I need help!! (Photo book photo CC etc...)

DeVore

Ok, my tale of woe and desperate request for help!

I'm in Malta and of course I left my laptop with my pics and editing stuff back in Dublin. I'll be back on Thursday as it happens but while I was here, my trusty 400D and nifty-fifty snapped what may be (imho) the best pic I've ever taken. Buuuut.... since I like stuff that people hate and hate stuff some people like, I wanted to check myself with you guys.

This is a portrait I took of a friends child here in Malta and she's adorable. I'm really happy with the focusing and the light and everything but then again I know squat really and I could be mad.

The link to it is http://www.antesup.com/tom/maltachild.JPG. (3mb!)

But now I'm in a panic. Its not landscape and I cant decide the crop, and I dont know if it will be ok for the book now when it is cropped. I also dont have photoshop here so I have done absolutely nothing to it, thats the picture I got in the camera! I dont know if I should punch it up (which will mean waiting for my return on thursday and begging an indulgence from the editor) or leave it untouched (and I'm thinking of calling it "Untouched" simply because she's a picture of perfection).

So, am I mad, should I consider something else, does it need punching up, is the focus too soft and and and... I need help!!

DeV.

melekalikimaka

looks lovely as it is, could get one of us to give it a spin in ps and you can see if ya like results, even give in request for what ya want done

Fajitas!

Quite a tight landscape crop could work really well with it, contrast and high pass sharpening will sort it out no problems, there's no real worries with sharpness imo!

Go for it

DeVore

If you guys think it will print ok, then just crop suggestions would be very welcome. I only have Windows Photo Gallery (which cant even crop to 10x8) or Paintbrush (lets not eh? ).

I'd like geniune honest CC too, I dont want to like the photo just because I know the child in question. Is it too "boring" a portrait? etc...
I dont think I have fretted over anything this badly in a long time lol, I'm not at all usually like this!

On a side note, I love the way if you zoom right in you can just see me as I take the photo of her

DeV.

sheesh

I think is a fine photograph I cannot for the life of me see a landscape crop

ok something like this



but why not just put it in sideways?

btw everyone say Aaaaah

DeVore

Its a very "aaaaah" picture alright and it does her justice but she can be a terror too
I like the crop and thats pretty much what I was thinking too. I dont really know what Fajitas was saying about "high pass wotsits", he might as well be saying "do magic, caveman!"

Would sideways work?? Are others going in sideways? I have a bad feeling about putting it in that way and think that maybe the crop is better.

I totally hate that I missed another trip to Charleville too btw, I'd call you all nasty names except I'm desperate for help and advice!

DeV.

ps: is the focus too soft?

pps: is that at an acceptible Size/DPI for the book? I cant tell with the tools at my disposal here...

whyulittle

No photos have been put in sideways.

PixelTrawler

2638 X 1884 at 300 DPI, no border or copyright watermark is what they say.

By the way thats a really well taken shot. I don't normally dig cutsie child potraits but thats very good.

Pity it works better as potrait, the crops not as effective.

AnCatDubh

i like it Dev - as a portrait it is really nice. It captures a moment i'd guess. The focus i think is quite appropriate to the subject and at the angle you a nice depth of field / bokeh going on. Her skin is pretty perfect even when blown up - almost think you'd run it through portrait professional. The lighting is very good but i would think it lacks a little 'sparkle' and depth - not sure how to describe it, perhaps its the punch that you are thinking about. Maybe contrast + saturation is needed.

It maybe going overboard in terms of that processed look but playing on the potential strength of the colours in the image lightroom's direct positive gives an interesting take on it and adds depth;



You'll either love or hate it.

As an image it also works really well in black and white, sepia, high contrast b/w, and anything else desaturated.

Just my take on it.

EDIT: I think the above has lost too much in the eyes which you would have to pull back into being recognisable if using something like that.

AnCatDubh

A slightly less processed attempt which is less destructive on the eye area - along the lines of contrast, saturation, and in this case a little sharpness (although don't know if it needs it);

Calina

I'm ever so slightly busy and the photograph isn't opening in PS for me, sorry.

I think the photograph is lovely, I like the angle it was shot at and I like the way she is staring right at the camera but not smiling...it's like she's talking straight out of the photograph at you rather than being recorded for posterity.

As a general opinion I wouldn't normally crop it landscape but I know there are requirements for the book so needs must. I like Sheesh's version of the photograph, or AnCatDubh's second version. On balance probably AnCatDubh's second version.

Well done.

barnacle

Hey I've added two different takes I would put on this, not that it actually need much, just a crop really. But here's my spin anyway .

DeVore

Many thanks to everyone for the help. I'm less of a panic today

AnCatdubh, funnily I neither love nor hate the first attempt at it. I can see how that would be a really nice effect for some portraits in fact. In the end its a bit too strong in the "gilding the lilly" way and I prefer the second one you did.

Calina, I think you have nailed the attraction of the picture for me. When you first look at it, you are immediately drawn to the eyes and expect it to be a cutsie child portrait but then you look down to the mouth and she's quite serious with strange, deep look. Solyad, I dont much like cutsie posed child-portraits either but something about this just grabbed me. Her skin is awesome, it looks airbrushed but its absolutely not! In fact I am leaning a little towards not touching it in PS now just to be able to say it is completely unprocessed.
Barnacle, I think thats a little harsh for my taste but funnily enough I just used something similar on a photo of a castle in Killarney and it gave it a really nice effect.

DeV.