How to achieve this look

[june_daley]

<p>Hi everyone,<br />I love bright, vivid, crisp images and this photographer does EXACTLY what I want to achieve. I have tried through trial and error in photoshop to simulate colours as beautiful as this but not a lot of luck.<br />Here is the site: <a href="http://www.pebblesphotography.com.au/">http://www.pebblesphotography.com.au/</a></p>

<p>I have a couple of questions... on the image on the left of her opening page, the background appears to be in shade yet the girl is fully lit. Is she simply standing on the edge of a shadow or something else? Does it look like flash was used? I often have trouble with subjects being darker then their background, when using natural light.<br />I am also wowed by the soft, evenly lit skintones achieved in all the photographs. Is this due to flash/artificial light/diffsusion of the sun? I use a handheld diffuser in my work but surely that hasn't been used here as the photographer follows the kids around (we know how fast kids move).<br>

Last of all - her colours are stunning. the different hues stand out, and all are crisp and vivid. Any tips on how to achieve this?</p>

<p>Sorry to ask so many questions... have emailed the photographer but no luck :( Any opinions appreciated! :)</p>

[raymond_ocampo]

<p>Although there are multiple ways to achieve a look, I would guess that no flash was used and that the photographer was using all natural lighting with the Sunlight fortunate enough to be above the subject causing the hair highlights (aka hairlight). I could see streaks of light reflecting on the lens from both sides and, kids, having the best skin condition ever.</p>

<p>The exposure is toward the subject. Hence, the over-exposure on the hair. While the white outfit does not reflect any light which is why I believe no artificial light was used on the front of the subject.</p>

<p>Of course correction and manipulation of the photo is a definite including hue and saturation.</p>

<p>If the photographer responds back, let us know.</p>

[june_daley]

<p>yep I can see the sunlight on the hair and guessed the same, that no flash was used because the dress isn't blindingly white. Would like to know how she achieves such brillaint colour. Also true about kids having great skin, I shouldn't overlook that!</p>

<p>Thanks for the response and I'll be sure to post if the photographer replies.</p>

[raymond_ocampo]

<p>Colour is easily enhanced in post by your favourite photo software. Even a simple white balance can bring out good colours especially in a psychological way. Of course, it depends on you as the photographer to control how much hue and saturation you bring out. The difference can be dramatic as well as amateurish.</p>

<p>Honestly there is no certain colour in the photo that stands out. I can only guess at this point, but I think you're eye is drawn to the highlight first and foremost as it reflects against three main colours - white, green and brown.</p>

<p>The subject stands out against the background in two simple, but brilliant ways - highlights on the hair as well as depth of field.</p>

[john_w.1]

<p>I first thought that these were digital, but the more I look at them, the more they look like film. From the colors, I'd say they were probably Fujichrome Velvia, or Fujichrome provia. That look is so hard to get with digital. I'm not a portrait photographer, but I have, on rare occasion, gotten that look with digital. The way I did it was; in adobe camera raw, I put the shadow around 20, the contrast around +50, and the saturation at about +25 to +45. For outdoors, I set the white balance from 4600k to 5300k.<em> </em> On the camera, I use an enhancing filter along with a polarizer.<br>

Hope that helps. If you would like, I could post one of the few shots that came out looking like that 'look' to see if that is similar.<br>

Good luck!<br>

-Jon</p>

 

[june_daley]

<p>oh, I should have mentioned I'm talking about her entire portfolio. When you go inside her website a short slideshow plays and in particular the photos of the girls in beanies with their backs to the camera shows beautiful colours.<br>

That was silly of me I made it sound like the whole post was about that one photo.</p>

[june_daley]

<p>Ho Jon - yes please, could you post a photo? I've heard about velvia... sad to hear it's not easy to copy :( but I guess that's to be expected, can't have everything with digital.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>"..Last of all - her colours are stunning. the different hues stand out, and all are crisp and vivid. Any tips on how to achieve this?.."</p>

<p>contrast & hue saturation in Photoshop.</p>

<p>"..I've heard about velvia... sad to hear it's not easy to copy.."</p>

<p>contrast & hue saturation in Photoshop.</p>

 

[june_daley]

<p>Patrick, thanks for the input, but I realise what has been achieved has something to do with photoshop or another editing program. I'm asking for tips on how to do it, anyone can go along and change hue and saturation but the results aren't going to be like this. I'm an amatuer in that area and just asking for tips.<br>

There are also other factors about these photos which make them stunning to me (as mentioned) like the way the subjects are lit and how they stand out from their background. I don't have enough experience to know how this was achieved, hence the reason for my post :)</p>

[john_w.1]

<p>Also, there seem to be <em>billions</em> of colors with velvia that don't seem to be there with digital, although it can look similar.<br>

Here is one of the few shots that I have gotten to look like Velvia.<br>

If this doesn't look right due to the 8-bit JPEG, I will post a TIFF file.</p>

<p>WB: 4700k<br>

Shadows: 15<br>

Contrast: +50<br>

Saturation: +40</p><div></div>

[robert_brake1]

