Beginner Before and after

Just wanted some advice on what you think of these pics first is as shot, 2nd changing white balance etc. Is the edited version any good what is it lacking and what can I do?

•
The warmer tones of the first are quite pleasing and not a fault in
themselves, the warmer WB here could be your legitimate intent.

Yeah, I prefer the warmer WB. Also, the cooler white balance makes her roots show quite a bit more... If you're trying to get the hand of editing you could try and boost her eyes a little.

As a general comment, the background is rather busy - the twigs are the same colour as the hair so she is lost in it a bit.

Err... well, the second 'corrected' version, doesn't look 'better' to me. Original has slight warm tone, second is cooler and seems to accentuate the hot spots making it look harsher and a bit washed.
That put to one side, what 'hits' me and jars, though is the composition! I suspect that its deliberate, but.. sorry, it just 'jars' on me! Maybe I'm just a bit too conventional, and credit for being a bit brave..
I should say I am getting 'more' conventional; I was just looking at a folder of pictures I took twenty years ago, and half of them I couldn't even bear to look at. One, the sea spouting up a crag in a cliff, I had deliberately put the horizon almost diagonally to draw attention to the ball of water rushing at the viewer... brave, anarchic, powerful, and... and.. I cant look any longer! its making me sea-sick! and I have many many like that I used to think were so good I actually hung on my wall!
Back to your's though; as I 'read' the photo... first glance - err - what? what am I looking at? There's nothing there! Dead tree? It's out of focus! ah.... girl with cute dog... oh... why is she hiding round the corner of the frame?
It's brave, you have avoided the cheese of a cutsky puppy shot close on H&S.. but selective focus hasn't thrown distracting back-ground out of attention, but draws me in, trying to see what the 'interest' in it might have been to include so much of it, so predominantly in the frame, increased contrast on high-lights in PP seems to accentuate this, too, so the girl and the dog, some-how become incidental, almost as if they just stuck their head round the corner while you were taking a picture of the barn! I like the way she is leaning into the frame, and focus is crack on both her eyes and the dogs. Pose is inviting. elements are there, but, composition just doesn't work for me. Small shift in Pov perhaps? Pull out a little wider, maybe, possibly go portrait, though suspect landscapes also deliberate, and a bit more More girl, bit less less dead tree, and do it all 'in camera' leave the post, its not doing anything for the shot.

Thanks for the comment, wow a lot to think on, this is only my 2nd week with the camera, I've been out as much as I can with it and I'm under no illusion I'm at the beginning of a very steep learning curve! I agree the background is pretty poor and In hindsight I should have probably come out a bit as it was actually under quite a Nice timber pergola in the park! I preferred the warmer tones which in fact we're all camera, my concern was that it might have had too much of a yellowish appearance I guess these things you pick up over time! Yeah now you say it every time I look at it now I'm looking at dead twigs lol! Thanks for not holding back maybe I'll get to the point of sticking something up that is at least not too bad

It is a steep learning curve but keep at it. I would try not to get overly concerned about the PP side of things but try and focus on composition and lighting first - get those right and you don't really need to do too much PP.

Take lots of photos and post them up for critique (good news is it seems you have a thick skin some people throw tantrums) and ideally learn to self critique, it's a powerful thing to be able to do.

Dan ives said:

This is only my 2nd week with the camera

Click to expand...

Bloomin eck! Well that puts a different slight on the matter!
So, what I thought was 'deliberate' contention, probably wasn't?
Did you think to turn the camera side-ways, 'portrait-orientation' rather than 'landscape' orientation as you have it?
If not, next time you are about, give it a go. - it's about the only thing i might do in Post-Process with that one, actually, 'crop' it portrait, take about half the frame off the side with all the twigs in it.
Do you know about the 'rule of thirds'? and how a viewer instinctively 'sees' a photo?
At first glance,our vision takes in the 'whole' of the frame, but pays most attention to the middle, then it shifts to the left hand edge and up to the top corner, where we'd start reading a book, and 'scans' the periferal detail... this is also how most newbies take a picture, they look at their 'subject' scan round them then bang them slap in the middle of the frame, frequently never stopping to think whether turning the camera through 90 deg to 'portrait' would cut out distracting back-ground, or include more of the subject or interesting for-ground. consequently, they get incredibly 'boring' photo's... not because they are 'bad' but, the viewer 'sees' everything that was put in it, at that first glance.
rule of thirds suggests you put a naughts and crosses grid on the frame, and place your subject not slap in the middle, but on one of the grid-lines, 1/3 over or up or down, preferably, subject dependent on the right, so that at 'first glance' the viewer doesn't pay the subject so much attention, then as they shift attention up to the top left and start scanning like a book, 'discover' the subject and take in a bit more detail... exact same subject, exact same shot, but JUST that slight skew, playing to the way our 'perception' works, suddenly makes it 'interesting'.
It also tends to conform to classical ideas of aesthetics and Athenian ideals of 'harmony' in the balance of thirds... you can do the same sort of perception trick on 5th's but doesn't work so well on the 'balance' bit, works well when you have a scene that's more dynamic and you want to emphasize the drama or tension but that's getting a bit 'deep' for a 2-week starter!
Fair bit, as such a newb to take heart from in there; you have avoided the cutsky cliche, you have avoided 'slap on centre' boring, you have got the focus bang on the eyes, and got a bit of selective focus, shallow depth of field working for you; plenty of pluses to build on... read up on composition, try turning the camera, look for alternative angles.... stay out of Post-Process! work on the basics of getting it Clean in Camera, you must have some of the right ideas and instincts.. so build on them.

Nawty said:

It is a steep learning curve but keep at it. I would try not to get overly concerned about the PP side of things but try and focus on composition and lighting first - get those right and you don't really need to do too much PP.

Take lots of photos and post them up for critique (good news is it seems you have a thick skin some people throw tantrums) and ideally learn to self critique, it's a powerful thing to be able to do.

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't take it to heart, if you don't get told where your going wrong you can never improve! Not that I'm trying to win any prizes or anything just want to take a decent photo!

Thanks for your comments

Thanks Teflon Mike, at least there are some basics there to work on, I was trying not for everything to be slap bang in the middle but didn't give much thought to composition! I'll try not to get too hung up on pp and let the camera do most of the work on that side of it which sounds like good advice! There is so much to take in!

Purely from a processing point of view the original is much nicer imo. The colours are a lot nicer in the first, and teh 2nd has too much clarity which is unflattering for faces (almost makes her look gaunt) and the 'foliage' in the background too harsh,

I think the first shot looks more natural - the second is rather too cold and the subject looks a bit washed out and slightly ill (though it may be more technically accurate from a white balance perspective).

Regarding the background - a lesson I learned a long time ago was to first choose the background, then place the subject in front of the background. This results in much more effective pictures and avoids the possibility of a distracting background as you've got in this shot. So when I'm trying something like this, before I even bring the camera anywhere near my eye, I'm looking primarily at everything else that will be in shot, then positioning myself and/or the subject as best I can.

You're also exaggerating the impact of the background by having your subject so far to the right. Might work on a "cleaner" background but not so much when it's quite distracting.

As above, when planning a portrait, the thought process in order is

Light
Background
Subject

Once all that's sorted, the most important thing is subject engagement which you appear to have cracked.

Thanks for the comments really good advice and I take it all on Board, Will keep shooting and see if the comments improve.

Thanks all

Colour on the first looks more natural to me, I wonder if the screen you're editing on is maybe set up a bit too warm?

First one is more nicer and warmer , and is my choice , but second one is more real , but who cares. We want world to be more enhanced.

The colour of the first one is better. Even if not more accurate, it's warmer and more pleasing to the eye. It might look better cropped as a portrait rather than landscape