To alter an image, in accordance with the client's instructions, in such a way that the image produced shows no visible signs of being altered.

This is the present definition and may be improved upon. If you have any suggestions or comments please post them in this thread.

Well, here we go, diving in right at the deep end.

Here's my first shot:

To remove imperfections from an image in digital form, while not altering the subject of the image.
Such imperfections may be present in the original subject or may be due to the photographic process.
The extent to which the imperfections are removed should be in attendance to the client's specifications.

- When alterations are applied to the original subject, beyond than removal of imperfections, other terms should be used.
- When the imperfections are due to damage inflicted to a photograhic print, or similar, the term restoration should be used.
Please shoot me down!

Rô

To touch again :)

I agree with Goose (kind of). IMO, anything done to an image after the shutter snaps is retouching (the shutter snapping was the first "touch"). For scans it would be after the scan is complete. For "from scratch" images (drawings, illustrations, etc.) it would be from whenever the artist decides that the image is "done".

Retouch


From
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=retouches

1 : to rework in order to improve : TOUCH UP
2 : to alter (as a photographic negative) to produce a more desirable appearance
3 : to color (new growth of hair) to match previously dyed, tinted, or bleached hair


And From

http://www.plumdigital.com/0_technology/4retouch.html

The technical definition would be using any digital technique to alter photo elements. If there is a line between imaging and restoration, its a blurry one. The general consensus is that:
Removing damage and rebuilding missing elements is Restoration (non taxable)
Removing unwanted photo elements or cosmetic flaws is Retouching
Adding or combining elements to create a new photo is Imaging, Compositing or Illustration.

There are some picture samples at the link.

Ken

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retouch) explains it all.....

Retouching is a technique that can be used to manipulate photos. Nowadays, retouching lost a lot of popularity to photoshopping, which can be practised by anyone who owns a personal computer and a copy of Adobe Photoshop. Retouching requires more tools and more practise.
Easy, so we just say it's like photoshopping, but only better! :devious: :devious:

Ken, agreed - jut didn't understand the "non taxable" bit.

Anybody know where along the line "touch up" got rewritten as "retouch"?

Rô

Rô, your definition fairly accurately captures what I've always believed for retouch. In addition to covering removing imperfections, should it also include something along the lines of "enhancing features"? For example, subtly increasing reflected light in eyes may not really be removing an imperfection, yet considered by most to be retouching. Is it worth a distinction?

Technically I agree with Doug, in that doing anything could be retouching. For me, this doesn't match well with my mind's picture when I hear "retouch" - it's more extreme. This suggests that retouch is the grand umbrella for any post-shutter-closing action, with restoration, manipulation, etc. falling underneath. I've always considered retouch to be on an equal plane with these, with distinctive differences. Of course, I could be all alone on this... :spchless:

- Kurt

Agreed that anywhere else "retouch" could easily be used as a general umbrella term for "post-shutter-closing alterations". The queston is should it be used as such here?

If yes, then the name of the site says everything. But once inside, the word becomes pretty well useless to us - because everything we do is retouching. Also we're going to need to find another word to describe small corrections and cosmetic adjustments.

If no, as many here seem to think, then we just have to come to a common understand as to what it means here inside RetouchPRO.

As to the "imperfection" wording, I was just trying to sum up a lot of different meanings I'd found (improve / more disirable.....). Maybe a bit clumsy, OK - I'll try and find something better.

Rô

If yes, then the name of the site says everything.

If not, I'll need to rename the site, since "everything" is what I had in mind when I registered the domain. At least come up with a replacement term for me :)

Doug, you could just start up more of these great sites: RestorePro, ManipuPro, ArtPro....the "Pro Series"! Ok, juuust kidding.

PhotoshoppingPRO. :devil: :devil: :devil:

(please don't throw me out, it was just a joke - really)
Rô

1.To add new details or touches to for correction or improvement (i.e. color and tone correction).
2.To improve or change (a photographic negative or print), as by adding minor details (i.e. highlights in eyes) or removing flaws (i.e. blemishes, cracks, tears).
I like this from T from the Nov Contest Discussion thread. It covers what I had in mind with the "enhancing features" angle, but with much better wording. :thumbsup:

- Kurt

The dictionary seems to class retouch and touch up the same, however I have always used the terms slightly differently.
I would say “I touched up the marks” or “I touched up the eye”
But I would say “I retouched the print”

I have always thought of ‘touch up’ as a repair and ‘retouched’ as improvements.

If ‘touch up’ is the same as ‘retouch’ we could rename the site to ‘TouchupPro’ which really would bring a whole new meaning to it. :grin:

I think the problem we are all having is in deciding just what we can do with a competition image. If we say that it would be ok to add highlights to the eyes etc. in a ‘retouch’ then where do you stop? The boundaries would again become blurred.

