Katie's bday invitation

I've been working on Katie's birthday party invitations today, and I used some photos from a recent "session" with her...if you can call it a session. She gives me literally 5-10 minutes and poses, faces, etc. MUST be her idea. I get whatever she decides to give me. In this particular session I got maybe 2-3 that I would give to grandparents/family, but as we have one we just did for all the family I'm not worrying about fully editing them.

Here are 2 I particularly liked as they show a little bit of Katie's personality:




I will definitely have to show you all the final photo invite when I figure it out. I'll also show you a few others from this particular session.

*details - canon5d 24-105 lens, 100% natural light - window to the left of Katie and white reflector to the right of Katie. This is shot in my dining room with the dining room table removed. ;)

Photography/Photoshop that can help Orphans!

Sandy Puc, a truly awesome photographer, is currently quarantined in China. She has some amazing charity drives through her photography business, and founded a personal favorite Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep which helps parents of stillborn children capture photographic memories (100% donated services from local photographers). If you click on Quarantined in China you will be taken her blog, which links to the Denver Post article that has a link to her Facebook photos (which are public). :)

Anyway, while quarantined in China (Shanghai to be exact) she has taken photos of the "grunge" in her hotel room and created "Grunge textures" to be used as layers in photoshop for grunging up photos. Click here for direct link to the grunge brushes BTW, the samples of the grunge brushes in action on that site are of her daughter in Quarantine. The session was a challenge for the Mom I've heard without all the extra equipment she typically has on hand for taking indoor photos.

100% of proceeds from the sell of this set of brushes is going to help Chinese orphans through a charity that works with them. I have asked which one, and will update when I know.

If you don't know how to use these brushes, please let me know and I will do a quick photoshop tutorial on them. It's super easy, and many photographers use them in a layer above the image and play with opacity and such. It's really easy. :)

Thankful Thursday

I PASSED!!!!! I passed the exam and the 20 image review by peers. I'm one of a very small percentage of photographers out there that has this, that took the time, and the effort to become certified.

Why certification

This is a big deal, but not huge like graduating from college. KWIM? :) But if you are in the Nashville area next January, I will be attending Imaging USA and walking across that stage to receive the recognition of this in front of my photography peers (it's Tuesday night of that week)! But from what I've seen of the vendor fair/EXPO, I will most definitely need to leave my credit cards at home! *drool*

So very very thankful to have passed.

Photography Friday

Faces. It seems everyone loves faces, and quite frankly so do I! I love serious faces, silly faces, and happy faces. But mostly I love those BIG eyes. Not so easy to get in Katie, but doable when she's older.

I've talked about how your camera has an in camera meter. In a dSLR, especially those Canons, you have 3 choices for the in camera meter - spot, center weighted, and evaluative. Each are good in their own way, and I think the default is evaluative. But I can't remember for sure and I don't feel like looking for my manual to see. Forgive me?

Anyhow, here are what those 3 in camera meters do.

Spot - the spot, the circle in the camera viewfinder? That's what is metered to 18% grey if the image is turned to B&W and "averaged" overall. So, if what is in the spot is black, the camera will overexpose that to where that spot would be 18% grey. If it is all white, then it will underexpose to 18% grey. Spot metering is GREAT if you are looking to meter something that is far off and you can't get close and the rest of the scene could be too bright or too dark. Say, oh a child on a snow bank. ;) You probably don't want to use it for close up because one spot on the face might be more in the shadows or brighter sunlight...and the rest of your exposure could be off.

Center weighted - this will evaluate the entire scene in the view finder but "weight" the results to what is in the center...and again, bring the exposure to 18% grey. If you have 3 kids in dark snowsuits sitting in the snow and they are centered, then the camera will set the exposure with the subject matter in the center more "weighed" and it might actually come out close to correct. But, what if, you are following the rule of thirds and a snow scene and had a child in the top 1/3 on the left (that point) in a dark snowsuit. The entire image, weighted for the center of bright snow, will be underexposed. (hint, spot might work better here)

Evaluative - this one considers the ENTIRE scene and brings the entire scene to 18% grey. So, a snow scene is going to be underexposed and a scene shooting in the dark shadows is going to be overexposed.

So, why does this matter with FACES? It pertains to it a little, but mostly, to get a good exposure in a non-direct lighting situation, the best way to meter using your in camera meter is to get really really really close to the face and meter. Set the manual exposure to the most correct when filling the frame full of the face. Then, after getting the correct exposure reading you can back off, recompose, and take the photo knowing that the FACE will be in correct exposure regardless of the rest of the scene.

