Hello all....Naturally these pix were taken in the wrong place at the wrong time. Hopefully they can be saved. The shadow/highlights are so awful and I can't seem to help the matters. Any tips/tricks/workflow would be soooo greatly appreciated. Thanks to all who reply.

http://www2.cecomet.net/ronbon/ronbon/retouch1.JPG
http://www2.cecomet.net/ronbon/ronbon/retouch2.JPG

For some reason the photos are not showing up.

Loverly

hopefully these will do it

http://www2.cecomet.net/ronbon/ronbon/retouch1.jpg
http://www2.cecomet.net/ronbon/ronbon/retouch2.jpg

Well, I did a little playing around with picture #2. The shadow on the grooms face made it very difficult. I lightened it as much as possible, but any more than what I did was starting to give his face a yellow cast.

I also changed the background.

I agree the groom's face is the hardest aspect. I used a quick mask to mask dark areas and then feathered it by 4 pixels before I created a new layer and used it in screen mode, I duplicated this many times, each time erasing areas I was happy with. This is just a quickie, but you should be able to get the idea. At 2.30am in the morning I really should be in bed. The second image, I used two omni spot lights and also cloned over the highlights of the groom's face (pardon the overspray on the ear). On the other image, I started playing around with a transplant face for the bride, but that's a little more time intensive. I realise the whites are probably a little overblown but this is for concept mainly

Ken....That came out better than expected. What extraction method are you using to get that background in?

I used Corel PhotoPaint to mask off the bride and groom, along with the greenery at their feet. PhotoPaint has some nice features. After masking, I had PhotoPaint "smooth" the mask to give it a more natural appearance. When I pasted the bride and groom over the background, I also feathered that layer by a couple of pixels.

I also looked around and found a nice garden background with the sun shining in from approximately the same direction as the original photo.

well, since everyone else took the other picture, i went with this one.

masked off the over-bright areas with a show all.
ran the fast fix plugin on the masked parts to lower the brightness and give a touch of contrast.
did some minor clone and smudge to fix some similar very small areas that the mask/fast fix didnt catch.

done.

Craig

Here is my quick atempt. I didn't want to take the time to put in another background.

I added some LOVE as only a Loverly can do :wink:

Loverly

loverly,

maybe i've blown out my gamma on the monitor again, but i dont think so this time. it looks way too bright, especially the girl.

Craig

Here's what I got using Photoshop 7. On Retouch1 I replaced the brides eyes with the 2nd photo. (This was alot harder than I anticipated!) After that I corrected the slight overexposure by using a merged layer and changed it to Multiply mode and lowered the opacity to 50%. Fiddled with the Hue and Saturation to correct Grooms Sunburn(not that you can tell!), Dyed Brides roots, added some makeup, Lightened the shadows under the grooms eyes by making a selection around his eyes, copy and paste into it's own layer then change mode to Screen. Then use a "hide-all" or black mask to slowly paint away the shadow with a soft white brush at a low opacity. I also used the liquify feature to open his eyes up to lessen the squinty look. I removed the glare on the grooms head using the healing brush (on a seperate Background duplicate layer), then lowered the opacity of that layer to give it a more natural look. I whitened the brides teeth and also helped even out her skin tone by using a Merged all layer/duplicate background layer set to Multiply with a hide all mask, then painted in with a-you guessed it-soft white brush at a low opacity. This evened out her skin tone nicely and I used the same layer to darken her flowers and the top of her dress, the grooms tie and parts of his suit. After I was done I played around with Sepia tones, dreamy qualitys, and hand tinted look.

The dreamy quality was the easiest! On a duplicate layer of the flattened original layer, under filter>blur.gaussian- set at a 3% (it's just needs to be alittle blurry) Now set layer mode to Lighten- Viola! Dreamy effect. If you want the eyes to be sharper then use a layer mask and paint the sharpness back in.

Any Q's just ask, I had to write this pretty fast so it may not make sense!

~Amber~

Here are my steps in retouching this print:
1.Duplicated the Background Layer
2.Applied CS2's Shadow and Highlight feature. It opened up the man's
jacket a bit. and I applied highlight correction to the bride's dress and
flesh tones. I then made a layer mask on this layer and painted back
some of the image on the groom
3.I made an Empty Layer and used the Healing Brush to remove the
squinty wrinkles on the brow of the Bride.
4.I then made a Merge Visible Layer and applied the Liquify Filter and opened up both the Bride and Groom's eyes. I also corrected the down-turned corners of the Bride's mouth giving her a better smile
5.I made another Empty Layer and used the Healing Patch to remove the
sweaty highlight on the Groom's forehead
6. I made another Emtpy Layer and set the blending mode to Soft Light
and with a 10-20% soft black brush worked on the face shadows and
eye area.

