I really like her stuff and got her book. She said in a recent interview that she could spend up 6 months to retouch one photo:

http://www.lorettalux.de/

BTW nobody knows her real name and her prints sold as high as $19,000 each. She hand-painted her some of the backgrounds and the skin as well. The closest i can get to emulate her skin tone is putting a red channel layer on the top of the original playing different bending mode (luminosity or screen). and opacity. Can some experts here suggest a better method???? :dizzy:

Her photographic backgrounds have a kind of creamy yellow or pale rose red tinting to me. I have tried using a layer filled cream colour set to very low opacity and putting it on top, masking the areas where i don't want. In addition, I have tried using diffuser glow filter setting the foreground and background colours in two shades of creamy colour with layer mask for selective areas. But it doesn't get close to her style. Finally I am thinking of handpainting the different shades of creamy colour all over the areas with a low opacity brush.....I wonder if there is cleverer way of getting that creamy pastel colour on the clothes and background???? :question: I got the feelings that she achieves that skin tone and tinting through sheer patience of hand painting and super painting skills. (she was a trained painter).

sorry stupid me i posted this in the wrong part of the forum..i can't delete the post and re-post it to the main forum. :depressed

unreal, to be well contacted and eccentric whilst valued at the same time is an art form

I have Posted this on Many Forums.
Would be nice if anybody could help on Finding out how to achieve those pastel washed out "White" skintones!!
Will be watching this thread.
:lol:
Snook

Snook :)
The more I study her photos, the more fascinating it gets. She is enigmatic. There are several variations of skin tone she used. From very pale complexion to pinky rose colour. I would describe the skin as translucent, painterly and creamy. She often put the backgrounds, like the walls, sky and clothes in the very close shade of colour; a good example is the "Rose Garden". She got some of the vintage clothes from e-bay and used hair stylist BTW. All she said her techniques are very complex and time consuming.
I start to believe she creates that skin tone by very slow and labourous handpainting; there is no short cut for that.
Check out this painting of Bronzino I found by chance:

http://www.micromediaups.it/estetica/Maria08A.jpg

The child reminds me of the "Drummer" :). The hair style is the same. She emulated the skin tone of the old masters.

This reminds me a little of some of Joyce Tenneson's work. Except I don't think Tenneson did it in Photoshop.

http://www.tenneson.com/index_tr.html
(some artful nudity)

dc

I've a question about her style---why does it appear the heads are larger than the bodies in some images?

Or is it that the bodies are elongated?

Maureen :wavey:

I've a question about her style---why does it appear the heads are larger than the bodies in some images?

In some of the photos, she enlarged the heads with Transform tool, the eyes with Liquidfy, Spherize or whatever...adding colour and details to the iris. The hair in some cases is being retouched to give that silky look, everything is meticulously painted with precise colour matching.

Nothing New on the Loretta front?
Just thought I'd bump this thread up as I am really interested aswell.
I do know 2 things about her. Her Backgrounds are put in seperately and as she states they are from her different worldy trips. And yes she does emlarge slightly heads ,eyes limbs etc...
I am more interested personally in how she get's those White, slightly colorless skintones. Anybody have any suggestions?? Also she has kind of a pastel look to her colors and ofcourse she uses really FLAT lighting.
Hope that may help someone..
Snook :eek:

Still Nothing on this thread???
Strange... :cold:
Snook

Why strange?
Theres really nothing new to be said on the topic that hasnt already been said. How she does it? Well you'd have to ask her. Can it be done a number of ways - yes. Personally I'd use curves and colour layers. Is there anything special about her retouching? No. In fact if she posted here for critique we could have a thread several pages long listing her mistakes.
If you just take her retouching at face value, a lot of isnt very good.

The 'appeal' of her work is not the retouching she does, its the image as a whole - thats everything from the model, the expression the costume, the lighting, backdrop, the choice of colours, everything. People dont pay ludicrious amounts of money for her work, or go to a gallery to see it to say 'oooh look at that retouching, its amazing'. They do those things because something about it appeals to them as an artistic piece not an example of technical wizardry.

Well she won't tell you how she did it, becuase she even doesn't tell you her real names. According to a fashion magazine, some german guy tried to de-code the photoshop techniques of her retouching in a forum. MAybe the way she got the skin tone was very simple.
If she made lots of mistakes, I would imagine they are very good mistakes. At least she makes an art form of combining photgraphy and retouching. :bow:
I suppose there are no rules; right or wrong things to do in photography/retouching. She is just very good at expressing her artistic vision in her head (imaginery world) and throwing the viewers' perception off balance, provoking both negative and positive emotions from people. This distinguishs her style from commercial glossy stuff, Dior look or whatever. If she followed the "rules", her stuff would look like everybody's else and nobody would pay mega $$$$ to buy her works.