Compositionally speaking however, what is good for those close-ups? I prefer a horizontal crop with the head tilted at a an angle (so the eyes are not horizontal). If I'm going to include the shoulders in the shot, then I prefer a vertical shot with the eyes at an angle. With shoulders and head, I will also turn the subject at an angle to the camera as well. The 3/4 shot? again, at an angle and vertical. :)

I have different tricks to getting different looks. Did you know that a recent 4 year old that I was taking photos of looked to see if she could find Tinkerbell in my camera? ;) My camera also does tricks. If you smile REALLY good, then it will wink at you. But you have to be aware, that IF you ask a child to smile for you, and you get that cheese smile, then they do think they are smiling pretty. They really do. It's a forced smile they are giving you, not a true one, and they don't understand the difference. I never tell them, "Oh that's not a real smile, give me a prettier one." I will say, "OH what a BIG smile you have. Let's see if you can show me a small smile? How about no smile? I bet you can't be serious. Now, don't smile. Don't you dare smile....don't smile...." and guess what they do? They smile. They just can't help it.

Except there is always one or two out there that can hold a straight face forever. Those kids, they make me work for their smiles. They get to see some silly looks, hear some silly sounds, and oh if they are around 6 year old boys...they get really bad jokes told by me. ;)

One week ago

One week ago I took a test to see if knew enough about photography to pass or not. Sure, I know enough about photography to be able to talk about it intelligently, but this was a test that would ask questions about things like gel filters and lens filters, and the inverse square law for lighting and flashes. Oh the JOY.

1 week of waiting to find out the results. I was told I would be mailed results in 1-1.5 weeks. Well, supposedly, before they mail the results out they will post to the website if you have earned the certification or not IF you are waiting on the 2nd part of the certification process results...which I am. I've already passed image review. The website has not been updated yet, and I'm left to wonder...did I pass or fail the exam?

See, it was 100 questions. I knew most of them, and knew them without having to think about which of the answers best fit. However, I had to think and eliminate down to the "best" answer on 20 questions (or I flat out didn't know the answer which happened 2 times). That left me with 10 questions of the ones I KNEW that I could have made a mistake in marking the correct answer.

I'm a terrible test taker.

I have to make a 70 to pass. I thought after the test was over that I was close, that I most likely had it. Now? I'm beginning to wonder if I did okay or not.

Internets...I had to learn how to develop FILM, and transparencies (at least theoretically)! I had to learn about view cameras, different kinds of film, and so forth. I learned about the Zone system developed by some photography greats (that was actually very interesting!). There were even some photoshop questions on the exam.

*sigh*

I really do not want to have to take the test again, but I will if I have to.

Photos from last weekend

Katie LOVES to float around the pool.


JM was not allowed in the pool on this day (long story for another time), and he wasn't thrilled about it. But he survived. Notice the RAIN drops in this photo? How cool!

Then...the entire series of Samuel jumping....he didn't stop and he LOVED every minute of playing in the pool.










Okay, so this is a COOL series right? Only you wonder how in the heck did I click the shutter that many times?! I didn't. I pushed it once and held it down until the camera stopped, or Samuel was in the water. On most cameras you have a "burst" mode as an option in "shutter drive" - single shot is one box, the stop watch is the self-timer, and then there is another option of MULTIPLE boxes stacked on top of each other. That is burst mode, and the number of frames per second is totally dependent on your particular camera. My sister's new point and shoot will do about 3-5, the 30d that I was shooting with will do 7-9. The 5d? something like 3 if I'm lucky.

Each camera is designed for a different purpose. This is why I can't recommend a particular dSLR or camera to any one person without knowing what they want the camera for. It's just...well, so dependent on how you will be shooting. KWIM?

When do I use burst mode? Well, mostly during sporting events (or swimming). I've used it to capture my younger brother doing his crazy dives off the diving board (lots of fun), I use it during baseball games to capture the hitting of the ball (or the entire swing), and I've used it to capture my boys sliding on the slip and slide (will re-do that later this summer as well).

I do NOT use burst mode to capture portraits. It's overkill. It's for capturing the motion of actions. It ends up making a GREAT "flip" movie book, or a storyboard. ;)


NOW....for the photoshop portion. ;) Compare these two versions of the same photo. One is "batch processed" with my basic edits, the other I edited fully.



and before I get any criticisms about no one being right next to Katie....my BIL is a lifeguard and was in the pool and within quick reach of her at all times. Of the 3 kids in the pool, there were 8 adults around the pool. ;) 1 big kid sulking and wanting a chance to jump in, and one 3 year old who was REFUSING to even get on the steps.

