Flagbearers

Did you make her lucky by at least waving afterward..?! Pleasant scene and tones. The top could use the complete shields. Even the tone balance would improve. The dark text, especially here on the right, partially is ruining the shot. Being honest, seen your background I really don't understand it. Well, maybe it's just because of it.. :) Knigth Olaf.

Thank you Olaf for your honest comments. I must say that I was the lucky one, having being able to frame her. She was engrossed in her magazine all through.

You are surprised that things are not improving with my photography. Perhaps you are right. It may be because I have changed my shooting preference from jpeg to RAW but am not doing justice to it. I have made the change over the last 2-3 weeks now and am using the trial version of Lightroom to optimise the photo. I'm sure I've underutilised the software.

PDE

Thank you for your encouraging comment. Regards.

Olaf de Vries has an interesting way of expressing himself, but he has his own eloquence.

This would be a really good photo except for reproductive values.

I suggest you ditch (get rid of) Lightroom trial and download the whole Photoshop trial and then play around with it, including its 'help' section.

You do need more detail in the stonework and less muddiness in her face and hair.  You cannot (last I looked) 'select' and work on individual portions of an image in Lighroom, but just make overall changes, especially to large numbers of photos, say from a wedding shoot, where you make similar changes to all photos.  It is an overall image adjuster but you can't 'manipulate' your photos or photo portions, the way you need to (so far as I recall).

I suggest you contact Meir Samel for some advice if he'll give it; he's an expert on tonalities and may be of some help.   It looks as though the photo were developed to make the sign black and white, as of course the sign should best be presented by the rest of the photo went to heck.  (If the sign had interesting text, we cannot read it, and it might have been helpful if you waited for her to turn so we can read the text . . . maybe not . . . maybe the text would detract . . . . artist's decision).

Selecting the sign (image>adjust image> and apply maybe shadow highlight filter, levels or whatever) then applying 'inverse' to the 'selection' you have made to the sign will 'select' all the rest of the photo.

If you're careful you can find the command that lets you select several things at once, or overlapping or intersecting objects as well.

Then use contrast/brightness filter, or convert the entire thing to graysscale (image>mode>grayscale) and then go to shadow highlight filter under image>adjust image>shadow highlight filter, then check the box to get the full menus including a mid-tone contrast slider from what in a color photo (RGB) would have been a 'color adjustment'  (that adjustment changes when you convert your capture to grayscale.

You are better off from using Lightjet (high quality commercial exhibition worthy) printers to have a RGB, non grayscale photo as they require all three colors to come up with black, but the printer can re-convert all your photos into RGB from grayscale.  They will also upscale your photos to over 700 dpi, as well, though, and you need to settle at 300 dpi (not the 240 dpi default from Adobe Raw Converter in Photoshop.

With Photoshop (LIGHTROOM IS SIMPLY THE WRONG CHOICE FOR A PHOTO LIKE THIS), you can work on its pieces, after first using the same 'engine' as in Lightroom, which is found in Photoshop Adobe Raw Converter.

This photo needs selecting or 'quick mask' for adjustjments of parts and I am unaware of how to do that in Lighroom, but anyway, even if you can, Lightroom is designed for mass production, not manipulating parts of individual good photos, and this can be a good photo. 

Listen to Olaf, he speaks, and I always listen, despite difficulty sometimes in my understanding -- he has an earthy but direct manner to him, and has some remarkable insight.

I hope this is responsive.  (oh, good symmetry, helps the photo remarkably and the use of 'three's' does too so long as not done blindly.)

john

John (Crosley)