Wetlook World Forum

Message # 69890.2.1

Subject: Re:photography, modified

Date: Tue 21/03/17 21:35:39 GMT

Name: eileen

Email: info@eileenvanuitert.nl

Website:

By wetimer - wetimer@zoho.com Tue 21/03/17 20:46:47 GMT

Website:

I very rarely buy wetlook photos, so I do acknowledge that I'm not in much of a position to criticize, so what I offer here is in the spirit of constructive criticism, coming at it from the point of view of a keen amateur photographer.

Photos can be improved so much with just a little knowledge, often by bringing out information that is already hidden within them. It does annoy me that some of the people who are putting themselves out there to sell photos seem to know so little about this.

In the photos you posted, the camera has done its "intelligent" thing and exposed for the scene as a whole. It doesn't know that we really want the focus to be on is the wetlook and the lycra. Unfortunately, in most cases, this represents the darkest part of the picture. Therefore, the camera has underexposed the girl's legs and her dark coloured top, so we are losing all the detail from what should be the very focus of the pictures.

It would be best to correct for this to a degree using the camera, to start with. However, using photo editing software, we can bring back some of the lost detail in the darker areas of the photos.

The camera is also a little confused by the artificial lighting and surfaces. When we use our eyes to see, our brains compensate for this incorrect colour balance. Cameras aren't that good at doing that, so this can also be corrected for using software.

I have taken the liberty of downloading the samples you have posted, and made the two adjustments described above for each photo. I have posted the results here so you can see the difference:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77916305@N00/

This whole job took about 2 minutes, and used your compressed jpgs as the starting point. I'm sure much better results could be obtained using the original files and a little more time.

Of course, the result I obtained is subjective. I had to work without knowing what the original scene actually looked like in real life. I'm guessing that the blue of the girl's shirt was lighter than in most of your photos, based on its tone in the sunlit bedroom photo.

I would be interested in hearing what anyone else thinks about all this. Do I have a point, or am I just being pedantic and self-important?!

By the way, the flickr album I posted here is still credited to you. If you want me to take it offline, let me know. It was just a way of demonstrating my point for the purposes of this message.

By vikwam - info@wamderland.net Sun 19/03/17 22:06:05 GMT

Website: www.wamderland.net

V077 Eileen – Just an ordinary day (video diary)

It’s a special video presenting you an average day of Eileen. The video starts as she wakes up in her bed, dressed in leggings and tank top (her usual pyjamas). After rubbing off the sleep of her eyes, she gets out of bed and put on a cardigan before going to the kitchen to prepare her breakfast. The camera follows her everywhere and you can see as she brushes her hair, eats her breakfast, and

get dressed …  for her bath :)

well yes, she is not an ordinary girl. While most people undress for a bath, Eileen prefers to take it fully clothed, including shoes. Watch as she washes her leggings and her hair, taking a lengthy bath before she heads out to the garden to towel off under the sunshine.

www.wamderland.net

www.wamderland.net