Maybe we need some New Words.
We could have for instance Retouch_RPLevel_1, Retouch_RPLevel_2 etc. Then we could have some very clear boundaries on their meanings. This would move any nitpickfeats from the Competition forum to the Glossary forum if there were any ambiguity.

Take, for example the Nov Competition. The babies dress looks to me like it was originally grey and then coloured green. Should we leave it Green or should we take it back to the original grey.

Also the rattle. Is it OK to delete it or move it? And what if the rattle had been a dummy (soother/passifier?). No professional photographer would leave that in. But in the strict sense of a Restore it would have to stay.

With very clear definitions to the new words all these ambiguities would be removed.
Also by using some new words we would not be in conflict with the dictionary and it would be clear that they were meant in our context at RetouchPro.

Ken.

Ken, thanks for an interesting post.
.....Maybe we need some New Words.
We could have for instance Retouch_RPLevel_1, Retouch_RPLevel_2 etc. This may be the key. Instead of using the term "Retouch" on its own, we should apply a qualifier. I could name a few......cosmetic, glamour, pageant.(*)

That way "Retouch" would have a slightly broader meaning. For me, it would still exclude full make-overs. But then again Doug might still persuade :hurt: me otherwise.
Then we could have some very clear boundaries on their meanings. This would move any nitpickfests from the Competition forum to the Glossary forum if there were any ambiguity.....Exactly! So let's get working, we've still got 19 days before the next one!

(*)for starters.......

Retouch: To remove imperfections from or add improvements to an image;

Cosmetic Retouch: To produce an improved photographic version of the original scene;

Glamour Retouch: To produce an optimised photographic image, based on the original scene;

Pageant Retouch: To produce an optimised stylised image, based on the original scene.

photographic = looks real; stylised = not photographic.

Rô

Thanks Rô.

I think we’re on the right track
Garazon has suggested some more

Restoration Artistic
Restoration Studio
Restoration Nonarchival

I don’t see the rush to create all these though. They can be created as and when they are needed.

TPaul could have some fun here by creating new ones. (eg. Restore_Portrait)
And she could intervene if she wanted. The next time a restore_Portrait contest came along then TPaul could take a quick look at the ‘Standard Rules’ and then make a qualifier ie “for this months contest use restore_Portrait but you may also change the background”

Regarding the Definition.
A spreadsheet could be used to remove any ambiguity. (it could be added as a download)

Eg
Remove Texture – Yes
Colour Correct - Yes
Replace background – No
Add Frame – Your Call
Etc.

Re Nitpickfest.
I do not think I have ever seen a nitpicking question. All I have ever seen are questions trying to get this sort of clarification.


Ken

Although I haven't posted here in some time, I've been mulling.

Trying to eliminate the specifics, and leave just the fundamental - I came up with this....
To alter an image, in accordance with the client's instructions, in such a way that the image produced shows no visible signs of being altered.
The wording may still be a bit clumsy, but I think the central idea comes through.
I'll post this at the start of the thread, but all suggestions are very welcome.

Rô

If you are talking about an old photo that has been damaged or whatever, then retouching is what we do, however if it is a portrait that I have just taken and the subject is looking at it with me, we NEVER retouch, we always ENHANCE.

To have to retouch means that there is something wrong with the subject. To enhance means that we are just going to make the subject look better than they already do!

I realize that the above has nothing to do with what you are talking about, just thought I would throw a little garbage into the game :lol:

Mike

I realize that the above has nothing to do with what you are talking about, just thought I would throw a little garbage into the game :lol:

No problem :cool: , that's what this thread is all about, Mike.
And the reason that it exists is that the exact word that is central to this site can mean different things to different folks.

I can see your point, enhance is a nicer way to describe the process to a client (even more so if the subject of the image IS the client).
But on the other hand, I could argue that the work that you will do is actually a retouch. So it would follow that, in a community of fellow retouchers, we don't need to be so nice with each other (although, thankfully, we usually are!)

Likewise the term "enhance" (which is on the glossary wish list) will usually mean (to us around here) a more general adjustment to the image - less focused on wrinkles, spots and creases.

Comments?

Rô

Usually when I am showing the client the image, it has not been printed yet so creases, spots or whatever are not a factor. So we enhance that good looking subject to make it look just a little bet better!

But I agree, when we are talking within ourselves, then retouch is a much more understood term that has been in use for a great many years. In fact we some of our customers use the term "retouch." And they seem to know what they mean by it when they are talking about their faces.

However when customers bring me an old print to work on, they usually do not use the term retouch instead they seem to not know what to call it, so I get terms like "magic" or "whatever you do to make it look good".

Anyway, nice thread.....