Custom Picture Style for portraits

Hi there,

 

I've been trying to use DPP and some RAW pictures I took to tweak for a custom

my-own-daughters-portraits picture style with no much luck, and would like to

ask for your help?

 

1. If you were to start from scratch, what Canon picture style would you use?

2. What setting would you move first: contrast, sharpness, etc?

3. What next?

4. What 'step' would you use? Only one, or two to make it more noticeable?

 

This is assuming that I finally manage to get the exposure more or less right,

and that white balance is also managed...

 

Would this be different if I chose B&W as the final JPEG format?

 

I would really appreciate your input.

 

 

Cheers,

 

MO

If you are going to shoot in RAW format, the picture styles won't matter. In DPP you can make (or unmake) all of the necessary changes on the RAW file before you output it. You can experiment freely with the sharpness and contrast sliders, white balance, B&W, etc. to get the effects you want, and you may discover some new looks and new ways of doing things.

 

The pictures styles will matter if you shoot in JPEG format, in which the file is actually affected by them. If you shoot RAW, the styles are just a set of instructions that don't impact the file.

I will reduce sharpness, saturation and contrast.

To be honest most of us don't bother with picture styles. That is mostly true for those who shoot RAW. No matter what you set the situation will change every thing anyway. I, personally, would rather make the changes on the computer. Also be sure you are useing a calibrated monitor. All else is for nothing if you are not.

 

To use DPP you can take a photo in DPP and set the picture style the way you want it on the computer. Translate those setting into the camera. With that you may get out of the camera results you want. But to be honest most who shoot RAW are not concerned with out of the camera results. The computer will give so much more control.

 

Jason

Assuming that your monitor is calibrated, IMO a good start point is Nutral, sharpness/contrast etc set to `0` which should make it easier in dpp to adjust either way. there can be some varyingfactors such as lens IQ. Being digital it only cost time to experiment.

I do not fully understand the question; but I hope these points assist.

 

1. In camera `Picture style` does not influence the RAW image.

 

2. In camera `Picture Style` influences the JPEG image out of the camera.

 

3. When I am shooting JPEG only (or RAW + JPEG) and I need accurate JPEG B+W images, I usually increase contrast +1, and sharpness +1 and use the B+W `filters` to suit the subject and the lighting of the scene, most often used are the green or orange, which suits my subjects, the surrounds and the lighting.

 

4. When I am shooting JPEG only (or RAW + JPEG) and I need accurate JPEG Colour images, I usually increase contrast +1 or 2, and sharpness +1 and saturation +1 or 2: but that suits the subjects and the lighting of the scenes I most commonly take and these settings have come about after trial and error, (as with the B+W settings above.)

 

5. I have also trial and error settings for white balance in degrees Kelvin, (when shooting JPEG) and they are location / lighting specific, i.e. for different stadia.

 

6. It seems logical to have all set at the `0` (MIDDLE POINT) as the starting point for the experiment / trial and error shooting (as chris jb states and this is what I did); that gives the most flexibility in post production, for all general shooting scenarios to get the template for future sessions.

 

7. Obviously there must be a constant, and that is a calibrated monitor and viewing environment. (also as mentioned previously).

 

WW

Thanks, guys. I'm actually enjoying playin around with those RAW files... not much time to do it so, though :-p

 

You've given me good suggestions... and will answer William's points:

 

1. I know.

 

2. So, it does not affect the way the picture appears on the camera LCD? I would think it does.

 

3. OK, thanks. You can applyo those filters afterwards as well, in DPP.

 

4. Even though you're shooting portraits? This is my main question?

 

5. I so want to get one of those 18% gray cards.......

 

6. I did that, but ended up using faithful and some additional tweaking. What do you think about my models?

 

http://picasaweb.google.com/matias.orchard/Matri_rosini

 

7. I am on fault there... it won't be calibrated for the time being, I guess (after seeing the prices for those calibrating devices).

 

 

Cheers,

 

MO

Hi,

 

One place that Picture Styles does matter when shooting RAW files is that it determines what will be shown on your LCD. Cameras can't actually display a RAW file there, so create a small JPEG, using the Picture Style chosen in your menu as a guide. I have mine set to one of the User Styles, with Contrast dialed all the way down, Sharpness dialed all the way up, Saturation increased two steps, Color Tone set to 0 and LCD brightness set to the middle. This give me a reasonably good rendition of the image, although I still don't rely on it very much (the histogram is more useful).

