I am putting the list of best retouchers World has to offer that influenced the industry with their style.

Pascal Dangin is one of them, although I couldn't find any info or his web, contact, address, etc.

Would you guys care to add anybody else along with him?

Cheers

ANT!!! He's a good one :D

AMY Dresser

Chris Tarantino

Fantastic work
http://www.christarantino.com/

Katrin Eismann
Not really any example on her site but she has excellent books.

On top of the two members mentioned from this forum, I'd say TheVeed.

Almost forgot about another member goes by the name Conrad.

I think its not only who is the best but how did they get there


just an opinion zganie

I think its not only who is the best but how did they get there


just an opinion zganie

Absolutely. It'd be great to hear their stories. At one point, their skill levels weren't that remarkable than yours and mine.

Too many unknown retouchers that are fantastic to say who is the very best. I will say that Tarantino is the best beauty retoucher I have ever had any experience with and his technical knowledge of the software is stupefying. A dude named Jeff Walker is also a fantastic manipulation/illustrative artist who has to be near the top of the list.

It has been my experience that once you get to a certain level, the really great retouchers almost become specialized in specific areas and do what they do best better than anyone else and everything else that they do is great, just not as mind blowing as their specialty.

Too many unknown retouchers that are fantastic to say who is the very best. I will say that Tarantino is the best beauty retoucher I have ever had any experience with and his technical knowledge of the software is stupefying. A dude named Jeff Walker is also a fantastic manipulation/illustrative artist who has to be near the top of the list.

It has been my experience that once you get to a certain level, the really great retouchers almost become specialized in specific areas and do what they do best better than anyone else and everything else that they do is great, just not as mind blowing as their specialty.


Do you have Jeff Walkers web page or contact?

It would be nice if possible to post the contact or web page associated the artist.

Jeff's page is http://www.adv-i-m.com/

Jeff's page is http://www.adv-i-m.com/

Much Appreciated

Thanks

I love Amy Dresser. She was the first retoucher I heard about. When I started doing photomanipulations I looked at her as an idol. I felt her works are magic. ^^
There are other so talented retouchers I've seen since then, but she is my favourite.

Jeff's page is http://www.adv-i-m.com/

He is so talented. It's amazing the way he understands light and objects.

I don't know who the best retouchers are, but I did have a video of a retoucher working on photos of Cindy Crawford, for the cover of Cosmo, I think shot by the late, great Scavullo. This was back in the Scitex days and the operator was working from a printer's proof where the art director redlined everything to fix, although the image and lighting were great out of the camera. The files were sent to the retouching house located in Tenn from NYC

The bill for the retouching was $20,000 and some change. And this was in the late 80's or 90's!! Of course model Cindy Crawford splashed on any mag cover then was sure to sell more issues and I heard that particular issue set some record sales for HG Brown

steve

I don't know who the best retouchers are, but I did have a video of a retoucher working on photos of Cindy Crawford, for the cover of Cosmo, I think shot by the late, great Scavullo. This was back in the Scitex days and the operator was working from a printer's proof where the art director redlined everything to fix, although the image and lighting were great out of the camera. The files were sent to the retouching house located in Tenn from NYC

The bill for the retouching was $20,000 and some change. And this was in the late 80's or 90's!! Of course model Cindy Crawford splashed on any mag cover then was sure to sell more issues and I heard that particular issue set some record sales for HG Brown

steve

I read some article a long ago stating that Pascal charges $20,000 for a cover and $500 for an inside page. I wonder who else charges this much, or is this the general price for the big retouching houses?

Edit: Here's the article: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/03/1046540121180.html

add Jeff Schewe to that list as well, but i think he's focused his attention to his photography lately...

http://www.schewephoto.com/portfolio.html

http://www.adobe.com/jp/print/gallery/schewe/image1.html

I read some article a long ago stating that Pascal charges $20,000 for a cover and $500 for an inside page. I wonder who else charges this much, or is this the general price for the big retouching houses?

Edit: Here's the article: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/03/1046540121180.html

Pixel, thanks for the Pascal link and I read the article. Very informative and interesting. He works or heads up Box Bros studio or something like that in NYC, with a staff of about 40, but I can't find any web site link. His studio must have a site, don't you think, or maybe I just missed a link somehow, anyway, would really like to check out Pascal's site.

I have a client I do some retouching and other stuff for who is a photography student and she told me some of the big players who come to the school for events and such are quite secretive when asked specific questions about their "secret workflow." Like pulling diamonds out of a sand dune in Death Valley.

Although this has been stated before, I rarely see any high end catalog or fashion magazine that has a credit under the photographer's copyright that also lists, "retouched by mr or miss so and so." Retouchers never seem to get the credit they deserve and my saying is, "behind every busy pro photographer, there is a retoucher lurking in the background to make the best images better."
steve

Pascal owns The Box and they don't have a web site.