Photo Friday - Disney Photos part 1

Taking a break from Photoshop this week to tackle special circumstances of Disney Photos. In particular that "bugaboo" of locations that EVERYONE always takes...a child on the carousel. These first ones are all STRAIGHT OUT OF CAMERA...so please, take it for what it's worth there. ;)

REMEMBER to right click photos to see them larger!!

Does THIS look familiar...and if you notice I was actually TRYING for a good photo here. Yes I goof too.

WHY did this happen? The camera's in camera metering system is what I relied on (and yes I shot manual). The in camera metering mode READ the scene and evaluated the scene and determined what the correct exposure needed to be to bring it to a "neutral grey 18 if all pixels were in black and white"

So, given the first image and knowing this above is Neutral Grey18, well you can SEE how the camera evaluated the scene and made it that. Problem is the FACES are what I wanted.

IN many modern point and shoot digital cameras there is a piece of software, called "Facial Recognition" that would "see" these faces and the in camera meter would evaluate the scene with the faces taken into consideration. I, however, using a dslr must use my own brain for facial recognition....and after a long day at Disney my brain wasn't working so well.

I can learn from mistakes (which I did after LOOKING at the image immediately to see if had caught both of them smiling....oops...). As you can see, I had varying levels of success IN CAMERA.



Further proof I was ON VACATION and just a Mom...not a photographer. JM has golden posts growing out of his head...so "perfect" it could be crown? whooops!





What can you do to help keep this from happening?

1-use a fill flash - force your flash on, and the camera will evaluate for the scene and "flash" as well to light up the subjects in the foreground. This will keep your nice pretty blue skies in the background as well.

2- Notice that when I shot back in toward the carousel, as opposed to the open sky, I had less of a problem. ;) Change your angle of shooting to a darker background.

3 - shoot in RAW format and then fix post capture in photoshop as I did HERE:



There is a trade off of course - NOISE when you have to bring up the exposure so very much. Less sharpness to the image when you have to bring it up so very much. But the ones with minor adjustments look pretty good. :)



that "crown" is even brighter now...thank goodness it's not a "great" face shot so it probably won't get printed for the wall. ;)




notice this was the VERY dark Samuel - there is a blue tint that I could not get out, and weird lighting in the hair. Sometimes, well things are just too far gone to try and save!



Here is what the save of the first photo looks like....


and because I can't help it....a basic edited photo of Katie in COLOR and then in B&W. Not sure which I like better!

Photography & Photoshop Friday

I'm showing you 100% straight out of the camera here....oh please don't run and hide.


Okay, this image was shot in Katie's bedroom with her in her crib (she had just woken up, and this is actually NOT a pout, but a "sniffing" of her nose which was slightly runny). Her bedroom window by the crib has sunlight streaming in it, but it's not hitting her directly. Notice the reflection in her eyes.

WHY is it pink? Well, the lights were off in her room and she has pink curtains hanging up that a lot of the sunlight was filtering through. I could have custom white balanced this and shot in jpg mode. It takes a few seconds to do, but as I shoot in raw I chose to not do that. If you open it up in a new window (right click on it), you will see that it's fairly in focus in the eyes but the crib behind her is out of focus (and really her ears are out of focus as well). It was shot slightly underexposed, but not too bad off (again in RAW format I can correct that).

So, I open in Adobe Camera RAW (Lightroom does similar, but I'm more familiar with ACR).


I adjust the color balance (the top two sliders on the right). I do this by playing with them until I get something that looks correct and "real life" to me. Then I adjust the exposure using the sliders below those top 2 - yes ALL those sliders fine tune the exposure for me. RIGHT CLICK and open in a new window/tab for closer viewing. :)

Isn't that MUCH better than "pink" pouty face girl?

closer photo of the ending sliders.


When I'm happy with those adjustments I open the image into Photoshop...

I look at the image at 100% - to see how much "noise" I am dealing with.


This one had more than I like, so I ran a filter I purchased - Noiseware.


Then I run a few actions I have bought or created or gathered. One is called "defog" and it's easy to create yourself. Open up the Unsharp Mask Filter, the settings are Amount 20%, Radius 60 pixels, Threshold 0. I use it on EVERY SINGLE PHOTO, thus I created an action that runs that setting. It basically removes the "fog" that is an artifact of every digital image, slightly sharpens the image. This image I also ran a 2nd action that gives layers for eye enhancement - on this one I sharpened and brightened her eyes bringing out the reflection of the window light.


Next I add a CURVES layer and a LEVELS layer - the Curves layer I play with the curve to get a slight S type curve (this one was backwards S. Levels layer I just play with it. Pay close attention so that you do not blow out the highlights and do not lose the details in the shadows. I give almost every single image both of these layers as well - with varying degrees of "opacity" applied.


