Two Headshots

[caleb]

Any tips for these? Googling, I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical so these just have global RAW adjustments. I also discovered that all the "standard" headshots appear to be in mostly natural light. Any suggestions for next time I shoot these?

[LeeIs]

The 2nd one is the better of the two for me. Love the relaxed pose, leaning on the wall relieves bodily tension and i can sense it. I also enjoy the 3 quarter view more than the full frontal view of the first.

In the first the head is cut off at the top and there's some stray hairs that are entering her face, which i wish weren't there (the hairs) . Also the light being on the right side, and her hair being puffy there creates a shadow on the left side of her face.

The 2nd also has better lighting and overall a better pic imo, nicely done.

[OldClicker]

"... I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical..." To whom??? - TF

[gahspidy]

I find number two to be the best and agree with the reasons that Liban layed out.
Googling you will also find way more that do photoshop and are quite successful. . .

[draymorton]

Googling, I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical so these just have global RAW adjustments.

:lol: Yeh.

That's why models, celebrities, and agencies pay exorbitant fees for retouching.

I don't think anyone's going to land in the clink for reducing skin redness, which is the first thing I'd suggest.

Cropping in tight would be the way to go with the first.

[BlueRob]

... I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical...

So....Am I going to hell?

[MarcusK]

In addition to what has already been said:

1- It is not an issue of ethics for almost all images. The debate has been going on for a long time, and I hope it will die out soon. The whole point of photography, in my opinion at least, is not to replicate life. That's photo-journalism. What the photo is supposed to do is capture the essence of the subject... be it portrait or anything else really. Don't worry about it too much... work on the image until you get the result you are looking for. something that speaks at least a thousand words about your subject.

2- A touch of make-up, minimal really, might help out here. Just a little something under the eyes. This of course can also be fixed in post, in case you wanna skip the make up.

3- You could also try something a little more candid. Or alternatively, by not having the model looking straight at the camera. This not an improvement... it is a suggestion of other things to try, seeing as you might go for it again.

4- In terms of head shots, contrasting the model with background might work. Not too much, but a little more might be something to consider.

5- When you pick your location, take into consideration how it reacts with the light. If you want to shoot natural light, try to pick the best time for the location in question. Get a feel for it's warmth, and overall effect on the image.

Hope this helps... the images are nice, and I certainly agree... the second is my preferred shot of the 2.

Cheers,

[MarcusK]

... I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical...

So....Am I going to hell?

haha, I will probably go there with you for supporting it!!

[BlueRob]

haha, I will probably go there with you for supporting it!!

Hhahahaha I have to say that Photoshoping my pics are the least of my sins

[BlueRob]

Caleb...as other have stated I´m one of may that find nothing wrong with PP a photo, also I must say that if you are one of many also that for any reason dont want to PP a photo that is OK too....every body has a way of thinking and most if not all are repectable ways of thinking.

Rgarding the pics....No2 for me is better.
In the first one the head is cut out right in the place where its not a full head shot nor a closed up face shot. The simple background is OK but may be the gray color is not the ideal.
The light on both I think is really nice though personally I like a bit more shadow-highlight play...but that is just me.

The main thing that has to be improved ether in PP or in future shots is the sharpness, I found these a bit too blurry.....you focal point should be the eyes...windows to the soul, key of most portraits. :thumbsup:

[shootme]

Rats, and I just started to learn how to do background motion blur on Photoshop.

As for the portraits, I like the second one for the reasons given above. Maybe it's my eyesight but I don't find the first shot to be as sharp as it needs to be? What f stop did you use? You probably need around f8-11?

[readingr]

Well, point to most of the Great Photographers and they all carried out PP'ing even if they were working in film, e.g. Lord Lichfield, David Bailey, ...

As for your photo's I would go for the second purely because of the pose and the lighting, but it could do with a bit of sharpening especially around the eyes.

Roger R.

[caleb]

Thanks for the replies. I like the second as well, although I was worried about the hot spots.