Chris

Pixel, thanks for the Pascal link and I read the article. Very informative and interesting. He works or heads up Box Bros studio or something like that in NYC, with a staff of about 40, but I can't find any web site link. His studio must have a site, don't you think, or maybe I just missed a link somehow, anyway, would really like to check out Pascal's site.

To the best of my knowledge, I don't think or recall that Box has a site. Maybe they're just too good to have a site. The people that need their services are the ones that already know what they're doing and are willing to pay the big bucks.

Like pulling diamonds out of a sand dune in Death Valley. I somehow find this line quite amusing. Maybe I do know quite a bit about that place. There are a lot of reasons why people that are very secretive about what they know. Rather those reasons are business or personal, I really don't have a clue. There was an individual at the last place I worked that was very reserved in sharing techniques because this individual wanted to retain that edge over others. I personally don't mind sharing what I know with my co-workers. It doesn't matter what I share with them, because knowing how to do it and doing it good are 2 different things. It won't make much of a different if they don't spend the time to practice. If they're committed, they'll know it sooner or later, and I'm just there to pave the road.

Although this has been stated before, I rarely see any high end catalog or fashion magazine that has a credit under the photographer's copyright that also lists, "retouched by mr or miss so and so." Retouchers never seem to get the credit they deserve and my saying is, "behind every busy pro photographer, there is a retoucher lurking in the background to make the best images better."
steve
In certain dictionary, "retoucher" is not even in it while "retouch" and "retouching" are. The word "retoucher" is actually unrecognizable if you typed it in email programs with spell check on or in Microsoft Word. I had a fun time filing freelance tax as a retoucher with the accountant.
It doesn't matter how much work that we do to improve the image that we feel that we should be credited. In the end, it's about the photographer's vision even though he or she is unable to achieve that vision without the help of a retoucher.

To the best of my knowledge, I don't think or recall that Box has a site. Maybe they're just too good to have a site. The people that need their services are the ones that already know what they're doing and are willing to pay the big bucks.

I somehow find this line quite amusing. Maybe I do know quite a bit about that place. There are a lot of reasons why people that are very secretive about what they know. Rather those reasons are business or personal, I really don't have a clue. There was an individual at the last place I worked that was very reserved in sharing techniques because this individual wanted to retain that edge over others. I personally don't mind sharing what I know with my co-workers. It doesn't matter what I share with them, because knowing how to do it and doing it good are 2 different things. It won't make much of a different if they don't spend the time to practice. If they're committed, they'll know it sooner or later, and I'm just there to pave the road.


In certain dictionary, "retoucher" is not even in it while "retouch" and "retouching" are. The word "retoucher" is actually unrecognizable if you typed it in email programs with spell check on or in Microsoft Word. I had a fun time filing freelance tax as a retoucher with the accountant.
It doesn't matter how much work that we do to improve the image that we feel that we should be credited. In the end, it's about the photographer's vision even though he or she is unable to achieve that vision without the help of a retoucher.

Well, I guess if a retouching house is so well known and doesn't even need to advertise on a website, they must be doing something right and word of mouth and reputation are enough to spread the word around.

I also tried to find out if the famous Vogue fashion photographer Steven Meisel had a site, because I am really inspired by his work, and so far, no link to his site, or I can't find it. Now, I have heard that Meisel is a very mysterious cat, who doesn't crave publicity and is quite secretive about everything, hell, I don't know if he had ever been interviewed by any of the photo mags. Again he is so well known in the industry, maybe he doesn't need one either, just like our "pal" Pascal.

steve

http://www.pascalandreimaging.com/index.htm or try
http://www.pascalandrephotography.com/flash2.htm
another good retoucher would be Amy Dresser, Lee Varis, Brian Dilg, Greg Apodaca, Kevin Ames, Katrin Eismann, & Suzette Touch-Strapp (GitterGuru). Just to name a few like it was said before there are a lot of unknowns and retouching companies as well.
Mary Alice

You might try this link to look at some of Steve Meisal work and info.
http://www.artandcommerce.com/AAC/C.aspx?VP=Mod_AlbumPages.Portfolio_VPage&XX=Artists&L4=2U1XC5J90XG&L5=2U1XC5J9EDA

http://www.pascalandreimaging.com/index.htm or try
http://www.pascalandrephotography.com/flash2.htm
another good retoucher would be Amy Dresser, Lee Varis, Brian Dilg, Greg Apodaca, Kevin Ames, Katrin Eismann, & Suzette Touch-Strapp (GitterGuru). Just to name a few like it was said before there are a lot of unknowns and retouching companies as well.
Mary Alice

Interesting link to another Pascal, but the one we are mainly referring to is the Box Studio in NYC, Pascal Dangin, the head man. And yes, I am aware of most of the other names you mentioned, who are tops in the field as well.

