by Dimitar Variysky

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

Fantastic
Regards,Luis

I think Dimitar has lit his model to bring out her best features, and the lighting to my eye is very natural and pleasing. She has a natural and genuine look; e.g., the hat she is wearing seems like a natural for one who chooses to have relatively heavy eyebrows, feminine in a countryside sort of way (hope that makes sense). Her short-cropped hair is not meticulously styled, and that also fits the personality of the portrait. There may be a slightly green bias throughout, but I don't find it distracting at all. The only thing I might change if this were my photo is a small crop on the bottom; I think I'd prefer smooth skin with no hint of shadow that's currently in the lower right. I think this is one of Dimitar's better photos -- it's much more traditional relative to his other portraits and that's generally the direction I tend; I can understand that others might think very differently.

Before I read Stephen's comment, I had also noticed a green cast. Although the photo is excellent as is, my own sense is that a very small increase in magenta (absolutely no more than necessary) would neutralize the excess green without doing any damage to the color balance. I am not sure what amount of magenta needs to be added using Color Balance in Photoshop (or other program), but it would probably be in the single digits.

Congratulations, Dimitar, on a very fine photo.

--Lannie

I just adjusted the color balance by adding magenta in the value of thirteen. I am still not quite satisfied with the colors, since the magenta dulled the green in the clothing and hat without seeming to resolve the green cast in the skin color. Can any of the portrait photographers who specialize in flesh tones weigh in on this one?

--Lannie

It's a nice sort of introspective and gentle looking portrait. I like the the sweeping curve of the hat brim, and the more gentle curve of her shoulder, outlined by the edge of the dress. I also like the way the shadow at lower right adds just the slightest hint of décolleté. I'm not too sure about the colour work, though...it looks a bit off to me.

As I said, it's a nice portrait, but for me, there's really no sense of connectivity with the subject, other than wondering what she's thinking. I prefer more eye contact with the viewer.

I believe Jim Adams is spot on with his critique! The soft lighting on this beautiful model creates a "calming effect" to a me. This one is definitely a step-up from last week's POW!! Well done.

Lannie, I might have at least minimized the green cast in the whites of her eyes. The cast to me might provide a painterly quality if handled with a little more nuance and where it wouldn't feel like a white balance issue. It could just be harmonizing with the background if the color work were adjusted some. If you wanted to affect the skin overall without affecting the clothing and background, you can work with individual color channels. If you add some magenta only to the red channels, the skin will be affected more than the clothing. This would be done by using SELECTIVE COLOR in Photoshop rather than COLOR BALANCE. If COLOR BALANCE gets the desired effect on the skin more than SELECTIVE COLOR, you simply apply COLOR BALANCE and then use the history brush to wipe it off the clothing so the clothing and background remain true to the greener look.

I also feel disengaged from the subject. For me, it's not just about eye contact. I think there are many ways to have a portrait be engaging without necessarily having the subject look at the camera or viewer. A lot of it has to do more with expression than eye contact. Her expression here says "winsome portrait expression" and doesn't seem terribly personal. In THIS PHOTO in Dimitar's portfolio, the woman is not making eye contact, yet I feel much more engaged with her. The perspective goes a long way in creating my relationship as viewer to the woman pictured. There's the age-old nostril problem, of course, but we don't need to get into those details. It's just to point out one possible way to create a connection to the subject without necessarily having direct eye contact.

It looks to me like there was some sort of shadow on the upper part of her forehead coming around and down the far part of her cheek. That is now just kind of a gritty black noise. Maybe the original shadow was lightened or maybe it's a high ISO shot, but it's fairly outstanding as a technical matter. And that's where the green is also kind of pronounced. So I might have worked just with the green in the SHADOW part of COLOR BALANCE but I'd probably rework the shadows from scratch because of how I'm seeing them.

I think there's a nice softness achieved without it seeming airbrushed, as so many portraits do these days. And the photographer has avoided what is to me a very unsightly trend of oversharpening, especially her eyes, which are handled delicately and un-self-consciously. The lighting on the rim of her hat is effective and frames her face nicely.

Good art portrait!