Ok I lied, DnB isn't the 'schnizzle' but it helps!

I've tried quite hard on this one, spent about 40mins on it. I didn't think the original had the feel of direct sunlight so I've tried to bring that out in the picture. Various techniques used, alot of healing a little DnB to even out skin tone, lots of curves and colour mods.

Feels like I'm getting somewhere now so I need to know if i'm not. So bring it on Ant ;)

If anyone has any input good or bad I'd love to hear it

Thanks


http://img19.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=52374_Picture_014_raw_122_675lo.jpg

http://img19.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=58066_Lynde_Close_up2_122_623lo.jpg

Anyone? 31 views? :(

I don't have the eye for retouching that many of the experts have . . . but from a purely amateur viewpoint I'd say you succeeded in bringing out a sunlit feeling. Those shadows on the face (guess they're from a window frame?), however, are really distracting.

She's a vocalist I use, tracks called 'Trapped' so it's meant to symbolize bars of a cell. Thanks 4 the reply tho ;)

If Ant doesn't, I will

What are all the streaks and pixelation going on in the areas that I have circled? No woman I know wants additional lines in her face. If it is intentional, then overdo it so there is no question. Otherwise fix it 'cause the rest of the photo is gorgeous.

Ouch....When I said be harsh I didn't mean........... No I'm kidding, thanks for the reply. I wasn't going for 'Dior' perfection, I think Lynde would get shirty with me if I made her plastic perfect but I see your point, her skin's a little dry, that coupled with what I've done to the picture does accentuate the issue. I guess I could DnB them out (I'm kind of anti blurring at the moment) what do you think? Or what would you do?

.............

I'd bite the bullet and blur then mask it.

Swampy, ok will do thanks.

Ant, feels like I'm being told off by my teacher, was almost expecting a 'see me' at the bottom! ;)
Yeah you're right it probably is too sharp overall. But generally the skin isn't hideous right? I agree with your points but don't understand the "open" circles around the eyes and how do I sort out the green/cyan in the hair?
I'm gonna look at the areas you highlighted tho, like those stray hairs, the slight blemish on the lower jaw and my dodgy background masking which I missed on my old crt.
For the stray hairs are we talking healing brush?

Here's the best glamour retouch workflow I have come across. It gets rid of the "grunge" but keeps the small details to whatever extent you wish. It's not original ... got it froma tutorial on "removing the grunge" or somthing close, but here's the basic flow:

• Duplicate the image
• Zoom in to the offending area, and Gaussian blur until that feature just blurs out - note the radius and cancel the blur.
• High pass filter to the radius noted above.
• Gaussian Blur the HPF image by 1/3 of the radius noted above.
• Invert the HPF image
• Blend HPF layer with Linear Light
• Layer mask the HPF layer - black, removing the effect
• Paint white back to the layer mask in the areas where you wish to remove the "grunge". In your case, the pixillated areas. Use a soft brush at about 50% opacity

The grunge disappears, but the small details like skin pores, hairs, etc., remains.

Here's that workflow applied to your image with HPF radius 2.7 px. and blurred by 0.9 px.

Try it, you'll like it :)

Nice pic, by the way.

Stosh

P.S. The method above is copyrighted by byRo, a moderator at RetouchPRO. The complete method and explanation may be found at:

http://retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=213

It works a treat!

yeah, that looks horrible.


Here's the best glamour retouch workflow I have come across. It gets rid of the "grunge" but keeps the small details to whatever extent you wish. It's not original ... got it froma tutorial on "removing the grunge" or somthing close, but here's the basic flow:

• Duplicate the image
• Zoom in to the offending area, and Gaussian blur until that feature just blurs out - note the radius and cancel the blur.
• High pass filter to the radius noted above.
• Gaussian Blur the HPF image by 1/3 of the radius noted above.
• Invert the HPF image
• Blend HPF layer with Linear Light
• Layer mask the HPF layer - black, removing the effect
• Paint white back to the layer mask in the areas where you wish to remove the "grunge". In your case, the pixillated areas. Use a soft brush at about 50% opacity

The grunge disappears, but the small details like skin pores, hairs, etc., remains.

Here's that workflow applied to your image with HPF radius 2.7 px. and blurred by 0.9 px.

Try it, you'll like it :)

Nice pic, by the way.

Stosh

P.S. The method above is copyrighted by byRo, a moderator at RetouchPRO. The complete method and explanation may be found at:

http://retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=213

It works a treat!

Swampy, ok will do thanks.

