I need these pictures to SCREAM!

[tholte]

I like Milo's version the best.

[ole_hjalmar_kristensen]

Here is a quick attempt with free tools, the demo version of NeatImage and Gimp. I used NeatImage on both pictures to remove some noise and fix the out of focus problem somewhat. Afterwards, slight modification in Gimp: Added layer, Retinex filter, set blend mode to "hard light", 25% opacity. Finally auto color enhance.<div></div>

[dkm]

I'm afraid I agree with Gordon. "Fixing" your photo may help you out of a jam and be good practice for those who attempt it, but it's really not helpful to your own growth as a photographer.

 

There is a lot of free software available on the web, and there are a lot of good tutorials on this site. No one was born being good at picture editing, we all had to learn. I mean this in all kindness, but you cannot expect others to do what you're not willing to at least try yourself.

[corrim]

I do believe, as I look at Ole-Hjalmars photo attachment, that our young lady is wearing a scarf to hide a hickey!

 

With that being said, I think, Kim, that with all the critiques, ideas, examples and information, your thread was a wealth of information for all who reads it. That is what Photo Net is all about.

[albertdarmali]

Kim,

 

One more thing I notice from many of your shots are they are slightly soft/out of focus. I'm not sure if it's because of the faulty camera or your handholding technique. Try it with tripod next time, and if they all come out focused, then you have to work on your holding technique.

[beauh44]

I agree with Tim about Milo's version. Since the shot wasn't really sharp, I think "soft focus" can come to the rescue. Ehh... when I can't get the colors right there's always B&W! ;-)

[phoneguy]

My quick version, well not so quick. Some cross process...<div></div>

[phoneguy]

Not so good, but could be worked with...<div></div>

[color]

Hey Kimberly. I saw your thread and decided to jump in. I copied your pictures and did some Photoshopping on them. Maybe you can use the versions I'm attaching to this response.<div></div>

[color]

Here's the other.<div></div>

[phoneguy]

Here's one to match the other...<div></div>

[petemillis]

Ellis, remember, these are two women in a band - I know a few people who are in bands. They tend to reckon themselves a bit too much, and are really wrapped up in themselves. as such, they tend to be dull. So I reckon a dull image suits what may be dull people :)

[owahc]

Wow everyone really went to town on this thread! Thank you all for your inputs...! ! Most helpful!

 

I dont claim to be a great photographer... I know more of my work sucks than doesnt and I am taking on board everyones comments!

 

Peter M, your stuff was really helpful so thanks very much!

 

I guess I may have to sacrifice some things and get myself Photoshop or something similar.

 

It's great to see so many different perspectives on my work...!

 

I'm not going to even begin getting involved in all the debates that are going on but I will just say thank you to everyone, your help has been much apprecaited!

 

I know I am no where nere a professional photographer and I would never claim to be but [Linda] I do believe I have an eye for photography but it just so happens that the clients chose two really poor pictures from the shoot!

 

K x

[gordonjb]

Kimberly;

 

I know a few people who use GIMP. My understanding is that it is freeware. Do a google and you are sure to find a place to download it from. From what I hear it is pretty decent software and is similar to PS only without the price tag. BTW Other than yourself I do not think anyone here said your work sucks. I suspect that we all come to PN with some hope that our experience here will make us better photographers. So keep asking question and digesting the responses, you've got a great resource here.

[mike_s9]

Hi Kimberly, loads of responses to your post,which is fantastic. For what its worth, I would say, " Back to basics", and try out a good old fashioned FILM Camera,learn Photography from its roots.! No excuses if you turn out a bad photo,unless you are a whiz in the Darkroom and can maniplulate images there. Aim for carefully lit and properly focused, if doing Portraits,and top quality Negatives. You can even get your Film put onto a CD,and do post processing on your P.C with a basic Paint programme, it doesnt have to be Photoshop,there's plenty of choice out there, try downloading from Download.com. At the end of the day, be critical of every photo you take, be brutally honest with yourself,and see how you can improve,where you may have gone wrong. Try to get a top notch image first time around. As they say "you can't make a silk purse out of a Sows ear" Lastly,remember that everyone's a critic.!, Whatever you take, someone will have an opinion,good or bad. Its entirely subjective,so don't take comments too much to heart.! Its just an opinion.!

