• I aim to deliver images that separate myself from the crowd. Post-processing and retouching thus form a critical string to my bow, allowing me far more self-expression than I can achieve otherwise. I’ve written about this previously.
• I put my images into my portfolio, and these attract the attention of potential clients. When I’m hired, they’re hiring me in part for my ability to deliver the certain style of imagery that I use to promote myself. A good portion of that style is due to this post-processing work.
• The client then asks me to deliver images that have not been retouched – they often prefer to retouch in-house in order to have more creative flexibilty and to keep costs down.

The top image is indicative of my personal style and sets the expectations for the client. However, the bottom image is what the client then specifically asks for...

I hate delivering these un-processed images – I feel like a chef serving raw ingredients to a client’s dinner table.

Although I can generally understand the client’s reasoning I was taken aback not long ago when it was suggested to me that the photographer shouldn’t need to do any retouching – they should be “getting it right in camera”.

What’s scary here is the lack of understanding of the role of today’s commercial photographer. I believe absolutely that we should be getting the image right in camera, but the definition of “right” has evolved with the introduction of wide-spread digital techniques.

Today, the “right” image is one that is a prime candidate for manipulation. It should be well lit, well composed and technically correct – all this goes without saying, but it should be taken with consideration of the post-processing phase.

Here are some examples:

• The final image may need to have a “blown out” look. If the original isn’t blown out I can then choose the level to which to blow it out in post.  If it’s blown in camera I loose that ability.
• The final image may need to be toned. The “in-camera” image should nevertheless have natural coloration – no one expects the photographer to use coloured filters to do this any more!
• By giving a little leeway to the crop when the image is taken the client has for more cropping options available in post than if the image is too tight during the shot. The above image is a good example of this.  Obviously this can’t be taken to the extreme or else they’d be no pixels left!  This is one reason why I prefer high pixel count cameras such as the 5DMkII. The cropped image above still has 8MPixels – more than enough for most uses.

The list goes on, but the principle remains the same – the “right” in-camera image will often look very different to the final result. Moreover, we pre-visualise the final image before and during the shoot and so we’re shooting with the knowledge of how we’re going to be processing.

The running image below is a perfect example of all these considerations.

The original image to the right looks appalling and yet I absolutely got this image "right" in-camera because I was specifically shooting with the final image in mind.

The solution….

How can we address this issue with respect to out clients?  I only have one solution – educate them. Clients who approach us for out photographic style need to understand that post-processing is as important to our craft as the placement of our lights when we press the shutter.

Feel free to point them to this post if you wish…

I thought it might be interesting for some of you if I explain how this image of a tennis player diving for the ball was created, starting with the concept and working through to the the post-production.

Concept

Once the initial idea for the photo had been conceived (and having the idea is often the biggest challenge) the first step was to determine exactly how to achieve the result.  In this case I clearly couldn’t ask a model to dive onto a real tennis court (that’d hurt I would think…), so the only option left open to me was to produce a composite image.

As with all commercial-style shoots it’s important to pre-visualise the final image since this will guide the choice of location, the model, the clothing, etc. In the case of a composite image this pre-visualisation becomes absolutely critical; if the result is to be successful each of the individual images needs to be taken under similar conditions.  If the perspective of each subject isn’t consistent, the depth of field doesn’t match or the lighting is too different then the final result won’t be convincing.  It’s not feasible to undertake a project of this nature without having a good idea of what the final image will look like.

Planning

I knew that I wanted to use a wide angle lens with the tennis player close to the camera for a more dramatic perspective, and this implied a number of important considerations:

• I would need a very wide chroma key (“green screen”) backdrop.
• I would therefore need a fairly large studio.
• The perspective distortion would be strong, so it would be very important that the photo of the tennis court be taken at the same focal length as the photo of the player so that I could place the player at the correct distance into the image.

Unfortunately I didn’t have access to a green screen as wide as I needed, so I had to improvise.  I ordered a 1.2m x 15m roll of “Fadeless Art Paper”¹ so that I could stick it up on the wall using masking tape.  I didn’t expect this to be ideal (and I was right!) however I was prepared to spend a little more time in post-production to work around any problems.

Other than the backdrop issue there were many other things to think about – even a small scale shoot like this one needs careful planning.  Here’s an non-exhaustive list of the things that I needed to consider or remember to bring along:

• The date and time: the studio, the model and myself all needed to be available at the same time.
• The camera equipment: which lenses and strobes would I need to bring along? I have a very long equipment check list that I use when planning a shoot.
• The model’s comfort: food and drink (I made a quiche), access to toilets, a place to change, etc.  Also, in this case, a mattress to land on!
• Setting up: It’s the simple things that are easy to forget – masking tape, scissors and a step ladder for  putting up the backdrop for example.

