Post-processing, lighting, technique?

Discussion in 'Wedding and Event' started by ira casel, Mar 15, 2010.

  1. The people in this photographer's images have incredible "snap." Whether indoors or out, in color or black and white, they just leap off the page (screen). Does anyone think there something in her post-processing technique that gives the images their punch, or is it some shooting/light technique?
    http://jamiekphotographyblog.com/
     
  2. Looks like on-camera flash during exposure, competing with ambient in the outdoor shots, and a lot of sharpening.
     
  3. I think that in the case of the pictures you linked, a lot of it is the black clothes that everyone is wearing. The pictures look post-processed to a pretty high contrast, which makes the clothes pitch black. The light faces jump at the viewer, because they are offset by the black shirts and tops. The family members all seem to have black hair and dark eyes, and the black clothes suit them reasonably well. A black shirt can be a very stark frame for the face of someone lighter-coloured.
     
  4. Seems to be pretty typical post processing that is popular these days. In the following recent thread, it was brought up that increasing the black point immediately makes everything else look more saturated and crisp. I'm sure that isn't the only thing, but read the rest and you'll get ideas.
    http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00VLuV
     
  5. I think there was some on camera flash but only on low power - there are very small catch lights in the eyes. Everything else seems like normal processing in lightroom: increase vibrancy, decrease saturation, increase contrast, increase black point, adjust highlight/shadow sliders to compress tonal range. Use brightness brush to paint soft highlights into skin areas. The final effect reminds me of bleaching a dye transfer.
     
  6. Also--why don't you just ask her? As you see in the thread I posted, the photographer in question answered the question.
     
  7. Nadine, I think you misread the name of the photographer who's work I asked about. It's Jamie Karlin (jamiekphotography.com), not Julie Harris. Any additional thoughts would be appreciated.
     
  8. Ira--no, I realize it is Jamie Karlin, not Julie Harris. I just suggested the previous thread as an example of the fact that photographers do sometimes answer when asked what their techniques are, and also, you can learn a lot about what kinds of processing and techniques are used to achieve effects by reading what Ms. Harris did.
     

Share This Page

1111