[owahc]

Hi Gordon. I know no one but me said my work sucks. Dont worry, I aint taking stuff to heart, the whole noose thing was jsut a joke but hey I love it when people get all high and mighty about these things...! lol

 

K x

[axel-cordes]

Also IrfanView (http://www.irfanview.com/) is free and not bad. As another one said DPP of Canon is also the choice if you run on a Canon.

 

Regards Axel

[frank_dzambic]

"I guess I may have to sacrifice some things and get myself Photoshop or something similar."

 

Not necessarily. There's already been a lot of excellent advice in this thread if you can get past your hurt feelings. It almost boils down to two choices at this point. Since you already have a camera (and hopefully an external flash?) you can either keep practicing with it and reading and improving your techniques with it until you can get what you want in camera which is the cheap option. Or you can sacrifice some things and buy Photoshop and try to correct all your mistakes after the fact.

 

I think you're better off practicing and experimenting and taking notes and improving your technique so can get to the point where you don't make the mistakes in the first place. By practicing I also don't mean going out and doing jobs. I mean make your sister co-operate and pose for you for hours on end while you practice, or get a friend, or a mannequin head. That takes all the pressure off, and you don't lose your focus either.

 

Photoshop's a great tool to have, but if it means sacrificing to get it, then why not just concentrate on improving your skills and your vision with the tools you already have?

 

Anyway, I'm not criticizing your work, but I don't like to see people think they have to get Photoshop to get good results.

[frank_dzambic]

In other words, save your money, practice with what you have and learn to make your shots SCREAM in camera.

[don_e]

Frank's advice is good. Getting the focus and exposure and lighting and composition you want at the shutter release is worth more than Photoshop. Digital photography requires an image editor, though, both to adjust the photographer's errors and the errors of the sensor and lens. There is good sw for this under $100 mentioned above and all should have 30 day free trials for download. Most cameras come with editing software of some kind. The Gimp is free -- it is not color managed, but that is ok for web display; Ufraw is free for working with raw files.

 

For understanding perspective, composition, and lighting the best bang for buck is a drawing class. You might find one offered at night at a college or art museum with only a nominal fee for materials. Maybe a couple nights a week for a month or two. A good one will progress from the ubiquitous wine bottle and apple to "drawing from life".

 

Good luck

[owahc]

I will continue on my learning path... thanks for your advice guys!

 

K x

[linda guerra]

I simply posed the question because you took such offense when others offered you exactly what you asked for...valuable criticism. Then to believe that not everyone has the eye (you're right, they don't) it should stand to reason that if your pics don't cut the mustard then people are going to tell you. If your pics have bad posing, bad lighting, bad comp, AND they're OOF...give me a break! I was just trying to open you up to the possibility that they were trying to HELP you, not just knock you for the sake of knocking. The truth IS helpful...and the truth is those pics were all the things they said they were. Best to you.

[albertdarmali]

I think they harsh criticism is nothing compared to if you choose not to listen to them and had a bunch of angry customers not happy with your skills.

 

I know some of them (even maybe my comments) sound harsh, but they're kinda right.

[gordonjb]

" but hey I love it when people get all high and mighty about these things...! "

 

Rest assured that you will not be burdened by any further comments from this quarter.

[ellis_davison]

I defer to Mike Ferris's versions, which I think are excellent. Basic composition is good, and depending on how big the enlargements have to be, sharpening can compensate for the focus issue. I tried for a version that was a little simpler to implement. This uses "Levels" to compensate for slight underexposure, "curves" to pick up the contrast, and "Saturation" to desaturate a little of the on-camera flash harshness. I also selected the background (a very crude, bad selection but my time was limited) and replaced it with black. This was done in Photoshop 6 (which is the version I have on this computer) and could be done in almost any imaging program, including the less expensive Photoshop Elements. Advice: (1) get an imaging program and learn the basic "levels", "curves" and "saturation" controls. The kind of magic Mike did with your picture will come with time. (2) Try to stick with natural lighting - shade usually works fairly well with portraits - because artificial lighting is a whole other science. On-camera flash is good for fill, but is almost useless as main light unless you are looking for a snapshot look (and there are one or two fashion photographers who have made a fortune on this point-and-shoot look).<div></div>