Damien Symonds

Well, the quality still looks good, so that's all that matters. I don't see a problem here.

They will be, somehow. Your job is to figure out how. Try turning Gamma off, for starters. Then look for other settings that might free them up.

http://www.damiensymonds.net/desktop-monitor-brightness

Ok, great! It must have been a noise issue, then. The colour one must have been pretty noisy. May I see 100% crops of both files?

No, I'd stick with 6500 for now.

I would leave it on.

Are you sure you didn't resize at the same time? Can you check their pixel dimensions in the File Properties section of the Metadata panel in Bridge?

Gee ... could you show me a photo of that setting?

Some drop is normal, but that sure does seem like a lot. What quality level did you save it at?

Gosh, good catch!! It is sRGB, but her Color Settings must be wrong.

No, not necessarily. I was just curious.

As I mentioned earlier, if you'd shot on a tripod, you might have had other options (ie HDR). But in this situation, just choose one of the files and process it in the usual way. Choosing which file to use is a balancing act. Brighter files are better quality (not so noisy) but darker files have more outdoors detail visible through the window, as you know. As it happens, in this case, the darker file has noticeably better focus than the brighter one, so that decision is more or less made for us. I processed the darker file in ACR, then did some Levels work, to get this: With more time, it would be possible to enhance the outdoor detail a little more, of course, but even as you see here, it's fairly visible.

Out of interest, why do you work with DNG files?

Now, add a Hue/Saturation layer, and clip it to that new forehead layer. Move the "Lightness" slider to about -50, then invert the mask to hide the adjustment. Then very patiently (with a very low opacity brush) paint to darken the new forehead, until it looks plausible. Particularly the right-hand side above the eyebrow, where it should be more shadowed.

Yeah!!!! I think that has great potential, as long as the focus is equivalent.

This will probably require a "skin graft" from her arm, but before we explore that, are you sure you don't have any other photos of her forehead without the hair, that could be used for a forehead swap?

Yes, but not until you show me a clean edit. I don't teach my gymnasts to somersault before they can roll; nor would you expect your own children's teachers to teach them multiplication before they can add and subtract. The basics are vital, in any endeavour. PLEASE consider the Raw Class. It will change your life.

No, they're not blurred. It's exactly the photo you sent me, you must just be viewing it at a too-large size.

Ok, something like this?

Can you choose one that is more of a match for your photo? That one (the getting-out-of-the-car one) has a lot of shadow areas that your photo doesn't have. You need to choose a photo which has broad clear sky and lots of highlights, like yours does.

Hi Traci, can you give me a link to your lab's website, where they list these options?

Because you didn't use a tripod, no, it would be damn near impossible. Could you send me the raw files?

No, this is REALLY bad. You cannot possibly guarantee how other devices (your clients' screens, or more importantly, your lab) will handle that non-standard colour profile. Even if you insist on converting to BW in raw (and I strongly advise against it, BW conversion should be done in Photoshop where the control is so much more exquisite) you should convert to sRGB afterwards if necessary.

Do you mind sending me the raw file?

No, sorry, I can't do that here. You need to take The Raw Class for information like that.