I am fairly new here and I saw this discussion on Loretta Lux's skin. I have attached two files and while it may not be exactly the same as Loretta Lux's images, it might help in giving you some hints as to how to get voluminous, pastel/porcelain skin.

This tecchnique is my own, so I am not going to give a full play-by-play. Most of you are smart enough to figure out what's missing anyway.

Firstly, for this effect, you need a well-lit subject. You can try it on a high-con, or dark, moody image, but your mileage may vary.

Open the image in Photoshop, do you basic adjustments and retouch the image to fix the skin etc.

At this point I would do a batch of capture sharpening. If you don't know what I am talking about, then google it.

Next, I create a new blurred, layer with an alpha layer mask. I then paint in the layer mask wherever the skin is, being careful to leave in important details like eyes, lips, etc. This gives the skin an overall consistency. Adjust the opacity of this layer until you like it and it still look convincing.

Next step is to create a merged layer and convert it to black and white (I use a Deep Red Contrast filter). This layer is the key really. You can copy the layer mask from the blurred layer, but then you will want to make some adjustments to the layer to get everything looking right. Play with opacity to taste.

Next you can finish sharpening and then make any other adjustments as you like.

That's it in a nutshell.

I have no idea if this is anything close to LL's technique. I imagine her's is more involved, but while I admire what she does, I don't really find her work all that compelling. It has a 'Children of the Corn' effect to it, and I am always expecting their eyes to start glowing.

This technique of mine is just a simple way to get a nice soft, porcelain skin effect. Please do not ask me for more details. My instructions are a bit vague so that you have room to experiment and take it further, so do just that. If you come up with something new or easier or better, then let me know.

Bryon Paul McCartney
www.atelier-mccartney.com

Thank you very much for your input. :wavey:

Next, I create a new blurred, layer with an alpha layer mask. I then paint in the layer mask wherever the skin is, being careful to leave in important details like eyes, lips, etc. This gives the skin an overall consistency. Adjust the opacity of this layer until you like it and it still look convincing.

I got the idea of it. You blur the skin texture and blemish, masking out the details and edges.This sounds like the same idea used in Edge Sharpening technique using alpha channel which I use all the time--EXCEPT they are reversed: you blur the skin areas masking the edges and details like eyes, lips and hair-while Edge Sharpening selectively sharpens only the "large scale" edges of the eyes, lips..etc leaving out the "small scale " pores and digital sensor nosies...something similar but not quite the same steps.

Next step is to create a merged layer and convert it to black and white (I use a Deep Red Contrast filter). This layer is the key really. You can copy the layer mask from the blurred layer, but then you will want to make some adjustments to the layer to get everything looking right. Play with opacity to taste.

I think this has very similar effect as the red channel technique I mentioned above. The red filter on BW layer emulates the effect of red filter on BW film or the red sensitivity of very old 30-40s BW tungsten film that produced silky skin tones, brilliant highlights, and soft contrast shadows. YOu can also use channel mixer instead of red filter in Photoshop.

Thank you very much for your input. :wavey:
I think this has very similar effect as the red channel technique I mentioned above. The red filter on BW layer emulates the effect of red filter on BW film or the red sensitivity of very old 30-40s BW tungsten film that produced silky skin tones, brilliant highlights, and soft contrast shadows. YOu can also use channel mixer instead of red filter in Photoshop.

I use PhotoKit for the Deep Red Contrast, mainly because it automatically creates a new layer. You could use Channel Mixer as well, I suppose, as most of the work is done in the layer mask. In these images, I am using this BW layer to control the amount of color in the skin, more painting in the layer mask means more color in the final image, etc. You have to do a lot of painting in the layer masks to get this look right, in these images you have to separate the hair, eyes, lips, etc and convincing blend the skin tones to look right. How much opacity you give to the layers also affects the end result quite a bit.

I am fairly new here and I saw this discussion on Loretta Lux's skin. I have attached two files and while it may not be exactly the same as Loretta Lux's images, it might help in giving you some hints as to how to get voluminous, pastel/porcelain skin.

This tecchnique is my own, so I am not going to give a full play-by-play. Most of you are smart enough to figure out what's missing anyway.