"... I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical..." To whom??? - TF

These are headshots to be given to casting directors. In my searching for techniques or tips, I found that they should show "what you really look like" and not be beautified. Then after searching for photographers with collections of headshots on their pages, I saw some very obvious post processing work (most noticeable on eyes). This seems fairly unethical even though...

Googling you will also find way more that do photoshop and are quite successful.

That's why models, celebrities, and agencies pay exorbitant fees for retouching.

I understand this happens. It seems like a mistake to have your headshot retouched. In the same way that I feel it is a mistake to promise more and deliver less. I would rather be 100% honest about what I could produce or underplay it. Disappointment occurs when reality differs from expectation.

I don't think anyone's going to land in the clink for reducing skin redness, which is the first thing I'd suggest.

Cropping in tight would be the way to go with the first.

I will try both of these. This is not retouching in the sense of smoothing skin, making eyes more intense, etc.

... I found that photoshopping is borderline unethical...

So....Am I going to hell?

I photoshop every single one of my photos. I love photoshop. This isn't a normal photo where the goal is to have it as beautiful and "perfect" as possible though.

If photoshop sends us to Hell, I think we're all doomed.

1- It is not an issue of ethics for almost all images. The debate has been going on for a long time, and I hope it will die out soon. The whole point of photography, in my opinion at least, is not to replicate life. That's photo-journalism. What the photo is supposed to do is capture the essence of the subject... be it portrait or anything else really. Don't worry about it too much... work on the image until you get the result you are looking for. something that speaks at least a thousand words about your subject.

I agree for 99% of images. Just on the fence right now for headshots that are meant to give the most honest depiction of a person as possible.

2- A touch of make-up, minimal really, might help out here. Just a little something under the eyes. This of course can also be fixed in post, in case you wanna skip the make up.

3- You could also try something a little more candid. Or alternatively, by not having the model looking straight at the camera. This not an improvement... it is a suggestion of other things to try, seeing as you might go for it again.

4- In terms of head shots, contrasting the model with background might work. Not too much, but a little more might be something to consider.

5- When you pick your location, take into consideration how it reacts with the light. If you want to shoot natural light, try to pick the best time for the location in question. Get a feel for it's warmth, and overall effect on the image.

I agree about the makeup, I hope to be doing at least 5-10 more of these in the next week and will let the models know to bring along make up. I noticed this while shooting, but could do nothing at the time. I guess for young theatre majors in town, headshots are on their To Do lists for the upcoming semester. Which likely means some "free" lunches for me and a lot of extra experience

Different poses/looks are a good idea, I wrote this down for next time. Hopefully I can direct people better as I do a few more.

Could you expand on "contrasting the model with background"? I understand the concept, just a specific example would help me a lot.

As for the portraits, I like the second one for the reasons given above. Maybe it's my eyesight but I don't find the first shot to be as sharp as it needs to be? What f stop did you use? You probably need around f8-11?

I believe I shot everything at f/2.8. The lens in the first image is not quite as sharp as the lens in the second. I also have not applied an unsharp mask (yet?).

[GB1]

Caleb - Haven't read the thread, but my initial reaction is that both are on the right track but need attention to the 'small things' to push them to the next level. The top shot is direct and she has a nice smile, w/ good eye contact. The lighting is very flat however, which is not not really flattering for a portraiture shot, and the image is too soft for me. Did you do this on purpose by softening in PP? I just want the eyes to be sharp. I'm also unsure about how the top part of her hair is out of the frame.

The second shot definitely seems too hot on her checks and such. It is also soft, esp around the eyes. The DOF is good though, and the pose is classical. I would tone it down a bit in PP and then put a vignette around it to make it even more elegant.

G

[draymorton]

I understand this happens. It seems like a mistake to have your headshot retouched. In the same way that I feel it is a mistake to promise more and deliver less. I would rather be 100% honest about what I could produce or underplay it. Disappointment occurs when reality differs from expectation.

I appreciate that. It's an admirable (and practical) point of view.

If photoshop sends us to Hell, I think we're all doomed.

LOL how true. I'd be somewhere in the third circle. Dave LaChapelle and Erwin Olaf would be the dark overlords.

