>>4159666Pushed beyond natural looking but still a nice look if that's intended. I think the noise reduction is done in-camera which kinda kills it for me.
>>4164451Looks good. adds to the image and you didn't butcher anything.
And I'm assuming bottom is 'After' but with this being modern /p/, there's every chance you just cranked the contrast and top is After. I hope it;s the bottom though.
>>4165134Simple. Looks good. Sky seems a little too blue to be natural but still like it.
>>4169136Standard a7ii exposure technique
>>4169148It works.
>>4171797Genuinely hope right is Before and left is After.
She looks like a nice person who's had her pic edited to to feature on a suicide awareness pamphlet. Why desaturate her skin? Why turn her nails from bright coloured to near black? Why give her a dyed black hair look?
You fucked it.
>>4171862No complaints. Looks pretty good.
A few things I'd do differently in the original shot but the editing looks good.
>>4172001>>4172003You've thrown me with the 'uncropped' post. I assume the blue, washed out looking image is the After pic, right?
I assume you're just adding the uncropped original so we can see the crop. Anyway, not my taste but nothing wrong with it. Looks fine to me. The lowered contrast kids what ooks like a slightly blurred image. not sure if out of focus or motion blue but I only really see it in the original.
>>4172760Looks good. nothing butchered here.
>>4172761Pretty good recovery. Was it as simple as sliding the green/magenta tint?
I think you could go slightly further in contrast and sharpening on the face to bring out that scaring. Even just a giant radial filter in the centre of the frame.