Firstly, for this effect, you need a well-lit subject. You can try it on a high-con, or dark, moody image, but your mileage may vary.

Open the image in Photoshop, do you basic adjustments and retouch the image to fix the skin etc.

At this point I would do a batch of capture sharpening. If you don't know what I am talking about, then google it.

Next, I create a new blurred, layer with an alpha layer mask. I then paint in the layer mask wherever the skin is, being careful to leave in important details like eyes, lips, etc. This gives the skin an overall consistency. Adjust the opacity of this layer until you like it and it still look convincing.

Next step is to create a merged layer and convert it to black and white (I use a Deep Red Contrast filter). This layer is the key really. You can copy the layer mask from the blurred layer, but then you will want to make some adjustments to the layer to get everything looking right. Play with opacity to taste.

Next you can finish sharpening and then make any other adjustments as you like.

That's it in a nutshell.

I have no idea if this is anything close to LL's technique. I imagine her's is more involved, but while I admire what she does, I don't really find her work all that compelling. It has a 'Children of the Corn' effect to it, and I am always expecting their eyes to start glowing.

This technique of mine is just a simple way to get a nice soft, porcelain skin effect. Please do not ask me for more details. My instructions are a bit vague so that you have room to experiment and take it further, so do just that. If you come up with something new or easier or better, then let me know.

Bryon Paul McCartney
www.atelier-mccartney.com
I never understood why people would want to post half-ass instructions as a "tutorial" on how to do something. If you're not going to share everything... why spend the time?

Not trying to duplicate this skin tone... here's something cool that I have used before to give a picture a real muted pastel type tone.

Duplicate your merged layer and desaturate it. Then copy the desaturated layer 2 more times.
On the middle B&W layer, change the blend mode to screen.
On the top B&W layer, change the blend mode to soft light (and/or play with the other contrast blend modes - hard light/vivid light/overlay)
Now, drop the opacity of the first (untouched) B&W layer so the original image won't be totally converted.
Then drop the opacity of the screen level a bit so you won't blow it out totally.
Then drop the opacity of the soft light layer (top) to get the effect you want... combined with masking, it's a cool effect. Once you get the effect you want, you can merge the new B&W layers together and add a mask.

Just tweak around with the layer opacities until you get something you like.
The bottom layer controls how desaturated the image is.
The screen layer controls brightening the image.
And the softlight layer controls the contrast of the image. Generally, it'll look better with high opacity.

Anyway, those instructions might not get the exact result you're looking for, but at least it's something to play with that has complete instructions not holding anything back.

Knowledge is only power when you share it.

hello, first of all i must say i am no art nor photoshop expert, but what i see of "Loretta Lux" in googles picture search does not make me a HUGE admirer of what she does. can someone please post one picture of her work that shows what all you guys think is so genius?

the website lorettalux.de also seems dead. :sad:

RAitch, thanks! It's simple and effective

I'd like to meet her. The first question I'd ask is how she really intends to have her images seen. By that, I would ask if she wanted her images admired on a gallery wall, on paper produced throught the latest high end archival technology on the best printers (Epson? Iris? Veris?). Or does she see her stuff in a well printed gravure book. Or cheap magazine mass produced offset printing. Or low rez on the web, which, by the way, is what everyone in this thread seems to be basing their critiques on. Which is cool, it's the most democratic medium of the time. But, you know, flesh tones look a whole lot better on a nice Epson print than an old 15 inch monitor. Or maybe not. Low rez web graphics hide a lot.

Maybe she doesn't care (heresy alert!!). Maybe she just wants you disturbed by those "looks". Wants you talking, thinking about something else but photoshop. That's what I think.

Maybe she doesn't care (heresy alert!!). Maybe she just wants you disturbed by those "looks". Wants you talking, thinking about something else but photoshop. That's what I think.
...or maybe she just wants your 5 figure $$ for work thats largely media hype ;) (as all contemporary art is)

Hey, Nancy, we're all trying to get by. If she can make a living doing that and disturb me and make me look more than once or twice, great. She's young, and may just evaporate from the spotlight, or do something wierd like Cindy Sherman did just to shake up the expectations. I'm a little obsessed with her because I want a friend to do child photography, and I'm studying the look. God knows, as a mature man, I'd probably be arrested for making those pictures.

I never understood why people would want to post half-ass instructions as a "tutorial" on how to do something. If you're not going to share everything... why spend the time?

Not trying to duplicate this skin tone... here's something cool that I have used before to give a picture a real muted pastel type tone.