As far as the most secrets "revealing" retoucher, would have to be Katrin E, because of the several retouching books she has published. I have the first one, which I refer to all the time. It has "bailed" me out from time to time.

The fraternity/sorority of retouchers is a small club, to say the least

steve

Steve Meisel is a photographer only. He does not do retouching.
Greg Apodaca is a butcher. Sorry I don't like to criticize anyone but his stuff is way overdone. Do a search on the web and there are a lot who feel that way, His style was great at a certain time once.
I love Suzettes work, but she is primarily a photographer who knows how to shoot to minimize what needs to be done post.
Kevin Ames is also a photgrapher.

Steve Meisel is a photographer only. He does not do retouching.
Greg Apodaca is a butcher. Sorry I don't like to criticize anyone but his stuff is way overdone. Do a search on the web and there are a lot who feel that way, His style was great at a certain time once.
I love Suzettes work, but she is primarily a photographer who knows how to shoot to minimize what needs to be done post.
Kevin Ames is also a photgrapher.

Yes, I read that article about Pascal and it was mentioned that he handles Steven Meisel's retouching. Never heard of Apodaca, so I'll check him out.

I have seen many hi-rez drum scans of mainly female models from great photographers, mainly 35mm and med format and IRIS prints in a large pre-press house. Some photos needed a lot of retouching, others, not so much. What is a bit comical though is people will say, "you mean those girls don't really look like that in person with perfect smooth skin, no break-outs, blemishes"? Seeing some of the images right out of the camera is quite a revelation

steve
No sorry guys, they have to go to the retouchers to capture the "look."

another good retoucher would be Amy Dresser, Lee Varis, Brian Dilg, Greg Apodaca, Kevin Ames, Katrin Eismann, & Suzette Touch-Strapp (GitterGuru). Just to name a few like it was said before there are a lot of unknowns and retouching companies as well. - yes there are a lot of unknowns and most of them a lot better than many of the members on that particular list.

In defense of Greg Apodaca - he is technically very knowledgable, knows the software at a very deep level, and also very giving in terms of technique. Regardless of what people feel about some of the result.

There are a bunch of us that handle Steve's retouching. Pascal gets some, I used to , there is another company that the name eludes me in NYC that does a LOT of his work.

The thing is with a lot of these great Photographers is that they use different retouchers for different looks and feels. The same retouchers for all of the jobs can be very detrimental to what a Photographer is trying to achieve.

Chris

There are a bunch of us that handle Steve's retouching. Pascal gets some, I used to , there is another company that the name eludes me in NYC that does a LOT of his work.

The thing is with a lot of these great Photographers is that they use different retouchers for different looks and feels. The same retouchers for all of the jobs can be very detrimental to what a Photographer is trying to achieve.

Chris

Whoa Chris, I am impressed that you work with one of my favorite fashion shooters Steven Meisel. I am not sure what that dude looks like, but I think I might have seen a picture of him taken with Madonna. I guess he did a shoot with her sometime back. He seems to keep a low profile, shys away from publicity

Well then, here is a question for ya. Does Steven shoot totally med format digital for Vogue and 35mm digital or does he still use film and have it scanned? He, Helmut Newton, and Scavullo and of course Avedon are some of my fav fashion photographers and I have learned a lot studying their style. Now Avedon and Scavullo have had several books published, not sure if Meisel has had any.

Does he ever have master classes and I assume he lives and works in NYC, right?

Thanks
steve

there is another company that the name eludes me in NYC that does a LOT of his work.

Nucleus?

Steve, All the great photographers are here (and LA, London, Paris). If you are a working high end retoucher in NYC or at least the tri-state area you work on Steve's work, on LaChapelle, Thompson, you name it.

"Nucleus?"

John Rosen's Company? Hmmm. I'd be surprised.
No it is an offshoot of Coloredge. The salesman broke off and took a bunch
of retouchers with him. AMong the clients were Steve and Annie and some other large catalogue work. Damn. I need to check my books when I get home. I have the name on some of my invoices.

Steve

Meisel is extremely reclusive. He rarely if ever leaves his studio/apt.
In fact, for one job I had to go there with the salesman in order to know what he wanted. Very different. At least for me.
Check out my website. Thee is a list of everyone there(nearly complete) that I have worked with. Right now I am doing another image for Michael Thompson.

I love Avedon's work and would have loved to work with him also. I have doen some work with one of his contemporaries, Melvin Sokolsky. And had an opportunity (hopefully still) to work with one of the last greats around, Hiro. That I would jump at the chance to do.

Chris

Steve, All the great photographers are here (and LA, London, Paris). If you are a working high end retoucher in NYC or at least the tri-state area you work on Steve's work, on LaChapelle, Thompson, you name it.