Ant, feels like I'm being told off by my teacher, was almost expecting a 'see me' at the bottom! ;)
Yeah you're right it probably is too sharp overall. But generally the skin isn't hideous right? I agree with your points but don't understand the "open" circles around the eyes and how do I sort out the green/cyan in the hair?
I'm gonna look at the areas you highlighted tho, like those stray hairs, the slight blemish on the lower jaw and my dodgy background masking which I missed on my old crt.
For the stray hairs are we talking healing brush?

No, overall, the skin looks pretty good. It is way oversharpened though. I would open up the eyes (brighten them) so you can see detail and whatnot. they are plugged up. for the hair, pull a curve or whatever works selectively on those areas that it needs correction. The skin may be cleaned up, but the wrinkles under her eye near the nose need to be de-emphasized/simplified/reduced, not pronounced like they are now.

Right, I'll get on it. I'm getting to the stage now where I wish i had a wacom!

In addition to what Ant and Swampy have said about sharpening, stray hairs, facial lines, eyes, etc I would suggest that you clone out that earring. It is distracting and adds nothing to the idea of 'trapped'.

And speaking of the theme:'trapped' you might want to consider giving it a closer crop with a square aspect ratio so that it gives the feeling of looking out of a cell window.

You might also want to consider pulling a curve to give it a higher contrast which will emphasize the 'sunlight and bars' effect.

Finally you might even want to simplify it one step further and take it to black and white. It fits better with the predicament of 'trapped'.

Sincerely Syd

Ok, very roughly, here's what I mean. I think this way it simplifies everything a lot more and adds to the feeling of 'trapped'.

Syd

I tend to disagree about the "eye opening." If you are going for a harsh sunlit look, then I think that her expression works really well. Depending on your intended "feel" of the shot, I think you shouldn't mess with her eyes. I do agree, however, that her hair has a color shift, and that her skin could use a little softening. Go too far, though, and you loose that intense feel of the shot.

And, yes... GET A WACOM! ARE YOU CRAZY!?

Ok I've tried my best, I couldn't get the results I wanted from tweaking what I'd already done so i went back to the original file and started from scratch. Skin seems a bit more refined now and I tried to look at all the issues raised. I was a bit stumped on the cyan/green cast so i ended up colour matching the other side.
I'm getting quite pleased with this one. If I've missed anything let me know.

And yes, I'd love a wacom but they're quite expensive for where I'm at presently, maybe one day soon if I eventually make some money from all this..........

RIGHT! FEEDBACK!! ;) (Thanks)

http://img168.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=71223_Picture_014_nu_tweak_122_498lo.jpg

Ant, Swampy and Syd give such dead-on right advice. To me, I guess, at this point, the only thing that bugs me is the slight highlight under/next to her marionette lines. It gives her a bit of an 'aged' look that doesn't seem to fit with what you've done to the rest of the image.

Don't know about that highlight, gimme a clue! ;)

Anyone else? feedback is sorely needed!

Thanks

lol That's the shape of her head ;)

That explains it then.......

Ok, what about if you rate it outta 10? Once for amature, once for pro.

I'm figuring amature 8, pro 5???

Scale of 1-10, with 5 being average


amateur: 8.5
pro: 3

Damn, ok, long way to go then

Take your time. Spend 30 mins cleaning the skin with healing and the clone stamp. Then dodge and burn for an hour or two. The bigger the file the more time you need. For high end beauty images we get a day or two to do a face.

Hi there. My eyes are drawn to the nose jewelry.....it looks more like a blown out white speck or bad pixels than a piece of jewelry. (is it a diamond or a silver stud, can't tell?) The blue area next to her head on the left side also pulls my eyes that direction since the other side is totally dark. Guess to me it's kind of a balance thing, but since the lines are blurred, maybe that isn't that bid of a deal. Have fun!

Yeah I think I can see the areas for improvement, it's just taking it to the next level of detail, ironing out the finer problems. 2 days to do a face? Woah! Well if you're getting paid for it then I imagine that's not a problem. Plus I bet you're all using Wacoms I reckon 10 mins for a skilled user on a wacom is like an hour with my mouse!
Oh yeah regarding wacoms, do I really need an A4 or would an A5 do? I figure it's not like I'm using it as a painting device so i don't need those long strokes you can do on an A4, plus if you zoom right in you're increasing the resolution of the wacom because it's relative to what's being viewed right?

I have been using the small 4x5 graphire for a couple of years, I really like it and it I would recommend it for a start.

Ant, instead of telling someone "yeah, that looks horrible" why can you phrase it a little nicer like "that may be the tutorial that is most comforatable to you but it's not the best. (insert a link to a good tutorial or your own here), this would help you hone your skills a little more." i just think you can sound really mean sometimes....and i'm in no way trying to get into with you at all because you haven't done anything to me....i just think you should choose your words more carefully next time because you never know how your words will impact the person reading them.