Duplicate your merged layer and desaturate it. Then copy the desaturated layer 2 more times.
On the middle B&W layer, change the blend mode to screen.
On the top B&W layer, change the blend mode to soft light (and/or play with the other contrast blend modes - hard light/vivid light/overlay)
Now, drop the opacity of the first (untouched) B&W layer so the original image won't be totally converted.
Then drop the opacity of the screen level a bit so you won't blow it out totally.
Then drop the opacity of the soft light layer (top) to get the effect you want... combined with masking, it's a cool effect. Once you get the effect you want, you can merge the new B&W layers together and add a mask.

Just tweak around with the layer opacities until you get something you like.
The bottom layer controls how desaturated the image is.
The screen layer controls brightening the image.
And the softlight layer controls the contrast of the image. Generally, it'll look better with high opacity.

Anyway, those instructions might not get the exact result you're looking for, but at least it's something to play with that has complete instructions not holding anything back.

Knowledge is only power when you share it.


Niiiiiice.

Thanks a lot, its simple and works fine...

Simple is good!! Glad you like it.

how is your technique any more detailed than the one I posted which you saw fit to criticize me for?

how is your technique any more detailed than the one I posted which you saw fit to criticize me for?
Hmmmm

"This tecchnique is my own, so I am not going to give a full play-by-play. Most of you are smart enough to figure out what's missing anyway."
"do you basic adjustments and retouch the image to fix the skin etc." (this is detailed)
"If you don't know what I am talking about, then google it."
"Please do not ask me for more details."
"My instructions are a bit vague so that you have room to experiment"


Unlike yours, instead of tying to control the technique by withholding information, I gave every step required to get the finished result. There's nothing there that I'm holding back... or leaving for somebody to figure out.

And sure, there is some flexibility in that you can change the layer opacities to the desired effect. That's alright because you have everything already in front of you... Instead of leaving out gaps for "experimentation" in which somebody won't get to the end result (because you left out some critical steps).

What I'm trying to get at is that if you're going through the trouble to post a tutorial/walkthrough... you should include everything that'll help instead of taking the "well, I know how to do it... and here are a few of the steps... but since I think I've patented this technique, I'll withhold some things so you can't duplicate exactly what I'm talking about... but TRUST me... mine stuff looks cool!" road.

I believe in total release of information... otherwise it's not as helpful. That's all I'm getting at.

Interesting technique.

Thanks for the tips. Followed the suggestions...
b&w layer (pretty much mimiking a red channel)
selected skin
duped b&w three times, blending in luminosity, screen, soft light
for the layers used a mask based on a skin selection
adjusted opacity of b&w layers
cooling filter at small opacity
quick and dirty hand painting

Posted the picture at a thread there it belongs

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?p=131283#post131283

I'm not sure if I'm getting close to the target.
For Loretta Lux's images it is not just the skin color that creates the overall effect...much, much more to that.

Regards.
Pavel

i should sell my original loretta lux photos to you (the rose garden, girl with a loaf of bread, spring, dorothea) - so you can learn by watching :)

in fact i really like her artwork and her precise colour matching!

All the skin tones look very cold and plastic like. Do people really
like this look.

EXCUSE ME!

Yeah, sure you can take my words out of context and make me sound like a real dickhead, but that doesn't make it so.

In actuality, I did not include information on 'basic adjustment and retouch' because this is not part of the technique and everyone will have their own approach to preparing their own images; not giving a 'full play by play' in this case translates to not including precise opacity adjustment for each layer because that will vary from image to image; I saw no reason to explain capture sharpening in a skin technique tutorial, capture sharpening is related to a plug-in suite from pixelgenius.com, google it; the rest I don't need to justify but there is no sense in giving every detail in a technique that depends on variables from image to image.

Now I understand why I have heard so many complaints about this forum.


Hmmmm

"This tecchnique is my own, so I am not going to give a full play-by-play. Most of you are smart enough to figure out what's missing anyway."
"do you basic adjustments and retouch the image to fix the skin etc." (this is detailed)
"If you don't know what I am talking about, then google it."
"Please do not ask me for more details."
"My instructions are a bit vague so that you have room to experiment"


Unlike yours, instead of tying to control the technique by withholding information, I gave every step required to get the finished result. There's nothing there that I'm holding back... or leaving for somebody to figure out.

And sure, there is some flexibility in that you can change the layer opacities to the desired effect. That's alright because you have everything already in front of you... Instead of leaving out gaps for "experimentation" in which somebody won't get to the end result (because you left out some critical steps).

