More - Before and After ...

[r_fredrick_smith]

This shot shows the shot as it came out of the camera and what it looked like after post processing. Since I had cropped in the camera, you can see I didn't do any further cropping. I thought the original lighting (sunlight from a window) was uninteresting (and I had no control of it - public hotel lobby). So used three CEP 3.0 processes and two Mystical Lighting processes to get this:

Version of the photo after post processing

Here is the original:

Original version of the photo before post processing

Cheers,
rfs

[Kirk]

I like the post photo. Skin tone is warmer and the sofa has a much more desirable colour.

The shadow at the bottom makes it look weird. It partially covers her feet, then it does this funny right turn circular coverage thing under the legs and then stops on the table corner and before the statue.

Did the program automatically generate this?

"funny right turn circular coverage thing" I have found my phrase for the day!

[PhotosbyChuck]

I like the after shot also.

The shape of the curve looks like a burn to me...but it may be control points, masking, etc in combination with a filter. The result is very smooth, but still deliberate. I see red fringing on the bright side of her calves and arms. I don't think it's a jpg artifact and given I've not seen it before in things I've played around with, I'll guess it's from your Mystical Lighting filters. I have never tried those.

[Electricseashell]

I like the before photo .. in the after photo the statue becomes the center of attention.

[r_fredrick_smith]

Originally Posted by Electricseashell

I like the before photo .. in the after photo the statue becomes the center of attention.

Are we talking about the correct photo as the after or before. Keep in mind that the first photo is the after photo and the last photo is the original photo. In the original both the vase and the statue played perhaps too prominent a role. But keep in mind that in atmospheric shots you do need lots of "stuff" sometimes to "set the scene".

In the post processed photo (after photo - 1st photo), I purposely played with the light to darken the area of the vase and the statue. I wanted them to still be there and recognizable, but wanted the brightest thing to be the model. I wanted to get rid of the chairs in the background so I allowed dark shadows in that area.

So when you look at the first photo (the after one), you should find your eyes drawn to the brighter parts of the image (legs, white dress, face) since they have been given much more light.

The original scene (lower image) was lit with several very large windows that were partially draped and thus you got somewhat of an odd mix of light that was not really what I wanted. So in Mystical Lighting I added spotlights and shaders to do what you would normally do in the studio with a bunch of lights and gobos, etc.

Cheers,
rfs

[Electricseashell]

Yes it wasn't clear to me that the first photo posted was the edited version. Thats the one I like So Good job!!!

[RSStory]

Overall I say the post is a big improvement. For my personal taste though, the skin is a little too warm.

Scott

[Arbib]

Originally Posted by RSStory

Overall I say the post is a big improvement. For my personal taste though, the skin is a little too warm.

Scott

I like the warmer skin...It looks like Warm Sunlight from a window. (As mentioned in the original post about the light.) The Concept was executed nicely. IMO.

[zakDigital]

YEs, the edit version is much more attractive to me, it gives more of calm atmosfere and I, like the shadows.... thansk for sharring...

[JKlebPhoto]

I like the post better too, for obvious reasons. Now the question I have is would it have been easier to get the end result using some lights and gobo's instead of the post work? What if you wanted a series of ten or fifteen processed shots?