Ant, this is funny because a client of mine went to a LaChapelle book signing in LA and she asked him how much Photoshopping he does on his images and apparently he said either very little or none at all. Of course, seeing his work and being a retoucher and photographer myself, uh, no way dude, images like those just "don't come outta the camera." And to me, that's fine whatever he does in post, because they are his images, his vision, his concept, same with Meisel and the other great fashion shooters

I would also assume that anything and every image we see in the high end fashion mags has taken a trip or two to you retouchers for a final tweak, no matter how good the org image comes directly out of the camera, even with perfect exposures and lighting

steve

I would also assume that anything and every image we see in the high end fashion mags has taken a trip or two to you retouchers for a final tweak, no matter how good the org image comes directly out of the camera, even with perfect exposures and lighting

steve

you bet it does, when i used to scan some of the conde nast prints you could see where there had been airbrushing done to them...now why you would use a flat color on a glossy print is beyond me as the scanner would pick that up and there would be retouching on top of airbrushing...

Pascal owns The Box and they don't have a web site.

Chris


http://www.boxstudios.com/

Is this it?

gerry

http://www.boxstudios.com/

Is this it?

gerry

koax, it looks like you get the lollipop of the day for finding the Pascal Box site. well done, no one else has seemed to find a link. You found the man hidden behind the curtain. I'll check it out, looks quite interesting

steve

steve, what are you gonna check out their address… that sites been posted here a few times.....for clients really.

steve, what are you gonna check out their address… that sites been posted here a few times.....for clients really.

Well, several people here were interested in Pascal and claimed they had no luck finding his site. I was interested in seeing some of the work they do, maybe some before and after images like you see on Amy Dresser's site and Chris Tarantino has a site. but as you said, it looks like you only get access for clients only

steve

yea i hear ya, some agencies won't show befores, unless it's for business purposes only to respect their clients. Most photogs don't like people seeing their raw images. as retouchers, we know why!

yea i hear ya, some agencies won't show befores, unless it's for business purposes only to respect their clients. Most photogs don't like people seeing their raw images. as retouchers, we know why!

hehe, me included, I don't ever let ever let clients see my RAW images of jewelry, mainly because in shooting jewelry, I underexpose 1/2 to 1 stop and it may look too dark on screen and also I focus stack and sometimes have to composite 2-3 images so the whole piece will appear the same for the final file. But of course in RAW, shooting under and over doesn't really mess up the image beyond tweaking it for a near perfect output

Now there are some mouse over before and after images on the Amy dresser site from several photographers

steve

http://www.boxstudios.com/

Is this it?

gerry

Thats it. But I guess I should have clarified that tey do not have a site for viewing their work.

Chris

hehe, me included, I don't ever let ever let clients see my RAW images of jewelry, mainly because in shooting jewelry, I underexpose 1/2 to 1 stop and it may look too dark on screen and also I focus stack and sometimes have to composite 2-3 images so the whole piece will appear the same for the final file. But of course in RAW, shooting under and over doesn't really mess up the image beyond tweaking it for a near perfect output


steve

NIce to hear that someone is shooting Jewelry the right way!

Kudos to you Steve!
Chris

NIce to hear that someone is shooting Jewelry the right way!

Kudos to you Steve!
Chris

Thanks for the complement. Not sure if I'm shooting it the right way, other than it seems to work for me. I'm still trying out different set-ups, light boxes, strobes, cont light, cool daylite bulbs.

BTW, I have heard that the really bigtime jewelry specialists are located in NYC, the ones that do the really high end ads you see in Harper's, Vogue and similar

steve

Ant

The studio was Gloss

Chris

The great Steves and the Marios are all handled here.

Have you guys heard of/worked for Splashlight Studios? I've seen them cropping up a bit.

And btw, regarding retouching credit, I just picked up an issue of V Man, and in most the editorials, the retouching house is listed, I thought it was very cool.

Chris, ok.

The Veed. I've shot and worked on jobs at Splashlight. They are primarily a rental studio, albeit a nice one (I love their catering). But, maybe they are moving into offering retouching also. Regarding retouching credit, I will occasionally receive credit and have in the past also - mostly for editorials, but a couple of years ago I got credit for a Nokia ad campaign (6235) that was a selection of the month or something at Le Book.

"Nucleus?"

John Rosen's Company? Hmmm. I'd be surprised.
No it is an offshoot of Coloredge. The salesman broke off and took a bunch
of retouchers with him. AMong the clients were Steve and Annie and some other large catalogue work. Damn. I need to check my books when I get home. I have the name on some of my invoices.

Steve

Meisel is extremely reclusive. He rarely if ever leaves his studio/apt.
In fact, for one job I had to go there with the salesman in order to know what he wanted. Very different. At least for me.
Check out my website. Thee is a list of everyone there(nearly complete) that I have worked with. Right now I am doing another image for Michael Thompson.

I love Avedon's work and would have loved to work with him also. I have doen some work with one of his contemporaries, Melvin Sokolsky. And had an opportunity (hopefully still) to work with one of the last greats around, Hiro. That I would jump at the chance to do.