What I'm trying to get at is that if you're going through the trouble to post a tutorial/walkthrough... you should include everything that'll help instead of taking the "well, I know how to do it... and here are a few of the steps... but since I think I've patented this technique, I'll withhold some things so you can't duplicate exactly what I'm talking about... but TRUST me... mine stuff looks cool!" road.

I believe in total release of information... otherwise it's not as helpful. That's all I'm getting at.

Funny I actually prefered the quick and easy way imsireal descriped his version by.

Anyhow just to add a little twist on how to make white skin here goes quick and easy. add a white color layer set to color and mask it using normaly the green channel. try this and see for yourself. You will sometimes need to add a second cooler layer to adjust the transition. Or do some work on the mask and ofcause mask out more or less depending on the image.
I saa this done by a pro retoucher with 12 years of experience and on a Image that should be blown up high. So I know it works, might need tweaks to fit your images and to fit the pastel colors I would add such a color layer second or third layer.

Hopes this made sence, most techniques isnt that trickey once you get the experience of masking and colors.

/Lasse -Risici

EXCUSE ME!
Now I understand why I have heard so many complaints about this forum.

I understand you. But please don't generalize.

This forum has some people that just like to argue. But not all people. Most of us just try to help

Thanks lasse...
But you lost me on the green channel deall. You work on the green channel. In other words you put the White color layer on the green layer channel?
Can you explain a little more or post a Picture of the layers palette?
Thank you
Snook :D

EXCUSE ME!

Yeah, sure you can take my words out of context and make me sound like a real dickhead, but that doesn't make it so.

In actuality, I did not include information on 'basic adjustment and retouch' because this is not part of the technique and everyone will have their own approach to preparing their own images; not giving a 'full play by play' in this case translates to not including precise opacity adjustment for each layer because that will vary from image to image; I saw no reason to explain capture sharpening in a skin technique tutorial, capture sharpening is related to a plug-in suite from pixelgenius.com, google it; the rest I don't need to justify but there is no sense in giving every detail in a technique that depends on variables from image to image.

Now I understand why I have heard so many complaints about this forum.

I don't know how I took them out of context... but anyway...

Where have you heard complaints about this forum? I think it's great. I haven't participated as much as I'd like, but I usually browse around here first to see what's going on. Everybody seems really friendly.

you just copy the green channel into the layermask of the color layer. Note i used the green channel in this case you might need to use another or adjust the channel using levels in your images. But this is a starting point :)

you just copy the green channel into the layermask of the color layer. Note i used the green channel in this case you might need to use another or adjust the channel using levels in your images. But this is a starting point :)
Excellent tip!! Very easy and the effect is very nice!

Lasse.. do you goto the channels and copy the green channel and then paste it inot what? what is that example you posted a Curve layer and then you paste the green channel into the layerMask?
Soor but you lost me and I do not understand what effect that would have?
Putting it into a layer mask?
Thanks for any more information.
Snook :nod:

Lasse.. do you goto the channels and copy the green channel and then paste it inot what? what is that example you posted a Curve layer and then you paste the green channel into the layerMask?
Soor but you lost me and I do not understand what effect that would have?
Putting it into a layer mask?
Thanks for any more information.
Snook :nod:
I don't want to speak for Lasse (since you directly asked) but I hope I can help you out anyway.

It looks like Lasse copies the green channel greyscale into the mask of a solid colour adjustment layer (set to white). Then adds another solid colour adjustment layer on top (set to a nice soft blue) and dropped the opacity way down (to cool off the image and bring back some subtle blues).

Lasse mentions changing the blend modes to colour... but when I tested it out, I got some really nice high key soft pastel looks leaving on normal blend.

Try this.
- Switch to the channel palette
- CTRL+Click the green channel to load it as a selection
- Switch back to the layer palette
- Add a Solid Colour adjustment layer and select white as the colour
(because you have an active selection, it will be loaded into the mask for this layer)
- Add another Solid Colour adjustment layer and pick a soft blue.
- Drop the blue layer opacity down to around 7% or so (give or take)
- Play with the white colour opacity as well if you like.
- Try different blend modes like Colour (as Lasse mentions)


The layer mask will show the effect (of the current layer) where the mask is white. Everywhere it's black, the layer won't affect.
In this case, you're using image data to control the amount of the effect that will be applied. Look at your sample image and think to yourself "the whiter the green channel is... the more white will be applied to the image in that area."

Hope that helps.