Reading +Chang Su post (https://goo.gl/fUHj3G) on his Menma photo with flowers. I would recommend looking at LightRoom's Tone Curve. It's a pretty powerful setting.
TL:DR – look at the screenshot for the settings I used in LR
Lightroom does nondestructive changes (no physical changes to the original photo) ^_^
Chang has a great shot, the elements are there but I personally felt there could be more depth. I did a standard preset for the "punch" which added the Clarity to 20 and vibrancy a bit to 7 for the colors.
Next I took a look at the histogram and you can see a big bulk of the peak is group together. I set the curve (near the top right) whites near the highest peak. This brighten the image and did a slight curve to the darks (curve near the bottom left). This adds a bit more contrast, then I adjusted the sliders to take away some blowouts.
curves ftw
The clarity and tone curve tool have been my bread and butter for a long time. They are among the first edits I throw onto any given photo because they just make the vast majority of figure shots better.
However, the problem with this particular shot is that the histogram is already stacked the side of the light and highlights. To push it further right with the highlight and lights adjustment runs the risk of blowing out the details. While your shot technically does not blow out the highlights, it's becoming harder to discern the tonal differences in the white-ish portion of the shot (of which there is a LOT).
With that said, with our shots lined up side by side I agree that the shot could use more punch. I set my mid-point further right of the histogram and went from there. Here's my Menma Mk. II (http://www.hobbyhovel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Alter_-Menma_V2_5502.jpg) and the new before and after (http://www.hobbyhovel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/before-and-after2.jpg). Thoughts?
I can see this from all points, but I think I prefer the original. Francis' adjustments do get you to notice the shot more due to the highlights being louder, and adding punch, but the tones do fade away a bit.
However, I think Chang's add too much tonal difference, esp in the areas where the skin and flowers match. The difference between them has grown, while I think the fact that they were the same is what drew me to the photo in the first place. Although I think Francis' keeps that, it does wash out a bit. Which makes me think the original is my favorite of the 3 since it keeps everything in balance.
+Chang Su mk II looks good for me personally. With the histogram biased to the right it does make things difficult when you are adjusting for something else. Nevertheless I don't think there's anything wrong with a histogram skewed as well since we're not looking for balance but rather what we want to convey in the shot.
It's mainly all down to personal preference. I like a little more contrasty which is why I sacrificed some tone by limiting the range and pushing things to the right a "tad" more in my screenshot. 🙂
+Chang Su I'm curious what you feel like you're going for in the shot? Sometimes I take a shot, and then upon reflection, I'll tweak it emphasise a certain idea/feeling. I may come back later and decide that it wasn't the direction I wanted to go, and choose some other direction. All of the sliders and options and development possibilities can shift the purpose of a photo all over the motional spectrum depending on our mood at the time. So, I'm just curious if you had an initial goal, whether or not you achieved it, and what technical adjustments you made to further it? Getting your wife to stop asking you about it probably doesn't count. 😉
+jeremiah jahn "Light and fluffy" was the phrase I used in the blog post. I wanted the photo to not be too constrasty, but also avoid looking too flat as well.
There's more about the thought process in the post (http://www.hobbyhovel.com/2015/10/menma-with-flowers.html), but as for the technical adjustments, most of them can be seen here: http://www.hobbyhovel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/before-and-after2.jpg (the tone curve adjustment is for the second version of the photo, the rest were for the original). Besides that, there's some selective colour saturation and reverse vignetting I mentioned in the post as well.
As for whether or not I achieved the goal: I had thought I achieved it, but +Francis Huang has made me think twice about that. I generally prefer constrasty shots, and I think I can sprinkle a bit more contrast in this shot without compromising the "Light and fluffy" goal.
+Chang Su I had read your post, but for some reason didn't process "Light and Fluffy" as your goal… My opinion, is that you did hit that mark with the first version. You talk about NOT using the clarity adjustment to bring out extra detail, I wonder if perhaps you try going in the opposite direction and blur things up a little to achieve a "fluffier" look. I also wonder if there is a way to add more 'movement' to the picture. The sculpting of her hair makes it look as if she's falling back into the the flowers. So if you de-focus the ends of her hair and torso in a way to add movement towards the flowers it might also increase the 'fluff' by contrasting it with her smile. No matter what you do, it's a wonderful and inspiring photo, thanks for bringing the discussion, I've definitely learned a few things, that'd I'd like to try out.
Now that I'm on a PC with a calibrated screen… Yeah, the highlights are blown out (in Francis' version), in that the details in the flowers, face and dress are hard to see. In a sense, local contrast was sacrificed for global contrast.
Sometimes I can bring back local contrast by using an adjustment brush with exposure- or clarity+ in problem areas, or manipulating the global highlight/white sliders. But in the case of this photo, I think the curves are just driven too hard. There are some photos where blown highlights are part of the look, but not this one.
Nice feedback. I certainly appreciate it as well. 🙂
Thanks everyone! I find that the longer I spend editing a photo, the more and more I become divorced from reality, to a point where I don't know what is bright, what is white, or whether or not I can even trust my eyeballs any more. Your input really put things into perspective and are most welcome!