Chris

Chris, since you have worked with Steven Meisel, I finally found a video link on youtube from the 80's on an actual photo shoot. He looks like he is having fun with the models, he almost resembles Alice Cooper in the eye makeup dept, haha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1FFKCkkfk4

steve

Oh yeah. He has a REAL eccentric look.

I don't know who the best retouchers are, but I did have a video of a retoucher working on photos of Cindy Crawford, for the cover of Cosmo, I think shot by the late, great Scavullo. This was back in the Scitex days and the operator was working from a printer's proof where the art director redlined everything to fix, although the image and lighting were great out of the camera. The files were sent to the retouching house located in Tenn from NYC

Steve,

I think we've seen the same thing. I taped a segment of a show called Behind Closed Doors, a late 90s-early 2000s show on A&E hosted by Joan Lunden. I think the company was called NEC, not to be confused with the Japanese electronics company. The retoucher worked on what appeared to be a Scitex Blaze system. It seems to be a Blaze given the the only visual reference to the system I've seen online, presented by the guy who designed its interface. Check it out: http://www.rozin.com/insideout/project-details-popup.asp?id=31.

Man, I love seeing those proprietary systems.

Back to the thread...

I dont know if anyone read the article in july and august PDN magazine it was on the best retouchers in the world.Someone told me about it did not get a chance to see it so it would be interesting to see the list of names if anyone has them

zganie

BOX LTD PASCAL DANGIN STUDIO

532 BROADWAY FL 6
NEW YORK, NY, USA
10012


Telephone: (212) 941-9397
Fax: (212) 965-8490

532 Broadway Floor 7
New York, NY (New York) 10012-3939
Phone: (212) 965-9555

master retocher
nabegh kanjo
009613565075 lebanon 009746749722 qater
http://www.foto-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1201

Steve,

I think we've seen the same thing. I taped a segment of a show called Behind Closed Doors, a late 90s-early 2000s show on A&E hosted by Joan Lunden. I think the company was called NEC, not to be confused with the Japanese electronics company. The retoucher worked on what appeared to be a Scitex Blaze system. It seems to be a Blaze given the the only visual reference to the system I've seen online, presented by the guy who designed its interface. Check it out: http://www.rozin.com/insideout/project-details-popup.asp?id=31.

Man, I love seeing those proprietary systems.

Back to the thread...

Yep, same show with Joan Lunden. I lost the video, but it certainly was a Scitex system. Now of course, a fast Mac/PC and Photoshop CS 2-3 can basically do the same high end retouching and probably more than the early and very expensive Scitex systems could produce. Back then, Scitex operators could bill $300-500 per hour for high end retouching for pre-press. Man, I wish I could find that video. Learned a few tips from a real pro. Interesting stuff
steve

Now of course, a fast Mac/PC and Photoshop CS 2-3 can basically do the same high end retouching and probably more than the early and very expensive Scitex systems could produce.
steve

the one thing i have yet to reproduce, is to place a vector logo over a bitmapped image and then mask the image so the vector logo goes inbetween a persons heads and the background...i can do this in photoshop, but i have yet to find a RIP that can handle such a file...

I dont know if anyone read the article in july and august PDN magazine it was on the best retouchers in the world.Someone told me about it did not get a chance to see it so it would be interesting to see the list of names if anyone has them

zganie

PDN July 2007 the top retouching studios featured:

1. Procolor (singapore) www.procolor.com.sg
2. Remix Studios Bangkok (thailand) www.remixstudiobangkok.com
3. Royal Post Club (germany) www.royalpostclub.de
4. The Living Room (belgium) www.thelivingroom.be
5. Rocket Studios (california) www.rocketart.com
6. Rob Frew (johannesburg) no website listing

apparently this feature is part 2 of 2, so if someone has a June 2007 issue and could post that'd be nice. someone seems to have walked off with ours

I googled him and fount rob frew here...

http://adsoftheworld.com/search/node/rob+frew

don't know how old these ads are...


gerry

the one thing i have yet to reproduce, is to place a vector logo over a bitmapped image and then mask the image so the vector logo goes inbetween a persons heads and the background...i can do this in photoshop, but i have yet to find a RIP that can handle such a file...

Send me an example (even a jpg) of what you are trying to achieve and I can probably help you out. david@vaughtstudio.com

i can reproduce it in photoshop, the problem is trying to get it to film...the file chokes when it gets to the RIP...

Send me a file and i can help you with it. Trust me.

the one thing i have yet to reproduce, is to place a vector logo over a bitmapped image and then mask the image so the vector logo goes inbetween a persons heads and the background...i can do this in photoshop, but i have yet to find a RIP that can handle such a file...

Should work saved out as a eps file with vector clicked on in the save dialog.
This has worked for me numerouse times in the past.