The “Dive” Shoot

The "dive"

I planned to give myself an hour of set-up time before the talent arrived, however I was lucky enough to find a great model who wanted to be involved in the whole process.   She arrived early to help me unpack the car and prepare the equipment.  Without her help putting the backdrop in place would have been a horrendous experience – thanks Selma!

I’d bought 2 mattresses and a thick double duvet to use as a landing pad.  I positioned these at the angle that I wished to take the photo and moved them as far away from the “green screen” as I could.  The combination of a wide angle lens, a very wide subject (model horizontally out-stretched with a tennis racket) and close shooting distance meant that I couldn’t get as much separation as I’d have liked, so the green would inevitably “spill” onto the model and increase the post-processing time.  The main light also cast a shadow on the backdrop (although that isn’t too hard to handle later).

The lighting setup was fairly classic.  I used two monobloc flashes to light the backdrop as evenly as possible.  The main light was a Profoto AcuteB with the “New Zoom Reflector”, placed just left of camera and just high enough to put a catch light in the model’s eyes.  I planned to use another AcuteB as a fill light but it wasn’t necessary in the end (the white walls did that for me).  Rather than let it go unused I was able to use both power packs together for the main light (a dual tube Acute “Twin” head) allowing me to reduce the flash duration to better freeze the model in mid-air.  Finally, a Canon 580EX with a C.T.O. gel used as a kicker gave a slight separation.  All the flashes were set off simultaneously using PocketWizard radios.

After an hour’s set-up time we were ready to shoot.  Once again I was lucky to have been blessed with a great and enthusiastic model.  She took a 10 minute jog to get the sweat going a little, and then proceeded to take 70 (yes, seventy.) dives onto the landing pad.

My 5D MKII was tethered to my Macbook Pro, and the images were bought into Lightroom² so that she could see her body position and facial expressions.  This sort of direct feed back really helps to get the talent involved in the shoot, helping them to help you.

At the end of the shoot I took an image of a tennis ball under exactly the same lighting conditions.  This would facilitate the composition later on.

The “Tennis Court” Shoot

The tennis court

The choice of court would have an huge effect on the final image.  Since I wanted a slightly gritty/hard feel to the image I found a court that would suit that look.

The light falling onto the court was very flat – not at all like the hard light falling on the model – but that actually gave me more opportunity to control the image in post-production, and for the look I was after the flat light was more appropriate.  Had I wished for more lighting consistency it would have been crucial that the light was coming from the same direction as the light on the model (and that would have cast my shadow on the ground, complicating things a little).

The only major shooting considerations were therefore the focal length and aperture (which needed to be the same as that used in the studio), the focal point and the angle of view.

Post Production

I personally use Lightroom to catalogue and rate my images, so the very first step was to bring the images into my main catalogue. Once this was done I selected the images that would be used in the composite.

To choose my selects I use an iterative process.  On the first run through I give one star to all the images that have any possibility of being selected (in this case filtering out the ones where there model has already landed or where she wasn’t placed correctly in front of the green screen, etc).

I then filter for only these images and go through again to find the 2-star images – this is possible now that I have a familiarity with all the images in the collection.

In the third iteration I find the best images from the collection and I also check for critical focus.  If necessary a fourth iteration will leave me with just a few images to select from.  For this shoot the body position and facial expression were the two most important criteria.

Once I had my “dive” shot selected I bought it into Photoshop to remove the green screen (and the green spill).  This is a critical step, a badly cut out image will destroy the final effect.  Delivering a well-executed composite image requires a fair amount of post-processing experience and familiarity with your editing application (Photoshop in my case).

The tennis court also received some retouching to remove the fussy background. I wanted a clean image in which there weren’t lots of details fighting for the user’s attention.

The resulting composition is achieved using a fair number of layers in Photoshop.  Good use of layers ensures that the composition is created non-destructively so that it can be tweaked until it’s right.  The three principal images (court, talent and ball) are included as smart objects so that they can be transformed and retouched many times without compromising the image quality.

Here’s a look at the resulting layers palette to give you a feel for the work involved. Bear in mind that some of the work isn’t visible here since it’s inside the smart objects (the green-screen masking, for example).

Note that it’s best to read from the bottom up.