 

Another place the Picture Style parameters can have an effect is if your RAW converter is set to "As Shot", or similar (I use Photoshop and Adobe RAW, not DPP, so the label might differ). In that case, what you see initially will be a thumbnail based upon the parameters in the camera. But, yes, you can tweak and change them to your heart's content. So long as you keep the RAW file, you can even go back and change them later, if you don't like the final print, change your mind or just want to try something different.

 

Chris mentioned one thing in passing I'd like to reiterate. If your computer monitor isn't calibrated, you'll go around in circles trying to dial in what you see to what comes out of the printer. There are crude methods of calibrating built into some softwares, like Adobe Elements and Photoshop. However, more accurate methods use a sensor placed on the screen and a set of test patterns. Monitors change, too, so need re-calibration regularly (I calibrate my CRT about every 2 weeks.)

 

Even after DPP, I think the JPEG or TIFF created will generally need a little work. And to do that, in addition to the calibration, it's recommended to have the basic ICC profile for your printer and paper loaded into your imaging software, to be able to soft proof the image on screen and get a reasonably good idea how the print will actually look.

 

However, Chris, I gotta disagree a little on another point you made! My ink and paper costs alone can be pretty steep, from all the experimentation! When I started, I didn't fully anticipate the costs of Photoshop upgrades, extra RAM, calibration devices and software, not to mention disk drive storage space and backup DVDs!

 

Thank goodness I'm saving so much on film and processing! ;-)

Hi again Matias,

 

I looked at your photos (after I'd replied already, of course) and wanted to add a little.

 

For one, lovely models you have there!

 

Also, you have really set yourself up, because skin tones are one of the most challenging things to produce really, really well.

 

I "stole" one of your pics temporarily to look at it in Photoshop. In my opinion, it was a little too warm and slightly underexposed. It wasn't that far off, the difference might even be explained as due to your monitor's calibration (or lack of it) and would be even easier to tweak with a RAW file, than it was as a JPEG.

 

I don't have any way to post the photo back to you, but basically I just dialed in a little blue and cyan, and a very small touch of green, to cool the image down slightly (mostly reducing yellow, but also a little less red and magenta) and make the skin tones look more natural, to me.

 

However, I didn't really need to do a lot of adjustment and you have made a good start at it. I'd encourage you to continue and to keep studying the rather broad subject of digital post-processing!

 

What you might do is set your camera to Canon's "Portrait" Style and shoot RAW + large JPG. Then do your own post-processing on the RAW file, later compare it with the JPG to see how the camera handled the same file.

 

There are not absolute, hard and fast rules to this. Get a good print you like, showing skin tones (the cover of Mikkel Aaland's Photoshop CS2 RAW has a superb portrait of his daughter on it), then learn to emulate it. It will take time, but you will eventually develop a style of your own. The next step is to produce prints that capture it well, with all the different choices of paper being one hurdle and the settings on your printer another.

 

Beware of uncalibrated computer monitors, though. They'll tell you lies!

Thanks, Alan.

 

So, even though you're shotting only RAW files, the camera uses the picture style settings to display the picture on its LCD... interesting...

 

I'm still learning on how to use the histogram to take better pictures.

 

It is great all what you can do with RAW files; you just need so much time, imo. It is extremely tempting though! Possibilities are endless...

 

Is the calibration different for LCDs than it is for CRTs?

 

I would love to see what you've done with the picture you stole. Please send it over my email:

 

** m (at) dot2day (dot) com **

 

You can get as much sophisticated as wanted, I guess. I just don't have much time... actually, I'm spending too much time reading you, guys :-DDD

 

And thanks for your comments on my models... I'm very happy with them... with my daughters, of course! And also with the results for those pictures - they were not easy, as their dresses were very light in color... Please send that picture back over email ;-)

 

How should I correct that it was too warm? I know what to do for underexposing, but not with temperature... K white balance too high?

 

++ One important question: I did the comparing thing, and have found that those JPEGs created by DPP are much larger than those created by the camera. I'm using full quality, and 350 dpi; is this why?

 

Is this the photo you're referring to:

 

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/covers/0596008511_lrg.jpg

 

Thanks again.

 

 

Cheers,

 

MO