I would not have the color on his lips it does not look right. maybe just bring ou the color in the flowers in her hands and his lapel.

amber,

brilliant stroke in replacing the eyes. nicely done (and i'm sure a bit of a trick). very well done!

Craig

Changed her eyes.
Gradient masked right side - levels change.
Ditto left side.
Straightened his collar a bit.
Thought I'd let them walk on water.

Thanks for the compliment Craig! The eyes took the longest to fix because of the different perspectives/size, and I just have a hard time with it-period!

Creeduk- Now that I look back at the tinted ones, I agree with you. He does look funny! Thanks for the new perspective. I have never really tinted before so I am not sure what to tint!

~Amber~

Amber....The eyes turned out perfect with no squint what-so-ever. I tried the sepia effect but did not quite want it for this particular couple. Thanks for your workflow in describing. The color correction is right on also

I greatly appreciate the efforts made to help me on these pix. I have been trying everything to correct the shadows/highlights but either made to dark or lighter in areas unwanted. I am going to try to manipulate the eyes a little more on the squints and possibly remove some more of the darkness on the grooms shoulder. The foreheads really came out nice on all replies. Please feel free to train me even more on these pix!! :bow:

loverly,

maybe i've blown out my gamma on the monitor again, but i dont think so this time. it looks way to bright, especially the girl.

Craig

I'm on a lap top so sometimes there is a bit of a difference with desktop monitors and mine.

Loverly

Dreamypix, looks great.

Thanks Cass!

Amber, you just keep on postin! We can all learn a ton o' stuff frum u!

Dave

I'm on a lap top so sometimes there is a bit of a difference with desktop monitors and mine.

ah, ok.

Craig

Shadows are terible. Used the eyedpropper to sample a lighter part of his face and then selected the darker parts added a new layer and filled at 40% added noise to simulate skin, took the opacity down. Added a layer mask, multiply and then used a soft brush at a lower oppacity to paint on the lightparts of arms of the bride. Used the healing tool to blend in the light spots and shawdow on his face... cut them into a better backgound avialable at morguefiles.com. Would need more time to finish..

Here is my try at this one. I used the woman's face from the second image. I worked on lightening and softening the shadows and enhanced the bouquet.

Pierre

Well I thought I would have a go at this one too, although there have already been so many good solutions offered.

Like Amber, I copied the eyes of the bride from the second image, matched colour, pasted and transformed to fit the face. I'm still not completely happy with the eyeline though. I then selected, and duplicated the bride and set to multiply (at about 50% opacity) to reduce the overexposure, darken and increase detail. Finally I tried to open the groom's eyes up a little by copying each eye, and using transform. Oh - and I tried (rather roughly) to remove the cement barrier.

That is nice.....I see what you mean of the eye line vs. the original. Hey....it was an awful picture, what can I say!!!

Whilst there are some absolutely wonderful reconstructions here, one of the problems for the bride I'd think, would be overall this photo is not as flattering as it could be. This is why I have stolen her face from the other photo as it looks far more flattering and softer.

(Though Cassidy just beat me to it) I've pasted the bride's torso onto my last version. Of course the problem encountered here is the sun is coming from the opposite direct onto the bride and grooms face...

These are definitely NOT flattering originals at all...that is truly why I am here and rather embarassed even posting these but......know that one of you will pull through and teach me a great way.
Caitlin....I really am liking this last post only because the shadow is now covering the distortion of the face replacement as before it looked a little odd but still nicely done. I am sure that the client would not see it fit but, this last one is much more appealing.

You're right - the eyes on my last attempt did look a bit odd - Amber did the substitution far more successfully.

And now simply because I couldn't resist (it's the wedding portrait cliche after all...) a white marque.

Caitlin.......This is exceptional. Love the vignette....the texture is just a hint too strong but love it anyways.!!!!!
The grooms eyes came out very nice...nicely done!!!
I am a bit curious on how you did the face replacement so eloquently?

dbelmo - this is my layer just with the inserted torso. As you can see I've used a layer mask to feather around the edges. I used the Color match tool in CS2 to match the two layers with a selection. (Apologies for being slack and not naming any of my layers!)

Caitlin- That rocks! I didn't think about adding an entire torso! I tried pasting the other face but the perspective was just way too different to pull it off. But it never occured to me to add the entire torso. Looks great!

dbelmo- Just curious, Is there anyway I could use your photo in my portfolio as an example? If not, I understand. Thought I would ask anyways..:classic:



~Amber~

As per dreamypix's request also, if possible, Dbelmo.

Wow Caitlin, always learning, never knew a colourmatch option was tucked away in CS2. All that adjustment etc to match the colour and then trying to remove the shadow cast.

Dreamypix, have a play with that photo again, the face neck and upper body are about as close as you can get to ideal for transplantation.

Hi Dbelmo.

Could I get some feedback on the image I posted? It's obvious by your polite silence that there are problems with it, but I much prefer negative comments to no reaction. I wouldn't publish if I couldn't take it :wink: .