Chris

Should work saved out as a eps file with vector clicked on in the save dialog.
This has worked for me numerouse times in the past.

Chris

yup, but i have yet to get past the rip with this kind of file...

we used to do a lot of work for KOOL, and a lot of our packaging and advertising art consisted of a bunch of vector art incorporated into the Photoshop file...one of our vendors, fuel digital, couldn't handle the files output bc of their RIP.....they had to export some of these complex vector pieces into illustartor and quark (at the time) it was funny.....that's a lot of work!! man they prob hated us!!

yup, but i have yet to get past the rip with this kind of file...

Pixel, I just caught this thread. Have you tried assembling your job in Quark or InDesign and then RIP? Or have you already tried that? Could it be embedded in a pdf and see if that would work? It seems like there must be a workaround

I'll run this by my pre-press pal, who has seen it all and made the impossible happen with this type of job. He has seen a corrupted font choke and shut down the whole RIP/ImageSetter, problems with various versions of Quark and Illustrator, that's why he gets paid the big bucks, to solve these problems that can make one tear their hair out

Keep us posted steve

Modern RIP's have moved on, its better now. Not involved in Production any more but someone told me it partly depends on which version of Postscript they use

Pixel, I just caught this thread. Have you tried assembling your job in Quark or InDesign and then RIP? Or have you already tried that? Could it be embedded in a pdf and see if that would work? It seems like there must be a workaround

I'll run this by my pre-press pal, who has seen it all and made the impossible happen with this type of job. He has seen a corrupted font choke and shut down the whole RIP/ImageSetter, problems with various versions of Quark and Illustrator, that's why he gets paid the big bucks, to solve these problems that can make one tear their hair out

Keep us posted steve

i havn't tried it for a few years, it might be possible these days with a pdf workflow.......it's not something that can be assembled in a layout application because of the interaction between the soft mask and the vector element......this goes back a away, but it primarily came about due to the "rivalry" between the mac desktop department and the guys on the Crosfield systems, the one huge advantage of the Crosfied systems was the ability to combine vector and bitmap with a soft mask and the retoucher and page assembler could pass the file back and forth with ease....so, ever since postcript 3 came out, i have been trying to reproduce such a file without any luck...

Do the composite in InDesign. Place your base image in InDesign. Place your vector art in InDesign then save a transparent (masked out) PSD file of JUST the elements you want to be over the vector art . Duplicate your base image and move to the front so it covers the vector art. With the foreground image selected choose "re-link" and select the transparent (masked out) version of the image. As long as you have not altered the canvas size of the Raster images when you re link InDesign will maintain the X, Y coordinanats and they will line up flawlessley. InDesign's ability to handle transparencies created by photoshop is as flawless as Photoshops. And InDesign will suport a soft mask. Quark can utilize an alpha channel as a mask but it is horrible.

So you are basically sandwiching the vector art between 2 layers of the same artwork although the top layer has been masked.

Export as PDF X1a and you will have no worries with RIP. If your vector art is a spot color use PDF X4 because X1a will not support transparencies and spot colors.

Hope it helps. If you need further explaination or would like me to to one for you and upload a sample I would be happy to do so.

illustrator supports transparencies as well, and can export the same pdf settings.

when we do our complicated die-cuts, we do the mechanicals in illustrator, and the masked .psd is usually placed on a designated layer, named appropriately. usually use this method for touch plates with transparencies and masks.

i will have to try that out, the place i am at now doesn't have a RIP so it'll be a while before i can actually test it...

Export as PDF X1a and you will have no worries with RIP. If your vector art is a spot color use PDF X4 because X1a will not support transparencies and spot colors.

Hope it helps. If you need further explaination or would like me to to one for you and upload a sample I would be happy to do so.

can't i just export as a pdf from photoshop?

Correct, Illustrator does support the same transparencies and has the same limitations on Spot colors in combination with transparencies. It is just a little more cluncky or cumbersome than InDesign and while Illustrator is a fantastic tool and one I use quite a bit, it is not the right tool for this application even though it "can" produce the same results.

can't i just export as a pdf from photoshop? I have not tried that. I guess in theory it would work but I can only give you what I have actually had results with.

I do know that Photoshop is a raster art tool with limited vector capabilities, Illustrator is a vector art tool with limited raster capabilities and InDesign is a layout tool meant to utilize and call upon both raster and vector art and output press ready documents.

lately, a lot of these small town vendors, (client vendors) that we have to use can't even handle the DCS files that we normally output. they ask us to just place each color on it's own layer, named "spot white plate" for example, in grayscale. guess it's easier for them.

what about the other tiny parts of the world that have great retouchers ?
any retoucher from London ? maybe Paris ?
i'd gladly do the slave/coffee guy for them. i might learn the job this way. :grin:


Christophe Huet (http://www.christophehuet.com/) is very good, he is catering to a number of photographers. To see more of his work you can visit the link named PHOTOGRAPHERS and basically browse their images to see more of his work.

He does so much work, he may need help.

Anyway, it doesn't hurt to try!

I HOPE THIS HELPS

Cheers

Indrani
www.markusklinko-indrani.com

=]

Indrani
www.markusklinko-indrani.com

=]

Please tell me you aren't serious. Almost more of a hack than he is.

Hey Ant maybe you would like to list a few high-end retouchers you like
it would be appreciated to get a view from another slant

thanks zganie

There are so many good Retoucher out there in the industry. Only a few ever get any credit at all in the media, even online. We are the unsung hero's of the photography community. We are supposed to be the industries secret, that's why Pascal Dangin doesn't show any work on his site, never has.

http://www.boxstudios.com/

I've worked as a retoucher for over 12 years and have owned my own studios for 9, I think we do pretty good work.

Check it out.

http://www.qstudiosinc.com/

Thanks

i like the last line in Q studios about page, it's almost like a subliminal to you know who!

ha, nothing subliminal about that. that's a straight throwdown knock on pascal!

You know it! haha

Very nice work Q studios! Good to see high end retouchers showing
before and afters as well.

I've worked as a retoucher for over 12 years and have owned my own studios for 9, I think we do pretty good work.

Check it out.

http://www.qstudiosinc.com/

Thanks

Indeed, very nice portfolio!

Well I know very little (actually close to nothing) about retouching. So my opinion is of no value but I will give it anyway.
I checked a few links in this thread and all of the work is fantastic. Some of the models were beautiful but they were probably beautiful to begin with. Add a bit of skin tone, highlight the eyes, get rid of a freckle is real hard and they do a great job doing it.
But when I see a very poor quality image posted on this forum, what impresses me is the quality of the work done by some of the senior members. They have a poor photo to start with and it amazes me what they can do with it.
If I was giving marks, I would give 99% to a moderator (her work is excellent) and three senior members would come in equal second with a score of 98%.

Well thats my opinion anyway.

Scott Dorman
http://www.smalldogimageworks.com/about.html

lg Calvin
http://www.calvinhollywood.de

I would say Christophe Huet! Love his music on the page too.

Hi there, I am new to this forum. I see there are some very talented retouchers out there. Try this site:
http://www.clivebiley.com/

Hi there, I am new to this forum. I see there are some very talented retouchers out there. Try this site:
http://www.clivebiley.com/

interesting work, for the most part they do a good job of keepingg the CGI work seem "organic"...

Yes your right pixelzombie. I am a member of Clive's team (creative retoucher) and he is one of the best CGI/Digital artists I have ever worked alongside. He has done quite a bit of work with Jim Fiscus, John Parker and Nigel Harniman who are all photographic artists in their own individual ways.

do you ever get to see the "before" shots from jim fiscus or are they already corrected by the time they arrive in the studio?

Hey Mac Monkey,

Nice to hear from a pro on this site. Why do you have some work on your site (carmello, escada) that was actually not retouched by you guys? You give the credit to Dario, but why put it up then?

And nice to see that the Eukanuba gets such exposure at your site. I know I hated working on it, but it's nice to see it get some exposure :)

Hi there, I am new to this forum. I see there are some very talented retouchers out there. Try this site:
http://www.clivebiley.com/

That site has some quality CG stuff. It makes me wanna leave work early and work on something.

Hi pixelzombie. No unfortunately Clive was the only person aloud to see the RAW image produced by Jim. It was all very secretive.

DJSoulglo, Dario works for us in Amsterdam. The gallery of images up on the site is from a mixture of people throughout the group.

pixel_monkey, your not the only one. I am at present trying to learn CGI myself to integrate it with my retouching skills. I think that the way things are going it will be a must in times to come.

Hello mac monkey,

I was thinking on starting to learn CGI my self but don't know where to start. there is so many software like maya, 3dmax, cinema 4d, modo.... which one would you recomand to start with? and if you have any good link's for tutorial for the software would be great! thanks.

Hi Zogdart,

I am starting with Modo myself. I had a crack at Maya about a year ago, but found it too much as the package is huge! Modo is exellent for modeling and rendering but not too great on animation which i am not to bothered about. I started off with a book called 'Luxology Modo Guide' by Dan Ablan which sort of eases you into the program and gets rather more interesting the further you get in. Give this website a try for useful tutorials:

http://www.vertexmonkey.com/tutorials_general_modoIntroduction.php

pixel_monkey, your not the only one. I am at present trying to learn CGI myself to integrate it with my retouching skills. I think that the way things are going it will be a must in times to come.
3D is the way to go and I think all creative retouchers should get their hands on it. The learning curve might be high, but there had been many changes made to those programs and they're now more user friendly than they were 10 years or so ago. I remember it was pure nightmare when I first opened Maya back in the late 90s and there were limited learning resources available. I actually went to school and got my not so useful BFA in 3D animation before I turned into a retoucher. It does feel good to see more and more retouching houses are adapting 3D in their workflow. I'd better put my stuff together and jump on this bandwagon before this area in retouching becomes so ridiculously competitive like what's been happening in the 3D field.

3D is the way to go and I think all creative retouchers should get their hands on it.

there's probably more of a need for it on the east and west coast, but from what i have seen in my area there seems to be many more opportunities for retouchers with keyline skills as well as production artists...

zogdart,
I'd suggest either Maya or 3DMax if you want the full package. They're pretty much the leaders in the industry like Photoshop in the 2D imaging world. Although I'd lean toward Maya since I'm a user. There are also a bunch very nice small programs that do amazing things, such as ZBrush and Realflow that also integrate very well with Maya.
Here are a couple of sites that offer all the learning materials you need for highend 3D programs:

http://thegnomonworkshop.com/

http://www.digitaltutors.com/

This one is strictly for Maya:

http://www.simplymaya.com

Here are a few community based sites that you can read all about 3D:

http://www.highend3d.com

http://www.cgtalk.com

http://www.3dbuzz.com

Have fun.

there's probably more of a need for it on the east and west coast, but from what i have seen in my area there seems to be many more opportunities for retouchers with keyline skills as well as production artists...
Definitely, there will always be jobs for highend beauty/fashion and production retouchers. If you want something done that camera can't capture or just too expensive to produce, then you need 3D artists/retouchers with those specific skills to come in. Car companies, at least Chrysler has gotten rid of their on location photography. They just render out the cars in 3D at every angle imaginable and composite them in any background they want for their print outputs without worrying about locations, re-shoots, or anything in that matter.
Of course, all the latest stuff in digital technology always tends to happen in the big cities. Many 3D commercials we see on TV, especially those crazy 3D car commercials are done by a very small group of people in LA and some of them are my college friends. It's amazing when they see those commercials on TV they'll be able to tell you which company worked on which or the specific 3D artists if they weren't involved with the commercials. LA is huge for this kind of work just like NYC is huge for highend retouching.

Car companies, at least Chrysler has gotten rid of their on location photography. They just render out the cars in 3D at every angle imaginable and composite them in any background they want for their print outputs without worrying about locations, re-shoots, or anything in that matter.

Absolutely Pixel_monkey. I was recently working with a photographer called Nick Meek on a Landrover campaign who says he can't wait for all car retouching to go this way. It saves a hell of a lot of time and effort trying to get the car on Location and in the right position. You also have the car in any angle the creative/art director needs. I must say, I would have thought most photographers would be against CGI as to protect their own interests.

Thank's for those link pixel monkey,
thank's to you too mac monkey.

From what i Gather the car photographers now needs to become landscape photographer. since there is no car to shoot your just need to provide the scenery or and the element of it, to the retouching team!

what do you guy's think of cinema 4d?

Oh I forgot,

I have a good link for you guy's, i don't think it was mention before

Good retoucher, good in 3d.... Wish i could do it all !!!! =;+)

http://www.saddingtonbaynes.com/

Oh I forgot,

I have a good link for you guy's, i don't think it was mention before

Good retoucher, good in 3d.... Wish i could do it all !!!! =;+)

http://www.saddingtonbaynes.com/

Yes they are pretty good zogdart, but they only have one style of retouching unlike TaylorJames, who are probably one of our main competiters in terms of 3D.

Hi Zogdart,

I am starting with Modo myself. I had a crack at Maya about a year ago, but found it too much as the package is huge! Modo is exellent for modeling and rendering but not too great on animation which i am not to bothered about. I started off with a book called 'Luxology Modo Guide' by Dan Ablan which sort of eases you into the program and gets rather more interesting the further you get in.

modo can't compete, yet, with Maya or 3DMax, in terms of sheer numbers of features, but it's certainly on it's way to that level, and if it's past evolution is any indication, each new feature will be perfectly integrated into a single interface, with all elements perfectly compatible. Here's a fairly comprehensive review that gives a fair representation of it's merits:

http://www.microfilmmaker.com/reviews/Issue27/modo301.html

what do you guy's think of cinema 4d?

I've never used it, but I've heard some great things about it. From my understanding, it's a mid-range 3D package that has the ability to output highend results. I know a couple of 2D After Effect animators that picked up the program and were able to put it to use in production in a fairly short time. Its render engine is capable of rendering out some very photo real stuff and it's able to render out the render layer in multiple passes, which is perfect for compositing in After Effect. With all that being said, it's still can't compete with Maya or 3Dmax, but it's definitely much easier to get a good grasp of it.

http://shuakashi.com

so unknown, yet so great.

atleast i think he retouches his own work..

Hi @ll,

these are guys from Berlin, Germany...

http://www.retouching-deluxe.de/html/portfolio.html