How to create soft edit effect for Wedding Photos?

[ElizabethM]

Hello folks!
I have a question. How does one achieve the soft edit effect seen in many wedding photos? You know the effect where the contrast isn't too overpowering but at the same time the colours are blended it nicely. When you stare at the picture it doesn't come out as harsh or too much, but soothing and calm?

Like these:



I would love to recreate the effect in particular similar to the girl wit the flower crowd (though without so much blur) and the last two pictures with the groom and the flower, that's actually the most accurate photo to the effect I'd like to create. But an effect that looks like the couple on the bridge is also something I'd like to go for.

Does anybody know how to create these effects? :')

 

[IamSam]

I'm not sure if this is what your looking for but take a look here: https://www.google.com/#q=Photoshop+soft+focus

 

[ElizabethM]

Thanks for the link Sam, but unfortunately that's not what I'm looking for.

It doesn't have to do with bluring the image specifically. Like that picture of the wedding couple (where the man has the flowers) I'd like to be able to recreate that sort of soft tone that leaves everything a bit pastel like and giving everything a bit of a soft edge and touch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWttclt_nW4

Like this tutorial in a way.

Unfortunately my images are mostly flower images or landscape so I don't seem to be getting the same effect these people get with their images. :/

 

[Argos]

Is this what you mean? example porrly done in 10sec.

Original:

 

[Argos]

Maybe i was too sutil i grap one of your example this time. is this the effect you want?

 

[ElizabethM]

Yes to both but not so dark. The effect seems almost right, except I'd prefer it more like this:



See in this image they do have a bit of a faded effect but the overall thing I noise is that it's somehow white and ... light. I hope I make sense. I don't want it to look gray but more soft and light.... But without dulling the image.

How do I do that?

 

[Argos]

I dont know if i understand you my inglish kinda sucks sorry XD, something like this?

 

[ElizabethM]

I hope this isn't a bit irritating but much as those wedding pictures seem to have the faded effects which you all have so nicely showed me, it's not exactly THAT that I'm looking for.


It's this...


See it's this softness to the image that even though there's still strong contrast and colours, the image comes out as serene and calm. Is it the filter or what am I missing? Because I've tried so many filters and even actions to see if it'll work but honestly all I get is a colour overlay and faded details of the images itself.

 

[IamSam]

Elizabeth, just a quick question. It appears as though you have taken a screenshot from a video...................didn't that same video explain how to accomplish the effect?

 

[Tom Mann]

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread closely, but when I look at the example image you just posted, the first things that come to my mind are:

a) Overcast day, but color corrected

b) Long lens (over 130 mm) wide open (at least f/2.8)

Photoshop efx are way down on my list of the important factors that went into that image.

Tom M

PS - I would go so far as to say that with a little bit of time, I could probably find examples of images with that look that were taken before Photoshop was developed. Obviously, the photographer would have used one of the low contrast, restrained saturation "Portra" films, but that's about it.

 

[ElizabethM]

Elizabeth, just a quick question. It appears as though you have taken a screenshot from a video...................didn't that same video explain how to accomplish the effect?

I tried it, but I the end resultss didn't match because the video's image was a little bit lighter and mine is just like a landscape image. The colours just didn't match in the end. I even tried playing around with the setting but I loose so much details.
Tom Mann, do you mean to say it's more the camera's effect and not post editing?

 

[Tom Mann]

... @Tom Mann, do you mean to say it's more the camera's effect and not post editing?

I know it may be hard to believe, but, IMHO, it's exactly what I said in my previous post:

a) NO! IT's NOT THE CAMERA - the camera is almost irrelevant as long as the exposure is reasonable;

b) It's mostly the lighting - overcast day, maybe with just a touch of fill from a reflector;

c) The choice of lens (longish, f/2.8 or faster) is a major factor; and, a distant third is ...

d) The choice of film and printing. This is about the closest equivalent to post processing in the digital age.

This used to be a very standard wedding / romance look in film days and is still very popular.

The bottom line is that if you make sure you have items (b) and (c) in place, then you'll find post processing of the resulting image to be much, much easierl

Tom M

PS - The above is not to say that one absolutely must have exactly the perfect diffuse lighting and and a fast long FL length lens with good OOF bokeh to get this effect, but that it WAS possible to get this look before PS was ever invented, and, in the modern day, having these factors in place when the photo is taken will make it that much easier to get a very pleasing soft look, the final result will look less artificial, you will spend much less time sitting in front of your computer doing post processing, etc.

 

[Tom Mann]

To support my claim that a major factor in the production of such images is the starting photo, go back to the tutorial that your example image came from, and look carefully at the starting image. In case you don't have the link any more, the URL of the tutorial is:
https://youtu.be/MWttclt_nW4
The image they started with is attached below.

a) As I pointed out earlier, the lens they used is obviously a telephoto with a wide aperture to blur the background, so that hardly needs any discussion. Also, notice that in this tutorial they didn't do anything in PS to further blur the already nice background.

b) Next, let's carefully examine the lighting in the starting image. What do you think the weather was like when they took the original photo? Light overcast, right? Since the 1950's, and probably earlier, photographers and film manufacturers like Kodak have called this type of lighting, "Cloudy bright". It was described in the insert included in almost every single box of amateur level color film that Kodak ever sold (see attached). What did I say in my last two posts: Start with a photograph taken on a cloudy day.

c) Finally, go through the tutorial to the end and pay particular attention towards the end of the video when they do the before and after comparison to show exactly what they did in PS. Basically, all they did in PS was: (1) they added some vibrance and decreased peak saturation values; (2) they added a bit of split toning; (3) added a bit of sharpening and some very light noise reduction; and, (4) added some slight vignetting. These are hardly breathtaking, fundamental changes -- just relatively minor tweaks to the starting image.

The bottom line is that as I said earlier, the changes made in PS ( ... Lightroom, actually...) were only a small factor compared to the overwhelming influence of starting with an appropriate image.

HTH,

Tom M

PS - BTW, an easy way to tell if the lighting is sufficiently diffuse for an image like this, there will be no shadow under the nose, no hotspots on the shoulders, no hard-edged shadows.

 

[MrToM]

This has just been uploaded.....any closer?

Regards.
MrToM.

 

[ElizabethM]

Wow, thanks Tom Mann! That was quite informative. You're eye for how a photograph is taken is really impressive. Is that something that comes from years of experience? Because when you comment about how the image is "obviously" taken is this and this way I'm sitting here thinking, "Yes.... Obviously....." :lol:

Nevertheless, I didn't manage to duplicate the exact effect but this new insight on the original image has been placed into a box called, "Future Knowledge That Will Always be Useful" so thank you for taking your time and explaining that to me! I really appreciate it!