:hurt: :hurt: :hurt: :hurt:

Thanks Mr. Politeness Police. Instead of wasting your fingers typing why don't you......

Ant, instead of telling someone "yeah, that looks horrible" why can you phrase it a little nicer like "that may be the tutorial that is most comforatable to you but it's not the best. (insert a link to a good tutorial or your own here), this would help you hone your skills a little more." i just think you can sound really mean sometimes....and i'm in no way trying to get into with you at all because you haven't done anything to me....i just think you should choose your words more carefully next time because you never know how your words will impact the person reading them.

Whilst you're here ant what remains on the image above to make it a 10/10 pro image?

For me personally I'd say the masking of the hair to the forehead is a bit slack. there's still some work to do particually in the shadow areas. Nose is still a bit 'porey'. Bit more DnB work on the general patchiness of the skin, the lines imbetween the eyelashes need looking at.
But as far as colour and intensity of the image go I'm generally quite happy with it

There is no 'pro image' rating for this. It's a low res snapshot.

for instance, I'm currently working on a 60" x 20" image at 400 dpi (which will be used at 72") shot in the studio by a professional photographer of a professional model.

Thanks for the encouragement

Some retouchers still use a mouse. The wacom is not a magic tool that allows you to go super fast. Retouching takes time. High end work takes time.

See this article about one of the top guys:

"For all his technological expertise, it is Dangin's rapport with photographers and his slow, meticulous pace that seem at the centre of his success."

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/03/1046540121180.html

If I were you a would add a bigger shadow, like a square, centered with the actual "bars" shadows from the original photo, that would be a really "trapped" atmosphere.

When I come back home I´ll try to do a sample :)

ok, something like this...

This the way I would do it.

SchlinkyMalinky

First off, thanks so much for the chuckle on your screen name.
Second, I only took a look at your first posting of the before and after, and the comments I read aare all pretty good.
If you want, and I have done this for those who asked, You can upload
a hires before and after psd file to my FTP for me to look at and give you some constructive comments and such. I am busy, but I usually find the time to respond eventually.

Shelby is right, a wacom does not make the retoucher. But it really does help. And if you wish to work on the higher res images that are needed for high end work you really need to use something besides the graphire. It is a great training tool and awesome for home use and lower res images. But for images that are 300 dpi plus you NEED the added resolution that the intuos line gives you.

Shelby

Pascal had his time in the sun. Yes he is still a big thing in new york in the retouching world, but he has many "junior" retouchers doing work for him. Oddly enough most of those retouchers are "partial" experts there, meaning that they are great at parts of the image but not the whole. There is a reason why, unfortuenetly , clients are leaving Box studio. Mostly because his style of retouching has not changed with the times. And I am sure there will be those that do stay with him (clients) The soft light I so often "preach" to you and others will undoubtedly have its short time also. That is why I am working on figuring out something else that works as well. But I don't think that time will come soon thank god! : )

You are spot on though about taking your time and getting it right. There are "very" few shortcuts that work at a acceptable level at any level of retouching if you look closely enough. I just landed a 8 picture spread for InStyle that will likely take me 10 days to complete. Can it be done quickly? Probably someone on this forum can come up with something that is acceptable a lot quicker than that, but if I did something like that in order
for InStyle to save time or money it would be doing a miservice to them, to myself, my reputation, and to the photographer who got that shoot because of my skin work. Neither one of us would ever hear from Instyle again.
The beleagured point I am making is (to everyone really, not you) is to take your time and do it the right way (and contrary to some onthis forum, there is more than ONE right way). You are selling more than a retouching. You are selling yourself and your integrity as an artist. Also the believability of the magazine and the product that the retouching is supposed to help represent.

Cupcake, in general I like what you've done, it's all a bit blurry for me tho

Cricket, monster post! Thankyou very much for the offer, I will take you up on it, when I feel I have something suitable (and good enough!)

I'm bidding on a wacom on ebay as I type so fingers crossed!

ooooh I like insight into Box Studios...

I am busy doing an Editorial story for a submission to ID Magazine. Hold thumbs it gets published.

Again I would not spend less than three hours each on these even though there are 8 images to do.

Yes the Wacom has made a huge difference to me. It took a while to get used to it. Put your mouse away. Lock it up and throw away the key!! That is the only way you will move on. I found drawing paths the hardest thing to master on the pen and tablet. Now, I don't know how I retouched without it.

Thanks again for all your help

Here is my version!

I used dodge and burne on th dark areas of the skin and used ordinary air brush to brush in the white pixels with new!


gerry

oooh some insight into Box studios..!