[jetrim]

Caleb,
You've gotten some great pointers from MarcusK and GB. Some points that haven't been covered:
In the first shot, never a good idea to have shoulders square with the camera, other than that, the pose is good. Bring a reflector with you next time to bounce some light into the side of her face that's shaded by her hair, it'll get rid of the dark shadow lines and make the image pop a bit more (it doesn't have to be a $700 california sunbounce, you can use a $2 piece of white foam core poster board)

Second shot is good on the highlights in my opinion, but get in the habit of doing a custom white balance, because it's entirely too green (you can use the aforementioned poster board to accomplish this too)

[Frog]

Its 100% for number two so far and I'm glad somebody besides me had to mention the chopped head in number 1. I think I'd like to see a darker background in two.
As far as photoshop goes, I'm a firm believer that the final image is what is important. Whatever your area of photography, it is the image that YOU want to be shown that counts, whether anybody else likes it or not. We may attempt to capture life, but the best we can do is represent it in a moment of time. If photoshopping brings that moment out so that it communicates to the viewer whatever is intended and sometimes what is not intended, then I consider it one of the most valuable photo tools we have and I only wish I was better at it.
I do see the point of showing the actual face, in this case, without a lot of 'beautification' but even so, photoshop can help in showing actuality, getting rid of blown higlihghts or deep shadows or even sensor dust, making the image appear more closely to what the eye of the photographer sees.

Are we going to be able to party in Hell?

[caleb]

Jet, there's actually a $1.50 piece of poster board being used in both photos (and I believe that's what is causing the hot spots on her face in #2). The catch lights are actually from the window's reflection in the board.

The hair in the first is cut off after the fact (I like to hope that I would never do that in camera). There was reasoning on my part, but I guess that was a mistake!

[draymorton]

I tried a couple of things with #1, as I love the basic image. Mind if I post?

[caleb]

Yeah please

[draymorton]

Nothin' fancy; nothing, I hope, that would misrepresent her or destroy the integrity of the image. No skin smoothing, blemish removal, eye lightening, or anything. Just removed a little redness, separated her from the bg a little with a very slight vignette, and sharpened the eyes just a tiny bit.

Did the same with the other image.

[caleb]

It is a big improvement, thanks for posting. I'm hesitant to immediately be persuaded off of my initial stance, but it may happen.

[gahspidy]

It is a big improvement, thanks for posting. I'm hesitant to immediately be persuaded off of my initial stance, but it may happen.

Nice work, Dray. Subtle but very effective edits that really help the final image.
Caleb, I do agree with you in the idea that a headshot, at least a professional or formal headshot meant for showing a true representation of the subject as opposed to glamour type of thing is best left straight forward without too much of the photographers interpretation involved. However, some photoshopping such as what Dray has applied to your 1st image is quite appropriate in cleaning up and correcting for any mistakes or unwanted appearances whetherr due to the fault of the photog or just the difficulty of the given shooting situation.
In my view, post processing is just as much a part of the photographic process as is composing a scene in the viewfinder and snapping the shutter.
It begins with the click of the shutter, and ends with the click of the mouse. . .

[Grandpaw]

I have two comments on using Photoshop. When a subject spends a lot of time with a make up artist before the picture is taken aren't they just doing the equivalent of Photoshop work before the picture was taken? Also I was set up at an art sale trying to sell some of my pictures when a lady came up and ask me if I used Photoshop on the pictures she was looking at. My response to her was, if you have to ask, does it really matter? Jeff

[BlueRob]

If photoshopping brings that moment out so that it communicates to the viewer whatever is intended and sometimes what is not intended, then I consider it one of the most valuable photo tools we have and I only wish I was better at it.
I do see the point of showing the actual face, in this case, without a lot of 'beautification' but even so, photoshop can help in showing actuality, getting rid of blown higlihghts or deep shadows or even sensor dust, making the image appear more closely to what the eye of the photographer sees.

Well said.

Are we going to be able to party in Hell?

No body said Hell was boring LOL! :devil: