Hi. This is my first post. I found out about this site through Model Mayhem reading a post on beauty retouching. I like this site.

I'm a photographer and up to this point I've done my own retouching. Now I'm starting to take beauty shots and since I'm aiming for magazine ad campaign level of quality, I want to make sure I'm applying the best techniques to accomplish the task.

As I take more beauty shots, I'm starting to notice something. Women, especially blondes, have hair on their faces (see example below).

I like showing the person as close to who they are a possible, but after looking at some beauty ads in Vogue I realize I need to go a little further.

Here is the original full resolution (2.87MB) photo at www.gregorystorm.com/retouchpro/beauty_059.jpg. And this is my original pass that I sent to the model. www.gregorystorm.com/retouchpro/600x900_beauty_059.jpg. On my second pass I'm going to remove the mole, the forehead vein, and the couple fly aways on the top right.

Here are my questions:

1.) Is there a better way to remove the little blonde hairs other than one strand at a time with clone or heal?

2.) When do you know when to stop retouching beauty shots?

Thanks,

Gregory

Hi Gregory, welcome to the site.

Usually I don't take those fine facial hairs out completely, just tone them down a bit (ie blurred layer on top, reduce opacity).

A couple of things I notice about your photo:

1) the odd pinkness on her lower eyelids - perhaps she's really like that, I don't know, but I'd probably un-pink them a bit.

2) The clumsy way your cyan background (in the jpeg) meets her skin - particularly at her temple and neck. Be careful to make sure that looks natural.

Actually, this photo raises a question I've pondered before. If you're shooting somebody at 3/4 angle, and you only have enough depth of field to make one eye sharp, not both, should it be the front eye or the back eye?

I would say the front eye is more important. You've managed the tear duct in one eye, and the eyebrow in the other. In my opinion, that's a bit of a drawback to the photo, but I'm keen to hear what others think.

Hi Gregory,

I think Damo is correct. You seem to have somehow got the near eyebrow out of focus which makes the image look a little out of whack. I've added my version below that isn't finished but what I did was use gaussian blur, add mask, and use balck to transparent - what this has done is put the rear eyebrow and eye a little out of focus. I could then use the burn tool on the closer eyebrow to emphasis it more.

Here are my questions:

1.) Is there a better way to remove the little blonde hairs other than one strand at a time with clone or heal?

I ran my copy through neat image and lowered the layer opacity till I liked what I saw.

2.) When do you know when to stop retouching beauty shots?

When it looks like what the client wants, or you feel satisified that you have achieved your goal - or never :grin:

Poor Greg. He thinks he's in the right place, but .....no.

An interesting post from that forum:
"Anthony Rhoadesphoto.net patron, Aug 07, 2007; 04:11 p.m.

Bottom line. You want your images to look like Harpers Bazaar and Vogue images, you pay a high end retoucher to make them that way. Doing it yourself will get you in trouble. retouchpro specifically will get you in loads of trouble... it's about as pro as Sears Portraits"

"http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00M1wS"

LOL @ chillin

--- LOL @ Ant

Poor Greg. He thinks he's in the right place, but .....no.

example of an ad beauty retouch: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6148797&size=lg

Dodge and burn.

very nice, any chance of seeing the before shot?

Hi Gregory, welcome to the site.

Usually I don't take those fine facial hairs out completely, just tone them down a bit (ie blurred layer on top, reduce opacity).Thanks Damo.

I've done that before on other photos, but that didn't seem like a good idea with these close beauty shots because the loss of detail in the skin. If I were do to that here I would overlay a high pass layer of skin to put back texture.

A couple of things I notice about your photo:

1) the odd pinkness on her lower eyelids - perhaps she's really like that, I don't know, but I'd probably un-pink them a bit.

2) The clumsy way your cyan background (in the jpeg) meets her skin - particularly at her temple and neck. Be careful to make sure that looks natural.

Yeah she has a lightness to her eyelids that can be toned down. I agree that the neck could be masked a little better. How do you key out your backgrounds?

Actually, this photo raises a question I've pondered before. If you're shooting somebody at 3/4 angle, and you only have enough depth of field to make one eye sharp, not both, should it be the front eye or the back eye?

I would say the front eye is more important. You've managed the tear duct in one eye, and the eyebrow in the other. In my opinion, that's a bit of a drawback to the photo, but I'm keen to hear what others think.Normally you would want to focus on the near eye, but doing that can sometime cause focusing problems depending on the color of that person's eye, so focusing on the near duct is safer.

Since this was my first dedicated beauty shoot, I was experimenting. The problem with this shot is a low aperture. It was shot at f/4.0 which is way too low for this type of photo because of the depth of field. I should have shot it at f/8.0 or above. Other shots were shot at much higher apertures.

Thanks again,

Gregory

Hi Gregory,

I think Damo is correct. You seem to have somehow got the near eyebrow out of focus which makes the image look a little out of whack. I've added my version below that isn't finished but what I did was use gaussian blur, add mask, and use balck to transparent - what this has done is put the rear eyebrow and eye a little out of focus. I could then use the burn tool on the closer eyebrow to emphasis it more.

I ran my copy through neat image and lowered the layer opacity till I liked what I saw.Hi Alison,

I like what you've done, but it looks more Dave Hill to me. Using any blur seems like the opposite of what I'd want to do to make a beauty shot pop. Bringing the near eyebrow back in focus is less of a problem for me because I have other shots to take a sharper eyebrow from. What is neat image?

When it looks like what the client wants, or you feel satisified that you have achieved your goal - or never :grin:Yeah, unfortunately that's what I thought. Never. :-)

Poor Greg. He thinks he's in the right place, but .....no.

example of an ad beauty retouch: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6148797&size=lg

Dodge and burn.Hi Ant,

My bad. On which forum should I have posted this?

Gregory

You're fine Greg. Enjoy what you get here, like what Alison put forth... See chillin's first post.

good luck.

Greg we all have to start somewhere and here is a great place to acquire skills, with regard to removal of hair, do a search, there are a few threads in here which follow it up. Don't overlook the tutorials either, Byro's degrunge is sort of like a swiss knife technique found here

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

for the facial fuzz (also search peach fuzz) I used Byro's technique, the rest of the pic is bits and pieces I've picked up here and no it's not perfect

Hey you guys, this is my first post, im a n00b lol. I just wanted to take a try, something simple, i smoothed her skin completely, which might not seem too natural, i also played with her eyes a little bit, but i think she ended up looking a little bit crosseyed lol.


http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/x_xratedchiqa_x/beauty_0592.jpg

... Byro's degrunge is sort of like a swiss knife technique found here

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


that's a great degrunge method. thanks for pointing it out.

i really need to dive deeper into the tutorials.

So far, here's what I got.
Hope you like it.

Hi Gregory,

I ran my copy through neat image and lowered the layer opacity till I liked what I saw.



I think you should step away, and come back and look at it in an hour. It's all over the place.

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

for the facial fuzz (also search peach fuzz) I used Byro's technique, the rest of the pic is bits and pieces I've picked up here and no it's not perfect

yours is great, very easy on the eyes. It is tough because both eyes are out of focus to begin with but the skin looks great.

Hey you guys, this is my first post, im a n00b lol. I just wanted to take a try, something simple, i smoothed her skin completely, which might not seem too natural, i also played with her eyes a little bit, but i think she ended up looking a little bit crosseyed lol.


http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/x_xratedchiqa_x/beauty_0592.jpg


again this one you should look at in an hour.. it's almost horror movie like. Skin is blotchy and too fake, you made her crosseyed and she's got scary veins. Keep at it.

Here's my try on the photo. First I wanted to say this women has natural beauty, although I have never seen so much hair on the face. It was accented alot by the lighting. Another thing was that she has large pores in her skin, which can be very noticeable up close. This is my first time of ever sending a pix here so don't laugh. But, I've got the before and after. What I thought was really amazing about this pix, and alot of you might see this all the time working with natural retouches, is you could see the camera perfect in her eyes, but flipped upside down. Please let me know what you think. If my pix's don't show, then I'm doing something wrong. I'll try to repost. Thanks:blush:

Let me try this again.
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l265/kneff62/beauty_REDOBYKNEFFlowres.jpg

again this one you should look at in an hour.. it's almost horror movie like. Skin is blotchy and too fake, you made her crosseyed and she's got scary veins. Keep at it.

Lmao...
Its funny how you bascially just repeated everything i said,
Yet you still needed to say it...
My first retouch ever.
I did a damn good job for a n00b
:tongue:

Let me try this again.
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l265/kneff62/beauty_REDOBYKNEFFlowres.jpg


I LOVE what you did.
The skin is smooth, yet you still see the texture.
Its beautiful.

Hi Gregory,

Hi Alison,

I like what you've done, but it looks more Dave Hill to me. Using any blur seems like the opposite of what I'd want to do to make a beauty shot pop. Bringing the near eyebrow back in focus is less of a problem for me because I have other shots to take a sharper eyebrow from. What is neat image?


Originally Posted by Alison
When it looks like what the client wants, or you feel satisified that you have achieved your goal - or never



I just wanted that near eyebrow to look more in focus than it was, then I went off on a tangent :grin: Neat Image and Noiseware are free noise reduction programmes, they also have ones that you can purchase. Looking at the image I posted, I think the skin is more smooth than I would have liked. Probably shows why we should walk away from the work every now and again - refresh the eyes and brain :wink:

Yeah, unfortunately that's what I thought. Never. :-)

But the good thing about digital and photoshop, is that we can get many different looks out of one image :)

I think you should step away, and come back and look at it in an hour. It's all over the place.

I looked at it this afternoon and it looks bloody awful :grin:

Sometimes it becomes boring, skinretouching.
(but I always start, and than I can't stop anymore).

I'm confused as to who posted to my pix. Was it the one saying that I made her eyes look crossed? This wasn't my first retouch...actually, I retouch pageant photos, which are completely different than this one. But, this was the first time I added an image for anyone to see. It said I had a reply, but I couldn't figure out who replied..LOL Sorry, I usually just read stuff and don't post alot.
kneff

I still see lot imperfections. I’ve done only few retouches. I really have hard time with the facial hair.

What was your method of hair removal? What imperfections? I need to know these things. I know the pix isn't that great, but its actually the first time I've given it a go on the face without using a blur method. I tried to remove all of the hair, which probably didn't need to be done. Getting caught up in the shadow on the side of her face was the worst part with the hair. And like someone asked, how do you know when its time to quit. I could have kept going, and when I first finished, I thought it looked "alright". But, again, after looking at it later, I just wasn't happy with it. I've got another method I'm going to try and see if I can't get the face smoother and more evenly toned w/o losing texture. I need critiquing since this is what I do. Well, not so much with natural photos, but there may be a time when I'll need to do them.

What was your method of hair removal?

The facial hair is still there. Short of burning one by one I don't know good method of removing it without altering the skin texture.

can you tell me how to attach a photo like you did. I downloaded them to photobucket, not my webpage. So, is there a way to do that with photo bucket or can it be done just from my hard drive?

Sometimes it becomes boring, skinretouching.
(but I always start, and than I can't stop anymore).

that looks great, how long did it take you?

can you tell me how to attach a photo like you did. I downloaded them to photobucket, not my webpage. So, is there a way to do that with photo bucket or can it be done just from my hard drive?

When you go to post something, go to advanced and click in the attachments button next to the smile button. Then you can upload a imagem for url or your own HD. (only images less than 100 kb).

:wink:

that looks great, how long did it take you?

Thanks.
Must have been 1,5 - 2 hours max.

I personally find that images greater than around 82kb do not qualify to post as somehow the post becomes padded

Also, what exactly is grunge. I know there are grunge brushes.

I'd construe grunge as being ruddiness, degrunge should remove that

Sometimes it becomes boring, skinretouching.
(but I always start, and than I can't stop anymore).

Thanks.
Must have been 1,5 - 2 hours max.

what were some of your techniques if you don't mind me asking...

Good start cainam. comments attached

Thanx for the play...great image to work with. :)

Very nice picture .. this is my version
Cheers from Belgrade

Ok, I just had to try this technique. Please let me know what you think. It's my first time using this.

Good start cainam. comments attached

Ant, seems like you ruined my retouch!

Most of the time I spent on removing your "not always easy to understand" felt-tip marks.

Anyway, thanks for your comment.

what were some of your techniques if you don't mind me asking...

The usual techniques, I would say. I don't think there are any secrets in here,... only errors.
And it's always good to hear that someone points them out for me.

Ant, seems like you ruined my retouch!

Most of the time I spent on removing your "not always easy to understand" felt-tip marks.

Anyway, thanks for your comment.

I do like this one.
I dont like how alot of people are turning her so pale and white,
And i think this one keeps alot of the healthy tanned glow in the photo.

More comments.

The facial hair is still there. Short of burning one by one I don't know good method of removing it without altering the skin texture.There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

My take on your photo. Hope you don't mind me playing with it. I took out the catchlights in her eyes, and added some eyeshadow. Hope it looks decent.

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there....
....
Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

Thank you edgework, I'll keep your advice in mind.
You did nice work with the picture.

Ant...I really like this example you provided. Not just the skin, but the lips and the eyes. The moisture seen on the lips and in the eyes is really nice.

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg
Edgework...I think your pix is turning out great! Yes, it looks like you've put alot of work into it. And your post was very good too.

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

Really sensible advice Edge, and beautiful work too.

Syd

The thing about Dodging/Burning and in-close work with the Healing Brush is that it only seems to take a long time. Using quicker techniques takes much longer because once you're done, you have to go back and start from scratch and do it right the second time around. (Or third, or fourth, depending on how many quick techniques you try).

Another tip: always start in very close (I did my first two or three passes at 200%) but then, always move out, and repeat. Artifacts that don't appear at 100% magically come together and look like crap at 50%. It's not just a trick of screen resolution, they're there, and at some point in the production cycle, they will appear on a print or proof. If you shrink your magnification by 50%, make your brush size correspondingly larger. That way, you won't actully be obliterating the D/B or healing strokes you already made at full size. It takes a while, but it might as well, since you really can't get the right result any other way.

Another important thing about D/B; it will never be finished. Stare at any image long enough and you'll see myriad imperfections crying out for another pass. At some point, you have to tear yourself away, make like the Marines, declare victory and pull out.

Ant...I really like this example you provided. Not just the skin, but the lips and the eyes. The moisture seen on the lips and in the eyes is really nice.

Merci. Great makeup artist, Martin Wieser and photographer and retoucher, moi. I wish it was shot it on film though as the dynamic range isn't what I'd like. Next stuff will be using a P30+.

Edgework doesn't lie. Everyone take note.

Merci. Great makeup artist, Martin Wieser and photographer and retoucher, moi. I wish it was shot it on film though as the dynamic range isn't what I'd like. Next stuff will be using a P30+.
[Standing ovation. Loud applause.] Really stunning work. Such attention to detail. I am mightily impressed. I am guessing a project like that took you at least a week. Now I have something to aspire to. Thanks for sharing.

Syd

Just a day and a couple of extra hours to tweak. I'd guess maybe 10 hours total. I separated the background eyelashes in the final. RGB file size 22 x 14 @ 400 dpi.

Nose looks odd...rather flat/no definition/overprocessed. Lots of hair on cheek.

Poor Greg. He thinks he's in the right place, but .....no.

example of an ad beauty retouch: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6148797&size=lg

Dodge and burn.

Ant, seems like you ruined my retouch!

Most of the time I spent on removing your "not always easy to understand" felt-tip marks.

Anyway, thanks for your comment.

Another way to tone down the highlight is to make a Contrast Mask action (google for instructions...very common technique).

Run the action and darken the highlights.
Add a black mask, paint over highlights, adjust layer opacity to match.

This gives you a more natural look.

Nose looks odd...rather flat/no definition/overprocessed. Lots of hair on cheek.

No one asked for your opinion....fault of the capture/small dynamic range/subjective. Additionally, you have no reference file (original) to base your blanket statements on. My file, I am not bothered by the hair and much was already removed.

who are you to judge anyway Action, Button Pusher Boy? Exactly why I've never posted anything for the peanut gallery here before - much akin to taking the rednecks to a wine tasting.

Ant you should post some on here I think your photography is really nice and the retouching is great. Most people would want to see it. I know you rub some people up the wrong way but you know your stuff, end of story!

ANT,

Dude, it's plain to see to all of us (mostly) that you really, REALLY know your stuff. 'Mayday' is right your should post some more.

Retouching is fairly new to me. I have to do similar things but to cars, and whilst I am a long, long way off from achieving pro-standard work that doesn't stop me from trying or wanting to learn more from the professionals such as yourself.

Ignore the shit-kickers, if they think they can do better - let them prove it. Personally, I'd prefer not to rely on Actions to do my work for me, I want to learn the hard way, the old-skool way, because quite frankly it's usually the best way, tried and tested.

Ant, do me and the many others like myself a MASSIVE favour and create some Masterclasses. Run us through each stage you go through; from the original raw file; assessing what needs to be done etc, right through to each stage of retouching - explaining (for Dummies) the commands you use and why you use them. Sure it'd take a while to produce this masterclass, and sure it'd be one hell of a tome… but then again, it would be a tutorial we could ALL learn from Beginners and Pros.

Share a little and become a God. :)

N.

ANT,

Dude, it's plain to see to all of us (mostly) that you really, REALLY know your stuff. 'Mayday' is right your should post some more.

Retouching is fairly new to me. I have to do similar things but to cars, and whilst I am a long, long way off from achieving pro-standard work that doesn't stop me from trying or wanting to learn more from the professionals such as yourself.

Ignore the shit-kickers, if they think they can do better - let them prove it. Personally, I'd prefer not to rely on Actions to do my work for me, I want to learn the hard way, the old-skool way, because quite frankly it's usually the best way, tried and tested.

Ant, do me and the many others like myself a MASSIVE favour and create some Masterclasses. Run us through each stage you go through; from the original raw file; assessing what needs to be done etc, right through to each stage of retouching - explaining (for Dummies) the commands you use and why you use them. Sure it'd take a while to produce this masterclass, and sure it'd be one hell of a tome… but then again, it would be a tutorial we could ALL learn from Beginners and Pros.

Share a little and become a God. :)

N.This is in no way meant to be a reply on behalf of or in place of Ant. I suspect he's quite capable of both arriving at his own opinions, and expressing them.

But I gotta point out—good tutorials are all over the web. Masterclass level tutorials. I have no doubt that if Ant chose to do so, and had the ability to teach (not always a given) his would be right up there with the best. But it takes more than a tutorial, or two, or ten, and most of what it takes isn't about what you do. It's about screwing up enough jobs over enough time that you learn what doesn't work, and you stop wasting your time on those approaches. It's about picking option E when options A through H are all valid, and making E work, and not necessarily knowing why you chose it over the others. And choosing option B the next time and making that work as well. I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread: there's no quick fix. Knowledge is part of it, but if that was all it took, everybody who read Katrin Eismann, Dan Margulis and Scott Kelby would be turning out high-end work.

Until you develop your internal eye, and learn to edit out the stuff that doesn't work, you will just be what you're asking to be in your post: an observer. And the only way to get there is to dare to screw up, again and again. It doesn't have to be under a deadline with a job riding on your results, though a screw up under those conditions is quite educational. But just do it, over and over. And don't be initimidated when someone tells you it's crap. If it's true, they did you a favor. If it's not, you'll learn when to ignore it.

I first started this retouch as a "somewhat boring just another skin retouch".

I probably (in fact I'm sure) did some things, which I shouldn't have, ...and now I have to pay for it, because those things now are hard to fix...and time consuming.
I didn't expect a high end retoucher was going to go over it, and put some comments on it. Now, that's where I initially went wrong on this retouch.

And if someone wants to take lessons from it, than I would say, even before you read any tutorial, or even before you start your retouch: "Always go for the best, how unimportant it may look like".

That's at least what I will remember.

Thanks for your comments Ant, and Edgework: congratualations with your previous words,... they are o so true.

I know I've done allot better than this one, so I'm a bit disappointed about myself, just don't really liked the pic on some way, only a half H. worked on, and you can see that but just give it a try. Edgework Really beautiful retouch, great job on skin. also you're words are true!


the retouch link (pic. 50%) (http://img6.shareavenue.com/image.php?file=6d4afbad896776d13b67868532ca68bb03646a62)

the retouch link (pic. 100%) (http://img5.shareavenue.com/image.php?file=e7f6af2e539b9d341db0d48480b3333cbb5c6e43)

Edge: Nice tips!!!

ANT: really nice work...

I'm trying and trying on this picture...hehe...the hair is a very nice challenge...

thanks for everyone who has shared their pictures...

RUUD: Nice!

gerry

DONT EVER USE THE GAUSIAN BLUR TO FIX HAIR PROBLEMS!!!!
The best way to get rid off flaws like blackheads, poors, facial hair and zits.

Use the noise and dust filter.
make a new layer and use the brush to paint in a light haze of skin color over the top
use difforent colors to shade and highlight the face.
its ok to have a little bit of flaws showing so the photo looks real and not fake.
learn about makeup. if you cant pute makeup on a woman or man in real life, then you will never be able to understand how to imitate makeup in photoshop.
treat the photoshop tools as "makeup tools"not drawing tools. Use a soft brush to pute on blush. use the pencil tool to pute on mascara.


Its a mix of using all the tools you have to you. from the heal stamp to brushes, to the filters. I edited this example im posting of your image in an hour. Its no wear close to "magazine" quality. If you were a client and you gave me this image to edit. I would probably 5-8 hours working on it.

I wish i could go into details on everything i did. But then i would need to write a book. BUT DONT USE THE GAUSSISAN BLUR!!! :)

Ruud, Not up to your usual standard but never mind, obviously you lack synchronicity with this one

I'm sorry, forgot to sharpen before post :(

just a newbie

Ruud, Not up to your usual standard but never mind, obviously you lack synchronicity with this one

yeah, i just don't like the pic, thats also why i did only worked on it for a half hour, but I'm still a bit disappointed about the result of my retouching with this pic, maybe because i just don't liked it haha

Just thought ill post mine. Hope you like

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd295/funkyboy4/beauty_059copy.jpg

Until you develop your internal eye, and learn to edit out the stuff that doesn't work, you will just be what you're asking to be in your post: an observer. And the only way to get there is to dare to screw up, again and again. It doesn't have to be under a deadline with a job riding on your results, though a screw up under those conditions is quite educational. But just do it, over and over. And don't be initimidated when someone tells you it's crap. If it's true, they did you a favor. If it's not, you'll learn when to ignore it.

Good point. Yes, you're right, the willingness to make mistakes and learn from them is a better lesson to learn than reading techniques from a book.

Thank you.

This is in no way meant to be a reply on behalf of or in place of Ant. I suspect he's quite capable of both arriving at his own opinions, and expressing them.

But I gotta point out—good tutorials are all over the web. Masterclass level tutorials. I have no doubt that if Ant chose to do so, and had the ability to teach (not always a given) his would be right up there with the best. But it takes more than a tutorial, or two, or ten, and most of what it takes isn't about what you do. It's about screwing up enough jobs over enough time that you learn what doesn't work, and you stop wasting your time on those approaches. It's about picking option E when options A through H are all valid, and making E work, and not necessarily knowing why you chose it over the others. And choosing option B the next time and making that work as well. I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread: there's no quick fix. Knowledge is part of it, but if that was all it took, everybody who read Katrin Eismann, Dan Margulis and Scott Kelby would be turning out high-end work.

Until you develop your internal eye, and learn to edit out the stuff that doesn't work, you will just be what you're asking to be in your post: an observer. And the only way to get there is to dare to screw up, again and again. It doesn't have to be under a deadline with a job riding on your results, though a screw up under those conditions is quite educational. But just do it, over and over. And don't be initimidated when someone tells you it's crap. If it's true, they did you a favor. If it's not, you'll learn when to ignore it.



I dont think we can ask Ant to do tutorials, I guess he's too busy. Its just nice to see some of his test photography and the retouching he's done on that.

No one asked for your opinion....fault of the capture/small dynamic range/subjective. Additionally, you have no reference file (original) to base your blanket statements on. My file, I am not bothered by the hair and much was already removed.

who are you to judge anyway Action, Button Pusher Boy? Exactly why I've never posted anything for the peanut gallery here before - much akin to taking the rednecks to a wine tasting.



Lets not get too upset.
You are also very intimidating. He was just making an opinion, its a forum. I beleive that is what your supposed to do. If he what he says seems ignorant. Just ignore him.
There are too many ignorant people in the world to get upset with each one.[/

Hi Gregory, welcome to the site.

