Re: [OM] Portrait of Kina

Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait of Kina
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:16:24 -0800
On 1/12/2018 2:28 AM, Peter Klein wrote:
Moose, you've given me a lot to think about. Including whether I have a thick enough skin. I'll probably feel better in the morning.

Well, shoot, I guess I cut to the point too quickly. Everything else about the portrait is first rate, pose, composition, subject relating to the camera/photographer, eye catchlights, focus/focal plane. It's an excellent portrait, just sightly off color. As you say, it would be perfect for a B&W.

Thanks for the technical tips in any case.

I was doing a very last-minute favor for a friend. I hardly ever take formal portraits. I told them that I would be more comfortable doing B&W because of the lighting issues, but they wanted color.

The mother believed that the photo had to be sent to the musical organization that very afternoon. We weren't told we had any more time until I'd finished shooting. So we proceeded as if that were the case, and I had no choice except an out-of-camera JPG. Something I almost never do.

Even after I made the second version (from Raw) in my original post, both mother and daughter chose to use the overly yellow OOC JPG.  I disagreed, but that was their choice. Perhaps they are so used to overly yellow pictures from default tungsten WB of consumer cameras and cell phones that it appeared normal to them.

Could be. A lot of cameras leave some "warmth" in tungsten WB because it is flattering to most peoples' skins. DPR used to complain about this on every Canon they tested.

Oly addresses this directly by giving those using Auto WB a choice - In Menu *G:

Keep Warm Color - Select [Off] to eliminate “warm” colors from pictures taken
under incandescent lighting.

I actually bought a WB "credit card" recently. Unfortunately, the camera wouldn't focus on it closely enough to fill the frame, which is required to set the custom WB.

If you are going that direction, you do indeed need either a larger gray card or one of those diffusers that fit over the lens to integrate all the light. I think you may put the camera at the subject location to read incoming light??? Or some that way and others . . . exceeds the limits of my knowledge. Putting the small card so close to the lens is likely give a different light than is on the subject, without some care.

I take the other path, shooting the card sitting at the subject location, or, for distant things, held at arms length in a shot of the subject. I like to have a portrait subject hold it. Then, if that turns out to be the best shot, because they knew it wasn't a 'real' shot and relaxed for it, clone the card out of use that little piece of another shot. :-)

 I then use the WB dropper/color picker in ACR, PS or DxO to adjust WB in post. PWP and C1 seem to have color pickers, but I don't know how to work them. C1 trial expires soon anyway and PWP doesn't do layers.

I didn't remember where in the E-M5's labyrinthine menus the option resided to trip the shutter even if out of focus. So I fell back on the white paper.

The camera's Tungsten WB was almost identical to the WB I set with white paper.

In tests at home with the WB "credit" card and white paper, the results of setting custom WB were almost identical under several different lights. So I (perhaps wrongly) concluded that it would be OK to use the white paper if the card didn't work.

I may be overly picky. Once burned, twice shy, so I am suspicious of all 
"white" paper.

Apologetic Moose

What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>