So, I didn't edit these, but I did take the pictures. My husband was looking into HDR for another picture and decided to try them on the children. We're kind of at odds on if it looks good or not. At first we thought they looked great (because we were able to "fix" the white balance .. we think) then the more we looked at them we got confused. I'm convinced the HDR edit looks "plastic" if that makes sense? We're going to shoot in RAW this weekend because we've read about how to fix white balance if you're shooting in RAW, but I thought I'd ask for some CC for these edits.
1/250 f 2.8 ISO 100 55mm
My edit in photoshop
HDDR edit in photomatix. We just downloaded a trial of it last night to mess around with, and it puts a watermark on the picture..
I'm sorry I don't know what HDR is. Fixing white balance is easy in acr though. As far as the last edit goes, it looks a bit magenta to me (in the shadows) or maybe that is a color cast from something? I also think there is too much contrast. The crop has her eyes in the center of the frame too. I personally prefer the original, or your edit.
ETA : I had a quick play, since the SOOC was posted It's private in flickr. Let me know if you want me to take it down. I'd also be happy to share the steps, if you want to know
Annmarie, I think you're going about it the wrong way. From my understanding, most HDR photos are a composite of three separate shots - one underexposed, one overexposed, and one properly exposed. You would need to use a tripod in order to get each shot framed the same. And, most HDR pics are best done on non-living subjects since the subject would have to be stationary for all three pics. I've seen some really awesome HDR shots of some international landmarks, like the Eiffel Tower.
My knowledge on HDR is very limited - we went over it in my photography class, but not in depth.
On a side note, I can't believe how big Rowynn is getting!
My "babies" are Abigail (6/06) and Caleb (1/08 )
I think Krista is on the right track. HDR is not commonly used in portrait photography - at least, not with kids. You will see it some times with adults since you can reasonably expect them to stay still for the number of shots you need to get it right.
In the end, you merge a number of photos so that all elements in the photo are properly exposed. It often gives a really cool, hyper saturated effect.
Here's a website w/ a tutorial and some really stunning examples:
Now ... back to your edits ... I like your photoshop edit as well as Lauren's play.
I fully endorse switching to shooting in RAW. The ability to tweak your white balance is probably it's greatest selling point.
I had heard of HDR but never knew what it meant! Pretty cool effect, but I agree it looks better on objects than people!
(thanks for the tutorial link, GiGi!)
I like the more "clean" edited versions too. I also prefer your original crop...I don't know why but I see a mischevious twinkle in her eye. Almost as if there's something just out of the frame that's captivating her attention. It's the same look I see in my son's eye quite often, haha!
I agree with Lauren WB can be easily fixed on ACR given that you properly expose your image in camera.
-El mommy to B & A
Just chug-chug-chugging along.