Pierre

Hi panpan,

Whilst this was not directed to me, from one not very skilled (me), at first look at your photo, you've done a fine job however the tone of the replacement face does look a little flouro in spots and there appears to be a jaw line which upon close scruitiny would give away the face transplant to the trained eye. I personally found taking the face, neck and upper chest area together with some shoulder a better fit. The jaw line is probably only apparent due to the flourescence of the transplanted face.

I'm sorry for the delay...Just got your message. I agree with Cass that the face does look somewhat disorganized on her body but overall better than what I completed on this task. I am still trying to get the correct placement on Caitlin's excellent retouch but can't quite seem to perfect it as she did. Once again, I'm sorry for the delay of comment. I appreciate your gracious efforts though. !!!!!

Thank you Cassidy and Dbelmo. These comments help a lot because the fluorescence is not apparent on my system. I'm going to recalibrate my monitor. The face transplant was a shortcut that didn't quite work. Caitlin's use of the torso works well. I might have another go with a morph of both faces that would mitigate the shadow mismatch problem. Morphing is the technique I was trying to sidestep because it's more involved than just copying.

I think the only correction to the 1st image that people forgot so far is to get rid of the two strips of light between the groom's nose and mouth near the cheeks.

Cassidy, your feedback is very welcome. I addressed my request to dbelmo because I had more of a claim to his help since I tried to help him.

Feedback from others is also very welcome. I'm aware that critique is work; people hesitate even more when they only have negative comments to make. Im sure I'm not the only one who would like those negative comments made anyway. I suspect those of us with less skill or experience don't get feedback out of misguided courtesy.

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

I just had another look at your submission, and I certainly think that your retouch of the groom is probably the best that has been done. His face now looks clean and bright with a good eyeline. :bigthmb:

I think the problem that you have run into with the bride's face is a tricky one - which is why I ended out taking the easy path of transposing the whole torso instead. If you took at her face and pose carefully you will see that not only is she squinting on one picture her face and head are actually in different positions. Her head is slightly down in the squinting shot, while it is fully erect in the other one. This means that the proportions of the face change, and even the placement of the eyes etc.

In your retouch you have carefully matched the positioning and size of the facial features, but this does not look completely realistic, because the features have been photographed from a different angle.

I've taken the liberty of doing a comparison (attached) just by roughly pasting each version of the face in place.

As you can see, the features are higher up, and a bit smaller in the straight head transposition (no.3). Her features appear to be a diiferent proportion as she is no longer straining for a big smile, and her nose is no longer accentuated by the angle.

I think the fluorescence the others are referring to to me appears as some blotchiness of the skin, particularly around the jaw line, and if that was not there the face would look more real.

here it my attempt at one of them....

TokenArt

Hi Cailtlin.Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

I agree that the angles are different. It's seems to me that the lens is level with her eyes in the second and level with his eyes in the first.

Your idea of copying the torso is a better one than just the face. In this one, I blurred her freckles to avoid some of the blotchiness of my previous attempt.

Pierre

here it my attempt at one of them....

TokenArt

Hi TokenArt.

You're braver than I am. I didn't even try the second image because the lighting is very difficult :scared: .

It seems to me that this image's main problem apart from the harsh light is the groom's eyes are almost closed. Since copying the bride's features from this one to the first image worked, maybe you could try the reverse here and copy the groom's eyes from there?

I think you lightened the image and lowered the contrast too much. That makes the suit look grey and the dress look bluish and puplish on my monitor. I would target the highlights and shadows more directly in their own layers if I were trying this one.

Pierre

Looks great panpan

Looks great panpan
Thank you, Cass.

I decided to give the second one a try fianlly. I found it a lot harder than the first.

Pierre

Great Stuff panpan, glad you had a go at it. You didn't offer a penny for my thoughts, however a couple of observations/comments either welcome or not welcome, I think given the two photos the groom possibly is a candidate for some high blood pressure, so I think a little pinker is more realistic and I'd prefer a little bit more tonal range on the bride (not a slur, just my point of view). Keep in mind, I am a realist rather than an idealist so seek to maintain as much authenticity as possible. Despite that, you did a great job of removal of shadow and it may well be that the resulting colour/tonal ranges are as a result of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I feel you are seeking feedback

You didn't offer a penny for my thoughts, however a couple of observations/comments either welcome or not welcome, Your observations are always welcome, Cass. And I do offer a penny :lmao: .

I was so focused on the shadows that I didn't pay enough attention to the couple's skin tone. I'll see if I can fix that and edit the picture when I get something satisfactory.

Pierre

Here is the edited image. The groom's face is now redder and the bride's skin has a little wider tonal range. She's very pale so it's not a lot.

Let's hope for the groom that it's sunburn instead of high blood pressure ;) .

Pierre

yep makes a difference panpan