Attention to detail is essential if the composite is to look real to the casual observer. Things such as the subtle colouration of the ball and t-shirt from reflection of the ground help to ensure that the result is as seamless as possible.

Over to you…

I hope that this has been a useful insight into a shoot of this type.   There are many things to consider and to control, but this is what makes photography so interesting!

If you’re interested in learning more about photo realistic composition then you may be interested in the workshop that I’m going to to start offering for 2010.

If you have any questions then please feel free to leave a comment so that others may benefit.

1. This was harder than it should have been since I couldn’t find such a thing in France so I had to order from the UK.
2. Tethered shooting is possible using a combination of EOS Utility and Lightroom

Despite this, all too often the post-processing stage is neglected.  Some photographers even condemn the practice, uttering arguments along the lines of “wishing to capture the scene exactly as is was”, and using this as an excuse for avoiding any post-processing effort.  I’d like to have seen them have this discussion with Ansel Adams!

The reality of the situation is that no scene is captured “accurately” by a camera. Converting the 3-dimensional scene to a 2-dimensional photo has a dramatic effect all by itself, and this is further exacerbated by the choice of lens (and thus perspective).   Technology’s limits come into play too – both the dynamic range and the colours that can be recorded are determined by either the choice of film or the capacities of the digital camera’s sensors.  At this early stage the captured image is already a severely altered version of reality.

Furthermore, digital camera users who resort to JPEG mode have inadvertently decided to let the camera post-process their images for them,  in accordance with the preferences of the camera’s manufacturer.  The firmware of the camera will apply its own contrast curve, saturation adjustments, noise reduction, sharpening and colour balance to create a rendition of the image that is intended to be “pleasing” to the average user; it’s anything but “accurate”.  This is intentional – the results, aesthetically speaking, are more interesting than trying to reproduce the reality as accurate as possible.  Thus any personal attempt to capture reality has already failed – the camera’s done its best to create an improved version!

Those who prefer a RAW workflow take control of all of these aspects for themselves.  I believe that this is without a doubt the best approach for most serious photographers – I would never dream of letting my camera guess at my intentions when I create an image. Developing a RAW image is the first (and possibly last) step in the post-processing stage.  This is the point at which a photographer imposes his or her personal vision on a photo.

How far should one go with the post-processing?  Photographers will each have their own objectives; a journalist may indeed strive to create a neutral image that reflects the reality of the scene, whereas a fine-art photographer may change many aspects of the image.  The important point is that in all cases the photographer should be making these decisions and understanding his or her actions, rather than believing blindly that setting the camera to JPEG to avoid more work later is the right – or righteous – thing to do¹.

Since I’m a commercial photographer the post-processing phase is of utmost importance – it can make or break an image.  Advertisers don’t wish to convey reality; they wish to suggest something better – something that provokes an emotional response.  In my case the changes are often quite small, but they can make a huge difference to the final result.  The example in this post is from a recent shoot;  I’m loathe to show my out-of-camera originals – but hey, it’s for the greater cause. I’ve displayed the end result again for easier comparison.

Before

After

I’m embarrassed to show you the “before” version – it’s very rare that my original is quite so far removed from the final result, however as an example that demonstrates the importance that post-processing can have, it’s ideal.

Before the shoot I already had the final shot in my head, so I knew what I was aiming for.   This example is particularly appropriate because I couldn’t have captured the image I wanted without post processing.  The final image dictated that I use a wide-angle lens, but it would at the very least need cropping, and cropping is one form of post-processing all by itself².

I asked the model to wear a bright red t-shirt so that it would clash with the surroundings.  This would be easier to select in post-processing later, thus allowing me to make adjustments to the colour palette of the final image based on experimentation.

Although the original photo is well exposed, I decided to over-expose the final image to create the “raw” feeling that comes with high contrast.  Finally, I’ve warmed up the image by changing the white balance, added a little Lightroom clarity and a slight vignette, and I’m finished.

In the original the foot is blurred and the trainer’s dirty, the model has been decapitated and the colours are uninspiring, I don’t like the model’s overall body position or the composition. Nevertheless I was able to see past all this because I had an intention and because I’m willing and able to post-process my images. The actual post-processing work in this example is quite limited, however the result is dramatically different. It corresponds to both my intention and my personal style. I’m very happy to place the result in my portfolio.

1. It may well be the right thing to do for some photographers, such as a journalists who need to record many images and get them to the editor as fast as possible, but they of course understand this…
2. This is a major advantage of a high pixel count camera such as the 5D MkII.