to give any wedding photography advice but one thing I do remember reading about through all the research I did when I was going to shoot my one and only was to not ever shoot the bride straight on. She should always be angled to the camera or it just makes any bride appear heavier than what she is. Or you could try the liquify tool in photoshop, thinning people is one of the main things it is for and by the time you are done applying it to 300 photos of the bride, you will be an expert at using it!
I try to find a comprimise here. When a bride is heavy and in a strapless dress, straight on she looks wide and angled her upper arms look large. I have had brides complain about how big their arms look when I have angled them.
Looks like our first topic for photoshopOr you could try the liquify tool in photoshop, thinning people is one of the main things it is for and by the time you are done applying it to 300 photos of the bride, you will be an expert at using it!. I have never used this. I'll have to look it up in my books and see what I can learn.
Mark
[QUOTE=clemmb;82171]I try to find a comprimise here. When a bride is heavy and in a strapless dress, straight on she looks wide and angled her upper arms look large. I have had brides complain about how big their arms look when I have angled them.
QUOTE]
Yep, that is where the liquify tool would be of great help I believe. I have not had much experience at all using it but from the videos I have watched, it can be a miracle worker. I just wasn't blessed with patience and this is one tool that requires a great deal of that IMO.
There are tons of videos online showing how to use the liquify tool. Here is one quick example of what it can do. Granted, it's not a cure all but used in moderation and again, with patience it can shed a few pounds off of a person. There is just a great deal of controversy amongst people on how far should one go in editing photos of people. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and some may get offended when you start messing with what makes them who they are by removing "character" lines, laugh lines, moles, scars, etc. but from what I've read though, brides love this tool!
Here's just a quick show of what it can do ...
http://blog.photoframd.com/2009/07/2...he-plus-model/
I have skills in Photoshop, and have used the liquefy filter many times. However, I don't agree on its use with people.
It makes no difference if it's a bride, or any other person. Apart from lens corrections, the person should be left alone when it comes to their shape.
Okay, the bride is overweight. Or, the groom is overweight. Big deal. That's who they are. Changing their physical shape is making them into something they aren't.
I'm perfectly okay with small adjustments, such as contrast, color (we're all a little pasty looking and could use some saturation in the face, especially if the camera doesn't do well with it), or some other modifications (pimples removed, scratches, etc. which are "snapshots" at the time).
I was asked by the mother of the bride to make one of the bride's maids thinner. Yes, the woman was overweight. But, it wasn't the bride's maid asking me this, it was the mother of the bride. She was embarrassed by the woman's weight. I refused. I was tempted to tell the mother that it wasn't only the bride's maid that needed thinning out, it was something she also needed. But, I restrained myself.
A good photographer will use posing skills to change the emphasis to where he/she wants the observer to look, but beyond that, it's all they should do with shapes.
Anything more is obviously false, and everyone, including the people looking at the pictures will soon realize the photos were manipulated.
I caution against the use of the liquefy filter for such occasions.
Personally, I fully agree with you "shutterdown". The only things I edit out on people are things that won't be there a week after the photos were taken such as the pimples, scratches, dry lips, cold sores and such.
With all of the ways portraits can be edited. I think it is wise to ask the bride and groom at the initial consultation exactly what photo manipulations that are going to want and to what extent. Do they want full editing of any wrinkles, large pores, etc. Do they have any moles, scars, tattoos that they will want removed from the photos. Explain to them this all takes time ...and time is money. Show before & after photos to them of past clients that requested full glamour editing and others that went natural. Some don't even realize what their options are and how far editing can go.
IMO, in the end, it is all about what the client wants and wants to pay for.
Denise, I'm sure most bride and grooms wouldn't mind having those temporary things "fixed." Maybe even a mole, though, often times, this is the sort of thing that is characteristic of the person (e.g., Cindy Crawford).
Glamour filters? Sure, if they want them. But, none of this involves the liquefy filter. It's all cloning or healing brush.
I end up using photoshop to clean, floss and whiten teeth, plastic surgery, dermatology, electrolysis, haircuts (including coloring and highlights), makeup and a host of other things. I'm more of an electronic cosmetologist and dentist. Only on certain photos, since as you mention, it's costly in terms of time and effort.
I leave the weight loss to the client.
Raymond
To get back on the original post: Great idea iND! I used to really enjoy and appreciate the C&C part of this site when I joined here. Which has gone missing a bit I think. Also because not everyone knew/knows how to give and take constructive criticisms.
Will gladly follow this thread.
How much Photoshop is appropriate to use in photographing overweight people is an important and necessary debate. Here are my two cents:
The job of the wedding photographer is to make the bride and groom look their best. (Who am I kidding? It’s mostly the bride.) It is not to make the bride and groom look like people they are not or to make them unrecognizable. Fat or thin, beautiful or homely, the wedding photographer has an obligation to use whatever tools he has at his disposal to make the bride look like she is having a really good day.
The arsenal of tools a wedding photographer can use to flatter an overweight bride and/or groom includes technique (e.g. posing, use of camera angle, use of lighting, in-camera cropping), equipment (e.g. compressive attributes of telephoto lenses), and post processing (e.g. digital cropping, narrowing all or part of a photo to slim, adding shadow to deemphasize, lightening/darkening to emphasize [sculpt] features that might be lost such as chins and cheekbones, and using the liquefy filter). Any post processing techniques should be subtle enough that no one should notice that they have been done.
I do not believe that any post processing tools should be dismissed on principle due to the live nature of the wedding event. The photographer does not have complete control over the models or the lighting as he would in other circumstances. Key moments move quickly and there is no reshoot, so you are stuck with whatever you shot at the time. Photo editing software helps the photographer correct images to help bring them on par with what could have been achieved if the photographer had been able to carefully pose and light the bride and groom when they were exchanging rings, walking down aisles, cutting cakes, making toasts, dancing, throwing bouquets and garters, climbing into cars, etc.
Again, the goal is not to change what the bride and groom fundamentally look like, but to help them look their best.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote