GoldenLight Photography wrote:
I have seen this style of photos done  quite a bit.  It is soft but the details are in sharp focus.  I haven't had any luck getting the methodology from the focus but I have respect for their craft.  Would appreciate any revelations

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/20806355

Granted, I am new to PS still, but it looks back lit with some contrast addedback in, and some saturation. Nothing fancy.

I've had luck shooting backlits and just setting an overlay layer on top. Then you just need to tweak the satch. Easy peasy.

Sharpness is probably a post effect too.

But it looks like there was a reflector involved as well. Maybe a golden one, which probably would negate the need for tweaking satch.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:

Granted, I am new to PS still, but it looks back lit with some contrast addedback in, and some saturation. Nothing fancy.

I've had luck shooting backlits and just setting an overlay layer on top. Then you just need to tweak the satch. Easy peasy.

Sharpness is probably a post effect too.

But it looks like there was a reflector involved as well. Maybe a golden one, which probably would negate the need for tweaking satch.

I don't think that's photoshop at all.

It's lens flare from the corner, so it doesn't effect the image much.

David Katz Photography wrote:
I dunno if the saturation shift would create the softer effect alone

Saturation wouldn't create a soft effect. But it would bring back the color that is in that photo.

IrisSwope wrote:

I don't think that's photoshop at all.

It's lens flare from the corner, so it doesn't effect the image much.

I don't know, there's a lot of clarity and color for a backlit/lens flare photo.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:

David Katz Photography wrote:
I dunno if the saturation shift would create the softer effect alone

Saturation wouldn't create a soft effect. But it would bring back the color that is in that photo.


I don't know, there's a lot of clarity and color for a backlit/lens flare photo.

There's a reflection on her leg, there is probably a reflector or a wall there.

RDPhoto - Ric wrote:
It's backlit with the sun, a reflector in placed front of the model, shallow depth field (like f2.8 or 3.5 on a 50mm lens), slight over exposure.  You can also do it with a well diffused flash in front and the sun behind.

What He said!

GoldenLight Photography wrote:
This is so cool;  you guys are really producing some interesting ideas.  I see this style quite a bit....so it is a technique rather than a "by chance" shot.  What do you think the 'formula' is to achieve this?

Go out and try it, it's not hard.

You can see how the sun flares into the lens, you don't have to guess.
It's easier if you can line up the sun to hit something at the corner of the frame.

C. Scott Photography wrote:
Bullshit. 

That's a hard image to get and reflects a great deal of skill by the photographer.

Getting lens flare is common and easy. 

USING lens flair to make something thats simultaneously blown out and detailed is a mastery of art and technique.

Lucima posts on here.  Maybe he'll be good enough to give a general description of how he makes a shot like that.

You got it right! This isn't poor exposure, of flat lighting or any of that nonsense! This is a fantastic image! This style was popular in the late 70's and early 80's. Cokin made all kinds of flare filters to help people achieve different flare effects.

These shots are great!

GoldenLight Photography wrote:
I have seen this style of photos done  quite a bit.  It is soft but the details are in sharp focus.  I haven't had any luck getting the methodology from the focus but I have respect for their craft.  Would appreciate any revelations

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/20806355

Since it is an outdoor location I'd say the time of day since the glare works well in this image.

RDPhoto - Ric wrote:
um... I answered the question, and if you look at my profile, I have one on the front page.  The only PS I did to this image is put the words on it and sharpened the image when I shrunk it.  There is a b/w version in my portfolio.  Before I had a decent flash, I used a reflector to get this type of image.

There are some other versions of the image in my port with the sun behind and overhead.  It's a simple product of additive light and exposure in all cases.

Nope.
His photo is perfectly exposed and a hundred times softer and more balanced while being sharp.  Not a critique, your images blow mine away, but your photo is very different than the one the OP posted.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Or you can do this

Wow.  I think we have a winner. 

What is the explanation/technique description of this if I may ask?  I see its just a curves adjustment layer, but how do you go about approaching something like this? 
By that I mean, how do you know which rgb level to push which way?

C. Scott Photography wrote:

Nope.
His photo is perfectly exposed and a hundred times softer and more balanced while being sharp.  Not a critique, your images blow mine away, but your photo is very different than the one the OP posted.

No argument on the point that the photos are different, as I did not nail the EXACT effect of the ops image.  The technique for photographing the image is correct.  Post work in PS can always benefit the image.  I believe you need to have the correct photograph to start with, but many people want to do more work on the computer than I like, so of course there are other answers.  I don't believe my answer is incorrect - I have images on film (yes, I meant film) that look more similar to the referral image.

The ops referral photo appears to be shot in the morning in the countryside, mine is in the evening in downtown Atlanta with plenty of pollution to help me color the image.  My sunlight is much more harsh.  I did not bother making the model stand out too much - I was showing a client how I could shoot light colored clothing on a bright day.

C. Scott Photography wrote:
What is the explanation/technique description of this if I may ask?  I see its just a curves adjustment layer, but how do you go about approaching something like this? 
By that I mean, how do you know which rgb level to push which way?

When ever you're trying to duplicate a style (ANY style) Think in terms of :

Color

Light (Shadows and Highlights)

Texture

For this particular sample image:

Color: You have Two distinctive tones in this image - Yellow/greenish and Blue/purple
Complementary colors. This creates color contrast.

Where is the cast? Blue/purple in the shadows (so you lift the blue and red in that area)and yellow in the highlights, so you need to remove the blue from the highilghts

Then Light:
You need to start with a contrasty image,if it's not, then you need to enhance the contrast first and then do the curve.
You don't have strong highlights or strong shadows in the sample image, so you do that,you lift the darker point of the shadows and bring the highlights back.

Texture: Nothing special, basic clean up and a sharp image to begin with - other wise you need to sharpen it before applying the curve. Good DOF is also very important in these kinds of shoots.

You can dissect any image when thinking in terms of Color/Light and texture

Hope that helps.

Have a nice day
x

C. Scott Photography wrote:
Bullshit. 

That's a hard image to get and reflects a great deal of skill by the photographer.

Getting lens flare is common and easy. 

USING lens flair to make something thats simultaneously blown out and detailed is a mastery of art and technique.

Lucima posts on here.  Maybe he'll be good enough to give a general description of how he makes a shot like that.

Hence why the OP was asking how it was achieved, and people were responding with many options on how to do it. Nobody was referring to the skill of the photog.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:

Hence why the OP was asking how it was achieved, and people were responding with many options on how to do it. Nobody was referring to the skill of the photog.

Nope, I said it was easy.... and it is. But it requires some practice.

You don't even have to practice on a person, go shoot a light flared fence post until you get it right.

IrisSwope wrote:

Nope, I said it was easy.... and it is. But it requires some practice.

You don't even have to practice on a person, go shoot a light flared fence post until you get it right.

Ahh, I missed your post. I agree, I don't think it's exceptionally hard. No different than lighting, composing and exposing for any other photo.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

When ever you're trying to duplicate a style (ANY style) Think in terms of :

Color

Light (Shadows and Highlights)

Texture

For this particular sample image:

Color: You have Two distinctive tones in this image - Yellow/greenish and Blue/purple
Complementary colors. This creates color contrast.

Where is the cast? Blue/purple in the shadows (so you lift the blue and red in that area)and yellow in the highlights, so you need to remove the blue from the highilghts

Then Light:
You need to start with a contrasty image,if it's not, then you need to enhance the contrast first and then do the curve.
You don't have strong highlights or strong shadows in the sample image, so you do that,you lift the darker point of the shadows and bring the highlights back.

Texture: Nothing special, basic clean up and a sharp image to begin with - other wise you need to sharpen it before applying the curve. Good DOF is also very important in these kinds of shoots.

You can dissect any image when thinking in terms of Color/Light and texture

Hope that helps.

Have a nice day
x

I'll read it over a few times and try to digest what you said.  Thanks very much.

Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
Hence why the OP was asking how it was achieved, and people were responding with many options on how to do it. Nobody was referring to the skill of the photog.

Many of your pics share the same quality as the original. 

After seeing the photoshop technique it appears to be good photography followed by a particular photoshop magic to complete the effect.

IrisSwope wrote:
Nope, I said it was easy.... and it is. But it requires some practice.

You don't even have to practice on a person, go shoot a light flared fence post until you get it right.

Respectfully, I think your missing the point. 
The spirit of the OP's post was not 'how do I get the sun to flare in my pics?'.  Anybody can just point into the sun for that.
That photo has some very interesting post work apparently that has nothing to do with the flare.
I think that's where the conversation is getting mixed up.

For my part, I mistakenly assumed the affect was achieved entirely in camera as a result of the flare.

C. Scott Photography wrote:
Many of your pics share the same quality as the original. 

After seeing the photoshop technique it appears to be good photography followed by a particular photoshop magic to complete the effect.

I take offense to that. Most of my photos have SO much photoshop in them, there is almost no good photography in them whatsoever.

I kid But seriously, mine are very shopped. Back lighting isn't something I have played with much, but I'm starting to branch out. It is a skill, but just like front lighting, it's not hard to learn. Expose, compose, shoot, practice, learn, rinse, repeat.

C. Scott Photography wrote:
Wow.  I think we have a winner. 

What is the explanation/technique description of this if I may ask?  I see its just a curves adjustment layer, but how do you go about approaching something like this? 
By that I mean, how do you know which rgb level to push which way?

PRACTISE!  Play around with curves and you'll learn super quickly how what effects what.

This is how I edit my photos too - I have a lists of curves that i've made and use depending on the look I'm after, eg - vintage, youthful, defined, colour-popping,etc.

Although the vintage colouring is done in PS - it does take skill on the photographers side to get the overall effect.

L U C I M A wrote:
You guys are killing me! LOL

Seriously, I'm flattered. C. Scott, Nappsack, and all thanks for the kind words...

I've actually unveiled this image in a before an after sequence here: http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2011/02/ … er_05.html

If this posts correctly then it should appear below:


And as much as I love retouching (and I honestly really do love retouching)... this one had a great "start" to begin with. I don't think I'm always masterful or pure genius or necessarily even always driven by intent, sometimes you just get "lucky' with the shot

If anyone wants to know the exact layers and such, I can look at the full .PSD but I think my actual PS layers be disappointing to you now that you see the original

And yes, I'm always around Drop me a line!

Cheers!
________________________________________
Charles Lucima
Las Vegas Fashion/Editorial Workshop 4/16-17!

nothing like a 256 color animated gif to reveal the truth.

gerry edra wrote:
It is all lens flare. I always get several of the same pictures you showed whenever I shoot backlit subject and the sun is low, before 10am and before sunset.  I get several of those effects until i get my exposure correct. I'm using Nikon 70-200 2.8. I start with 2.8 wide open and speed of 100-200 asa 200. on camera ttl fill flash, and you have to shoot RAW so you can control exposure and whatever later on.  Hhhmmm !!! I did not know it is a style of shooting...I better start saving some of those pictures and have some sample on my port...

Would probably be a good idea.