These are two versions of the photo that I took for my front cover. The original image is on the left, and the edited version is on the right.
I decided to change my parts of my original image, as I felt that this would not be appropriate for my front cover.
- I decided to erase the background and replace it with a white background. This was because the background that I had taken my photo on was irrelevant, and may have distracted the viewer from the main focus of the image, which is the woman.
- I used the clone tool to erase her facial piercing. As she is meant to be a ‘pop’ star, it would not be good for her image to have a piercing here. It would also not appeal to the younger members of her target audience.
- I added a ‘lightening’ effect onto her necklace. This makes the jewellery that she is wearing appear to be much more expensive and interesting, rather than the original and more dull necklace that she was wearing before.
- I had to use the clone tool to erase the words that were on her wristband. I decided to keep the wristband in the image, as it shows that she is into music and attends music festivals. However, it is illegal to advertise any other brands without their permission. It would also not be good publicity for the singer that I am advertising, as it means that their attention could be lost.
- I decided to add a shadow behind her, so that it gives the effect that this photo was taken in an actual studio. This looks very professional and more realistic.
- I made the brightness and contrast greater, as the lighting in the photo was quite dark. There was also an orange tint over the photograph, meaning that I had to adjust the saturation slightly so that her skin colour was more realistic. Making the image brighter highlights the lighter areas of the photo, therefore attracting more attention to it.
- I decided to airbrush her face, to smooth her skin. This made her appear much more presentable for the front cover of the magazine. After I had used the guassian blur tool to do this, I used the sharpen tool to emphasise her eyes, lips, necklace and flower in her hair. This makes it far less obvious to the viewer that this image has been airbrushed.
Why did I not use these images?
- I did not paricularly like the lighting for this image. Because of the time that I took it, there was not natural lighting from the window, and I had to use the lighting that I had indoors. This created a slight orange tint on the image, which looked quite unprofessional.
- I chose to take this photo with flash on, because of the problem I experienced while taking photo one. However, i feel that this flash made the model look pale, and light had reflected off the wall behind, which looks quite unprofessional.
- I had tried to cover the floor and drawers with a white towel, to make it easier for me later on when I wanted to erase the background. However, I did not place enough white towels around, which made it very difficult for me to erase the background well.
- The angle of this image is not particularly good. It is not close up, nor is it a whole body shot. This makes it quite unclear for the user as they do not necessary know where to look. I should have either taken a close up image to attract more attention and make it clearer.
- This image is quite unsuccessful. Not only do I have a glare for a light that I had used, but my thumb can also be seen in the bottom left corner. This looks highly unprofessional, and distracts the user from the main focus, which is the model.