Portrait PP critiques needed (very photo heavy)

[theantiquetiger]

All in all i think you did very well, your exposure is handled well, and given the "studio" there was not much else you could have done, short of ripping shrubbery out and rearranging decks and porches ....

OK, so I need to decrease my F-stop/increase exposure to help with background. I do notice some terrible skin tones after posting here (I don't see it when I process them, easy fix). Be careful of "human horns". I did notice some shadows under their chins, so softer flash or reflector.

[Matt K.]

OK, so I need to decrease my F-stop/increase exposure to help with background. I do notice some terrible skin tones after posting here (I don't see it when I process them, easy fix). Be careful of "human horns". I did notice some shadows under their chins, so softer flash or reflector.

could not see the exif files on those ...tried to look .. but creating a shallower depth of field may be the answer ... what focal length did you shoot with? And yeah, softer fill flash ... I am experimenting with this as well .. it is easy to criticize someone else, but to do it yourself is much harder i found out ...

[theantiquetiger]

The lens was a 17-50. The focal lengths were anywhere from 20-40 for the most part.

[Bucky]

Hello,

All are very nice shots. I have only started working on my portraiture, but when I get outside to take shots I will try to keep the subjects far away from the background to allow subject isolation. Even in close quarters, you can use angles to create a more pleasing background.

As far as your question, I think the processing is great. Not over the top and complements all the shots.

[Marko]

For the future, this would less confusing if you numbered each shot chronologically.
The pattern I find here is that the FIRST shots looks way more natural, so from post 1 for example, shots, 1, 2, 3, 4 all look natural (in skin tones in particular), the pped versions do not. (the subjects look like they are wearing too much foundation...even the kids)
Hope that may help.

[asnow]

I'm certainly no expert in portrait photography, but I think Marko has a point. They pped version versions look a little over processed. Also my understanding is that you shouldn't crop at the joints (example: the girl with the jeans and white top - you've cropped her leg at the knee). Also echoing what the others have said, be careful with the backgrounds. Either really blurr them out or look for something less busy.

[QuietOne]

It does seem to me that the post processing is better. The skin texture and tones are definitely better, so I think you're making some progress. I like what the crops do in terms of making the subject the definite focus. It isn't just cutting out some of the background clutter, it's making the subject the center of attention. I can see what asnow means about cutting the leg at the knee; at the same time, it brought more focus to your subject.

For backgrounds, why not hit up a fabric store? Go to the bargain and clearance stacks and rummage through them. You can find stuff as cheap as $1.99 a yard. If you can't get some distance between background and subject, try some solid colors. Maybe look for the fake wools, especially something with a small loop or other texture. Stay away from felt! Most of it is made from acrylic, which really has a strong shine in light. The exception would be if you stumbled on some wool felt. I know many people have had luck with home decor fabrics.

You could also try sheets or blankets, but the sheets might be too smooth a weave and the blankets too loose a weave. I know muslin is traditional, and if you're doing portraits in a more usual style, you might look into that. Muslin used for quilt backings or interlinings comes in some wide widths, but it can be expensive. In all cases, go for fabric you can't easily see through when it's held up to the light. You'll have to experiment - my experience with fabric is as a sewer, not as a photographer.