<p>Lisa, here is a link to an article with a digital version of Velvia. It's a good start at learning some of the post processing techniques available.<br>

http://www.popphoto.com/howto/1605/digital-toolbox-film-by-photoshop.html</p>

 

[patricklavoie]

<p>Liza, i understand your point. Sure there is a good image to start first, a good ligthing condition etc...</p>

<p>But when you ask "Last of all - her colours are stunning. the different hues stand out, and all are crisp and vivid. Any tips on how to achieve this?..." I still will give you the same advice, whatever the how you do it, hue saturation and contrast are still the same, and will give you the same effect.</p>

<p>But as you can see on John image (no offense) one could use the tool and get indeed different image. I personnaly find this image way to dark and too *digital* maybe bacuase of the strong sharpen? or the compression?</p>

[steve_swinehart]

<p>The first thing you should do in PS is set "Levels" - so in layer control pick a new control layer "Levels." Now comes a neat little trick you can do. With the "Alt" key depressed (or control key on a Mac) - pick the left arrow on the histogram (shadow) - the preview screen will go white. It will stay white as long as you hold down on the right mouse key.</p>

<p>Slowly move the arrow to the right with the mouse key depressed until you see where the shadows start to appear on the white screen. Then check the image for what you've done and how the image looks. If you do the same thing with the right arrow - you will adjust the highlights. This method gives you a visual key as to what areas you are changing by adjusting the arrows instead of only using the full color visual preview of the entire image.</p>

<p>There are always multiple ways to do things in PS. Rather than the standard mantra, "contrast, hue, saturation" - try this technique it will give you a different control over adding color.</p>

<p>Duplicate the background layer. Then open the layer control and you will have a number (at least 20) different controls - try either "soft light" or "hard light" - that will give you a highly saturated color overlay. Then start adjusting the two layer controls - "opacity" and "fill." As you adjust those controls from 100% towards zero - you will desaturate the super saturated top layer until you get the amount of color added that you want.</p>

<p>You'll need to play with both controls as they have a different effect. Try "opacity" at 100% and then slide "fill" slowly to zero and see what happens. Then put "fill" at 100% and slide "opacity" to zero and note the effect. When used together, you can get a great deal of saturation control...but, there's even more...</p>

<p>Double click on the layer icon and open the second layer control panel.</p>

<p>There will be two sliders shown. The top slider is the top layer (the one you're working with) and the lower slider will be the layer underneath (base layer). There will be two arrows on each of the sliders - one for shadows (left arrow) and one for highlights (right arrow).</p>

<p>On the underneath layer (lower slider) "alt + click" (control key on a Mac) - on the left arrow (shadow) that will split the single arrow into two arrows.</p>

<p>What you've done is given a way to set the lowest point that the top layer will take effect so you can exclude shadows (they won't get darker) or midtones, etc. As an example, you would take the left split arrow and set it at 45 and the right split arrow and set it at 80. What that does is make it so NO extra saturation is applied to tones under 45 (shadows won't get darker) and will blend the affect to full at 80.</p>

<p>You can do the same with highlights (split the arrows) but, the the extra saturation made by this technique naturally falls off toward the highlights.</p>

<p>Then when you're done with adding color - use another control layer "Curves" to adjust the contrast slightly throughout the entire image....</p>

<p>Then you can go into selective color and adjust individual color, individual color contrast etc. - but try the duplicate layer and soft light or hard light adjustment first.</p>

[john_w.1]

<p>Patrick, I see what you mean. That looks awful compared to what it looked like when I followed the instructions in Robert's link.<br>

-John</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>I'm not sure flash wasn't used on these, especially on the one on the right. there is even hilightes on that one on her cheeks and the back ground, especially on the left is a good 2 stops or so darker than the foreground subject. This can occur naturally, but I wouldn't rule out fill flash at all.</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>Show us one of your pictures that you don't think is acceptible and others here can practice on it and tell you what steps we took to improve it.</p>

[bernardwest]

Definately increased contrast, and some sort of saturation boost. It could possibly be a saturation adjustment performed in 'Lab' colour space. This colour space is good for sometimes getting intense, but not too gaudy, colours. Basically the same effect (of using the Lab colour space) can be achieved by using the 'Vibrance' slider in lightroom. The other thing I would say about this is that she has really good control over depth of field for her subjects, and this, along with the strong contrast, definately help the subjects 'pop' in her photos.

[15sunrises]

<p>Curve adjustments are crucial when trying to emulate film in post processing. I'd suggest looking up velvia/provia/potra curves in google for photoshop and it might help you out as well.</p>

[june_daley]

<p>Steve - thank you SO much for that in deoth answer! That was really great of you, has helped me a lot. I had never thought to change the layer blending options before (I knew the option was there, just never thought to use it!)<br>

Thanks to everyone for all the great answers - I'm doing a lot better with my photos now! :):):)</p>