I then go in and burn and dodge different areas to get the final effect I want...again it's a "playing" kind of thing. Both my burn and dodge tools are set to no more than 21% exposure on the midtones - thus I'm making TINY corrections. The key to great photoshop is tiny corrections that build on each other with very very "feathered" brushes.


My final editing step is to get to 200% magnification and fix all those little "blemishes" I see...such as nose issues, sleepy things in the face, or snot smears on the face.


Final product - with square crop because I felt it just called for it.

Friday Photoshop Fun!

We went this past week to visit the botanical garden, and the big dogwood tree that is blooming. I love dogwoods, and the reason why is there was a HUGE dogwood tree next to the house I basically grew up in. I would say it was close to the size of this one. I remember seeing it bloom every spring, getting my photo taken with it, etc. EVERY SPRING. Good memories. Anyway I had heard the trees were in "peak bloom" and I knew a BIG STORM was coming that night and it had been raining or cool most of the week. I took a chance and ran the kids out to the gardens to try and do just snapshots of them. When I post the boys you'll see what I mean. One day I'll go back with the reflector and other equipment and concentrate on "portrait" quality photos. Although I got a few of them that I like. :)



Knowing how slowly dogwoods grow, and how fragile in those early years, this one (and the one from my childhood) have to be VERY old.

But back to the photoshop portion of this post. I took a series of photos of Katie, close up. Here are 2 of them. To see any of these larger, right click and open in a new tab or window. Your photoshop may not look like mine. I use Adobe CS4, but if you use Adobe products many of the tools "look" similar, and I think all photoshop products have layers capabilities. If you are using something else, then your tools may look different but you should have the same ones.




Basic edits done to them, but both adorable...just not "quite right" to me. The one with the better "face" is missing one of the pigtails due to the wind. The one with both pigtails showing, the face while cute isn't "just right" either. What to do? Well...here's what I'm going to show you on this post. I first open both in photoshop.

Then I copy and paste the one with BOTH pigtails over the photo of the one missing one. I also copy the background layer of the photo with the one missing the pigtail. I have 3 layers now - background, background copy, and Layer1 (which is the photo of both pigtails). If you don't know how to copy the background, one way is to copy and paste it on itself.



YES, there are 3 layers there. I never make "permanent" changes to the original layer so that I can always go back to it and start over. :)



On the top layer (which is the one with the 2nd pigtail) I change the layer mode to DIFFERENCE to see what is "different" between the two. When things are aligned properly the image is all black. Using the move/change size tool (mine looks like and arrow/pointer with a plus sign beside it...it's at the TOP of the far left tool bar in this photo), I rotate and MOVE the photo until I get the nose and eyes aligned. Then I change the layer mode back to normal (and sometimes lower opacity) until I tweak what I want into "perfect" alignment.





On the top layer that is now properly aligned, I add a LAYER MASK. What is WHITE in the layer mask shows the layer it is on. What is black on the layer mask blocks what is on that layer and shows what is beneath it. (Don't worry, more to come on layer masks I promise.)



Then, to "hide" all of that top layer, I use the paint bucket tool and paint the entire layer mask BLACK. If you make a mistake and paint the entire "photo" area black then just undo and click on the WHITE layer mask box to make it the active portion of the layer.


Then, I select the brush tool with the layer box active, and "paint" white over the black where the missing pigtail is located until I have it all the way "back" in the photo but the rest of that layer is still "blocked"...

I typically will work on areas that I'm "bringing back" (also known as "moving") zoomed in, usually close to 100%. I've been known to go to 200% or 300% depending on the blending that needs to be done. This was easy as the background around it was "blurred" due to bokeh. I had a bit of trouble around the face, and I had to make sure the face lines in the photo matched up.

After I had the "pigtail" in the photo as I wanted, and didn't see any harsh lines or uneven "face lines" anywhere. I made sure I was still on the top layer, then I merged it down into the 2nd layer.

Notice, there is no more layer mask.

I'm now ready to do the edits I would do to "fix" it up for printing. This includes - sharpening, a curves layer, a levels layer, then I enhance the eyes (sharpen those a bit more, brighten them), and then I fix the "spots" on the photo that are distracting...such as the leftover food mess. ;) Then I crop how I want it printed (or leave it and crop in the ordering program).





Could I have done this in Lightroom? Not that I know of. Lightroom IS powerful though, and does some really cool things. However it is more of a "proofing solution" not a full editing program. Lightroom is where I do the basic edits - exposure corrections, color corrections, etc. Honestly, I do many of those in Adobe Bridge. Then I do the full edits in Photoshop. :)