Usually I don't take those fine facial hairs out completely, just tone them down a bit (ie blurred layer on top, reduce opacity).

A couple of things I notice about your photo:

1) the odd pinkness on her lower eyelids - perhaps she's really like that, I don't know, but I'd probably un-pink them a bit.

2) The clumsy way your cyan background (in the jpeg) meets her skin - particularly at her temple and neck. Be careful to make sure that looks natural.

Actually, this photo raises a question I've pondered before. If you're shooting somebody at 3/4 angle, and you only have enough depth of field to make one eye sharp, not both, should it be the front eye or the back eye?

I would say the front eye is more important. You've managed the tear duct in one eye, and the eyebrow in the other. In my opinion, that's a bit of a drawback to the photo, but I'm keen to hear what others think.

he is asking for retouch methods not a critque on his photography! lol
and ill never understand why people think blurring is the solution. blurring SHOULD NEVER BE DONE. you never see a thick layer of blurred skin in any magazine. it looks horrible.

Ok...here's another go at this lady. Using a different technique this time around and I like the outcome better. Tried to tone down the reds also.

I'm looking for critiques here. This is my second time working on skin cleanup, and I'm trying to improve.

Ok...here's another go at this lady. Using a different technique this time around and I like the outcome better. Tried to tone down the reds also.

I'm looking for critiques here. This is my second time working on skin cleanup, and I'm trying to improve.Buy a copy of Elle, Vogue or Glamour. Look at any cosmetic ad with a close-up of a face. Make a list of the things you notice that you have done differently. Work on those.

Buy a copy of Elle, Vogue or Glamour. Look at any cosmetic ad with a close-up of a face. Make a list of the things you notice that you have done differently. Work on those.
Love photos from this magazines. It is kinda my way).
My try. (http://lifeideas.ru/retouch)

Originally Posted by Ant
No one asked for your opinion....fault of the capture/small dynamic range/subjective. Additionally, you have no reference file (original) to base your blanket statements on. My file, I am not bothered by the hair and much was already removed.

who are you to judge anyway Action, Button Pusher Boy? Exactly why I've never posted anything for the peanut gallery here before - much akin to taking the rednecks to a wine tasting.

Doesn't matter how much talent a person has, this rudeness and arrogance overshadows it completely.

here is my version.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/scentedpink/beauty_059retouch.jpg

looks good jennifer but there is noticable blurring in her hairline, and that vein in her eye has got to go...

hi all. here's mine. i only worked on the face so far.

a critique from the pros would be appreciated.

thanks!!

hi all. here's mine. i only worked on the face so far.

a critique from the pros would be appreciated.

thanks!!You've lost your color. Her skin's become, essentially, a duotone. Also very dark and a bit grimey, like a cmyk image looks if the black plate is converted wrong and ends up contaminating the midtones, quartertones and highlights. Retouching isn't too bad. Whatever moves you made were in the right direction. But try to avoid moves that damage the color.

thanks for the tip edge. i was basically going for a warm tan look, with lots of shape. i guess i went too far with the color and not far enough with the retouching.

Not sure how much this valuable information is all worth. Lets just say if one day you all get royalty checks in the mail, it might be from me ;) I was about to post one of my images before, after reading this thread to it's entirety, I'll take another crack at it. Having problems getting the little variations of skin tone to match with out loosing texture. I will put up both the touched up version and the OG for those who want to take a swing at it.

Let me thank all the contributors to this thread, especially cainam and all who helped get him to his latest attempt.

I did noticed the eye balls went a little flat or soft( I don't know), but I am no pro to start criticizing just yet. Just something to maybe revisit and keep this thread going strong.

here's my final version.

I don't normally do this but thought I would take a shot.
Cliff

i would love some comments or advice on my attempt at this being as it is my first beauty retouch, much appreciated thanx.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y137/soulsurfer1/Ankhversion.jpg

Please leave some critiques on what i can improve on!

Great image, I tried to retouch it how the original poster wanted it.

i would love some comments or advice on my attempt at this being as it is my first beauty retouch, much appreciated thanx.

I am starting to love this woman because of those eyes!! ha ha

From what I have learned. It looks like you used the sharpen filter on more accurate. This is generally not advised on people's skin because it brings out unflattering details. other than that looks pretty dope. If you want to step your game up - checkout all of edgework's, ant's and cainam's post and give it another try. Same for me and Ankh1. I mean it's our responsibility because that's where this thread went and we are all apart of it now.

muy bueno,

~Lan Man

here's my final version.There's still something odd about your color. The retouching is coming along nicely (I like that you kept the mole). But somehow there's a lack of the kind of color variation that makes an image really pop. And it's still feeling a bit heavy to me.

Here's an extreme move in LAB, designed to pull the colors apart. It's clearly way to much, but it's instructive in that it shows a few areas of discoloration, one, a curved shape running from the middle of her chin, up between the mole and the corner of her mouth, then up into her cheek, another along the side of her nose and the last the heavy shadow on the right side of her face (that you would expect, since RGB and CMYK shadows, by definition, tend to push neutral). I also ran shadow/highlight on the lightness channel to ease the overall heaviness, and you can see a good bit of hair remains on the side of her face.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/jacknick1.jpg

In this next version, I reduced the shadow/highlight and pulled the color shift back to a believable 15% — 20%. Compared with your original, there's just enough color variation to make a difference.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/jacknick2.jpg

Suggested retouch moves: The hairs are looking too obvious. Don't be afraid to hit them one by one with a small diameter healing brush. It sounds like a lot of work, but we're talking maybe 15 minutes. Come on, that's a small price to pay for perfection, don't you think?

i would love some comments or advice on my attempt at this being as it is my first beauty retouch, much appreciated thanx.I think this is moving in the right direction. Two things jump out on first viewing: the pores on her cheek and right along the side of her nose are looking too obvious. They could be softened. And the edge of the main shadow, while soft, still has too small an area of transition. It could also be lightened. And there are a lot of hairs along the cheek that need to be removed. (See my previous post).

Color looks hot. A tad more cyan into the shadows might help.

I think this is moving in the right direction. Two things jump out on first viewing: the pores on her cheek and right along the side of her nose are looking too obvious. They could be softened. And the edge of the main shadow, while soft, still has too small an area of transition. It could also be lightened. And there are a lot of hairs along the cheek that need to be removed. (See my previous post).

Color looks hot. A tad more cyan into the shadows might help.

thanx for the advice, i'll get right on it :)

one, a curved shape running from the middle of her chin, up between the mole and the corner of her mouth, then up into her cheek, another along the side of her nose and the last the heavy shadow on the right side of her face (that you would expect, since RGB and CMYK shadows, by definition, tend to push neutral).




would love to keep working on this file but i'm quite embarassed to say that i've accidentally lost my layers when saving the last jpeg to post. luckily, i didn't spend too much time on it and it was just a practice file. but still..DAMN!

as far as that discoloration, i think it must've been the d&b layer in combination with a curves contrast layer that started to bring that out. how would you avoid or fix that? i use a neutral gray layer @ soft light for DnB.

i have smoothed the skin a little more so the pores on her cheek and nose are less obvious, also i have tried to make the transition of the main shadow bigger across her cheek (only my second go at dodging and burning, i find it quite difficult) as for the hairs i don't really know where to start lol, first i tried using the healing brush on the most visible ones but after half an hour of trying to make it look half decent i scrapped the idea. Comments would be appreciated thanx!

i have smoothed the skin a little more so the pores on her cheek and nose are less obvious, also i have tried to make the transition of the main shadow bigger across her cheek (only my second go at dodging and burning, i find it quite difficult) as for the hairs i don't really know where to start lol, first i tried using the healing brush on the most visible ones but after half an hour of trying to make it look half decent i scrapped the idea. Comments would be appreciated thanx!
What is your procedure for using the healing brush, and for dodging/burning?

would love to keep working on this file but i'm quite embarassed to say that i've accidentally lost my layers when saving the last jpeg to post. luckily, i didn't spend too much time on it and it was just a practice file. but still..DAMN!

as far as that discoloration, i think it must've been the d&b layer in combination with a curves contrast layer that started to bring that out. how would you avoid or fix that? i use a neutral gray layer @ soft light for DnB.I don't use dodging and burning for large areas or for major shifts in value. The healing brush is far more effective at those types of gross moves. If there is a really harsh move called for, (like removing a dark piece of jewelry against pale skin) I'll bring in the cloning tool and slather some useful pixels over the offending area, until the colors are more or less in range with the surrounding area, then I'll work with the healing brush to bring in texture and create smooth transitions. That's your shovel and your sword. Dodging and burning is the scalpel. Small brush, low opacity carefully building up the effect, stroke by stroke.

What is your procedure for using the healing brush, and for dodging/burning?

-For the healing brush i use a brush that is a similar diameter as what i want to remove, for moles/freckles and things like that where i just hover over the area and click it seems to work ok but on the hairs where i have to click then drag over the hair it doesn't seem to work so good.

-For dodge and burn i only learnt how to do this the other day from the dave hill thread here, i create a new layer and set it to overlay and click the "fill with overlay-color (50% gray)", then i use the dodge and burn tool on 5% exposure with the airbrush selected (i don't know what having the airbrush selected does as i can't notice any difference whether it's on or off :confused: , i don't know if this is a good way to dodge and burn but it seems to work ok.
Thanx for help

still trying to get better at dodge and burn but i suppose that's where the magic is, having a tablet sure helps tho :)

-For the healing brush i use a brush that is a similar diameter as what i want to remove, for moles/freckles and things like that where i just hover over the area and click it seems to work ok but on the hairs where i have to click then drag over the hair it doesn't seem to work so good.

-For dodge and burn i only learnt how to do this the other day from the dave hill thread here, i create a new layer and set it to overlay and click the "fill with overlay-color (50% gray)", then i use the dodge and burn tool on 5% exposure with the airbrush selected (i don't know what having the airbrush selected does as i can't notice any difference whether it's on or off :confused: , i don't know if this is a good way to dodge and burn but it seems to work ok.
Thanx for helpUsing the actual dodge and burn tools are only about half as effective.

There are a lot of different approaches. I'll tell you how mine differs from yours and why.

I use a transparent Hard Light layer, no grey necessary, and simply paint my lights and darks into that single layer. Dodging and burning into a grey layer will pretty much duplicate the effect of painting white and black, but sometimes it works better to use actual tones sampled from the image: a highlight that hasn't blown out, and a shadow that nice and dark, but still showing tone. This is useful if white and black are creating discoloration, and impossible with the dodge and burn tools.

I set the opacity of my brush to 5%, and i make sure my brush is pressure sensitive. Why Hard Light as opposed to Overlay, or Soft Light, as some suggest? All three of those modes will both lighten and darken based on the applied strokes, but both Overlay and Soft Light drop off in intensity as the underlying pixels approach light and dark, which is a good thing if you are using an Overlay layer to add noise or grain: you don't want to muddy up your shadows and highlight. But for Dodging and Burning, I like the evenness of the effect across the range. It's never good for plugged up shadows or blown out highlights, of course, but sometimes you need to modify pale tones or dark areas, and Overlay will necessarily be less effective there.

I like the fact that I can switch from dodging to burning and back again simply by pressing the "X" key, rather than selecting a different tool each time, and I like that it all takes place in a single layer. Some approaches suggest two curve layers, one to lighten, one to darken, or perhaps a layer set to multiply and one set to screen, but then you not only have to select a new layer each time, you usually end up working on at least some pixels with each layer at once as you try to first darken then lighten to get things balanced. With a single layer, if you lighten too much, your darken strokes will simply reverse the effect. Clean, straightforward, one layer, one keystroke to switch. It works for me.

As for the Healing Brush: you need to give it another chance. You should be able to remove all the hairs without botching the texture with the healing brush. It's your number one weapon with a problem like this. Dodge and Burn later, to balance tones.

Folks! you can set a keyboard shortcut to switch your dodge and burn Curve layers. F1 for activating Dodge layer and Command F1 for Burn - set up actions. Your Curve Layers need to be named the same in each document.

I've used all the methods at one time or another, and like to vary them to keep my life intersting. The advantage with the dual curve method is that its the most editable and flexible. lightening and darkening moves can be later adjusted separately or boosted. Also, and heres a tip, you can group adjustment layers (clipping groups I mean) especially hue/sat layers to desaturate or colorise, whatever you want.

methods .. all useful, none rubbish
• Dual curves, explained above. Also Levels, Channel mixer, etc etc can be used in the same way

• Dodge and burn on flat pixel layers! in my humble experience, still used by many of the most experienced, years on the job retouchers, for reasons mainly to do with superstition.. and practiced years of doing it that way.

• Overlay/S-light/H-light layers filled with grey, or not, doesn't make much difference to result. This method enables you to brush in Colour as well as tone.

• Solid colour layers, filed with carefully chosen warmer colors can have blend modes applied (usually Overlay and S-Light) and these can be brushed in in the same way as the curves. This allows easy modification of the color at a later stage.

There you go dodge and burn 101. Actually doesn't matter too much how you do it, its more about spade work, and whether it works or not depends mainly on judgement, and whether you had a bad night

Oh yeah, and dodge and burn is not just for skin

that's my 1º post ever
hope u like it ^^
i'd love to read some comments about my attempt =)

I thought that I would take a stab at it too. Any feedback would be appreciated.

My Try!
Let me know what you think.

Robert

Sometimes it becomes boring, skinretouching.
(but I always start, and than I can't stop anymore).



ohh man you have to help me out thats what i want to achieve.that skin looks so nice.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x186/paulsabatino/fashioneditbeforeandafter.jpg

i gave it a try.

come on guys, get rid of those little hairs on the side of her face. Just takes some healing

Brings up something I've been wondering. When should you remove things like the hair on her face and when should you not?
Might be offensive to the person if it's a portrait. Last thing you want to do is offend a client. (They would know they have hair on their face)

With a model for a beauty shot like this, more than likely the hair should be removed.

Thoughts.....

Thanks

Robert

By the way. Thanks Paul

Your image looks nice.

Hi.
This is my first post, and touch-up.
It's not finished.

Cheers.

My little touches....it is unfortunate that compressing this image losses alot of the work done to remove the hair...the compression is certainly taking it bytes to keep the file size down...too bad we don't have more flexibility....

I gave it a try too

Just a question to throw at you all...does no one retouch this poor girls neck but yours truly?

My little touches....it is unfortunate that compressing this image losses alot of the work done to remove the hair...the compression is certainly taking it bytes to keep the file size down...too bad we don't have more flexibility....

that's why it's best to post to flickr or other photo sharing sites...

Saby, very nice ! As usual.

Best regards,

Storm

Thank U Storm