Okey, here is another break into the world of photographer/retoucher who really made her pictures pop out with very nice retouching!

For me, to break down her style, is based only on what I see in her portfolio, so you might disagree with, but please answer and share your opinion or even your own retouching!


Her studio lighting is of most importance here. The studio lights adds the dynamic within the highlights...I would go and say she is the soft version of Dave Hill or maybe Dave Hill is the hard version of Jill Greenberg!
Soft highlights, skin plus some funny or odd facial expressions ...This is what I have come up with so far! But I will add my try to achieve some of here style...just for kicks!

Jill Greenberg is also known for here provocative series where kids are crying! She admitted on tv that to make the kids cry, they gave the kids lollipops and took the lollipos away to make them cry! This is something that I think is to go a bit over the boarder of creating appealing pictures...

actually I have tried to copy her kid pictures before...just by retouching

see her:

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/photo-retouching/17511-amy-dresser-jill-greenberg-lookalike.html


Let's all chip in with wisdom and knowledge to shed more light on this!


here is the link to the psd file of the picture here...

http://in.solit.us/archives/download/88896

high res version of the original image

http://www.sxc.hu/photo/505715

cheers

Gerry

Heres my try ... or version ...

very nice, pelle...but not so Jill? Found the overall feeling and tone some what strange/odd(in a good way)...so a nice example of your arsenal!

here's one i had done awhile ago...different pic but was going for jill-style...

Nice.

Yes its easier when you can control the lighting yourself. I also did some sort of Greenberg shots a while ago.

Pellapiano-
I loved your first example, even better than Jill's general look. Your's approached that boundry between an illustrated look and photog but not quite hyper-real.

Anyway, just wanted to add that.

Gerry
I am posting this image so that i can stop looking at it and "fiddling" with it, I know i am not going to get anyway near the other posters but i have tried in fact i have been trying all afternoon and that is it now, think i will head on back to the photo art forum ;)

I think your demystification threads are a brilliant idea and i do have a good read of them

Pelle Piano I really like your work

Palms

I thought I'd join in with this one as well.

Peter

PELLE: nice photos! This portray more of your style then Jill, your style is more upfront and this style fits your pictures in a nice way!

PALMS: Thanks for your words! The picture you posted is a bit blurred in the skin, but the feeling is nice!

PETER: Thanks for replying! Your picture is as same as mine, not sharp enough! i miss more highlight details here!

Her work is mostly about the lighting. She uses at several lights on the faces of her subjects. Her retouching is to make the people look, shiny or fake. She spends tons of time retouching to get that specific look. Pellepiano's lighting situtation is close to her lighting but you made is your own.

PELLE: nice photos! This portray more of your style then Jill, your style is more upfront and this style fits your pictures in a nice way!

PALMS: Thanks for your words! The picture you posted is a bit blurred in the skin, but the feeling is nice!

PETER: Thanks for replying! Your picture is as same as mine, not sharp enough! i miss more highlight details here!

Sure your right, not as sharp as it could have been, but the pic I worked from was rather small so a lot of detail was lost. You need to be a member of Stock exchange to get the large original, and I'm not.

Peter

Heres my try ... or version ...

i really like this version better than jills, hopefully you'll explain some of the steps involved...

Yes, pellepiano, can you please explain how you did your first example? How did you get that glow/sheen on the skin, it's hard to imagine that it could be done with just dodging and burning...

I mostly painted with white ( wacom bamboo tablet ) on a layer set to Overlay which is kind of burning. I also added a new layer with a more brown skin tone and lowered the reds in the original. Jill Greenberg has the most fantastic skintones imo, I would love to know how she does it.

Well, if the consensus is that Greenberg starts with multiple lights to capture all the subtle contours of a face, could there possibly have been a worse image to start with, here? This is the textbook example of flat lighting.

Also, the kid's just so happy. Much more activity in the face muscles with crying babies, many more contours to capture.

That said, I tortured him into a semblance of shape and detail, though Greenberg's skin tones eluded me. They're amazingly cold, but so full of life.

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

Here's my try...
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8085/12ul8.jpg

well, i have traveled to this wonderful forum from the great land of NAPP. It is a pleasure to see such beautiful images, especially when it involves a style I am trying to understand. A quick question...

This is the demystification...would it be possible to throw together a brief tutorial or further explaining the steps outside of burning via overlay.

Again, thank you for your time in reading this, and I hope to read again soon.

Aj

Nice.

Yes its easier when you can control the lighting yourself. I also did some sort of Greenberg shots a while ago.

Hello,

nice work. Are you able to remember your lightning setup.
Maybe you could explain in a few words.

Greets

learza

As you can see on most of Jills images and the two that I did there are strong highlights at both sides of the face. So the answer is simple, its 2 backlights.

Jill also use very special frontlighting at times, like with the children, you can see three frontlights making very nice catchlights.

As you can see on most of Jills images and the two that I did there are strong highlights at both sides of the face. So the answer is simple, its 2 backlights.

Jill also use very special frontlighting at times, like with the children, you can see three frontlights making very nice catchlights.



Do you have a screenshot of the painting layer you used for white? that would be really helpful!

Or even better, do you have a PSD with the different layers of what you did on it? that would be EXTREMELY helpful to us all!

The PWL layer isnt much to look at, but here it is ... ( there is a Amy Dresser .psd file somewhere on this forum, its a better source for PWL layers ).

Nice.

Yes its easier when you can control the lighting yourself. I also did some sort of Greenberg shots a while ago.

Dude...awesome shots.
Care to elaborate on lighting setup and post-pro?

Really cool stuff.

Thanks. Strong backlights to get edge highlights. Dodge and burn with PWL to add some contrast and shine. See previous post for the PWL. And some usual cleaning up, of skin etc.

PELLE: Thanks for sharing your technique here! I really like it! It gives me confidence to see I'm on the "right track" when trying for my highlights as well!

Captainhook: Nice picture, the blue background is nice, but it lacks a bit of stronger highlights and a better skin color correction ...

Hi,
I'm brand new to the forum. Is there somehwere I can find a tutorial on how one might go about trying this? I'd like to give it a shot.

Thanks so much.

Hi,
I'm brand new to the forum. Is there somehwere I can find a tutorial on how one might go about trying this? I'd like to give it a shot.

Thanks so much.There are some good pointers right in this thread.

Jill also many times uses a Big octoBank behind her and a Ringflash on her lens.. Pretty sure one is for fill...:+}
In any case she was on like CNN or some program like that I saw on the net and she was using this style.
2 Kicker/side lights,hairlight above and the frontal light like I explained above...:+}
Snook
PS. and of course a lot of retouching.!!

There are some good pointers right in this thread.


There are, and I appreciate them...but being very new to retouching, it's hard to get a sense of some of the specifics. I realize that everyone probably has their different variations to the end product. I loved pellepiano and captainhooks versions...they looked great! I'd love to read a tutorial if anyone has one or would want to write one, and of course, I'll take any hints anyone has.

Thanks!

There are, and I appreciate them...but being very new to retouching, it's hard to get a sense of some of the specifics. I realize that everyone probably has their different variations to the end product. I loved pellepiano and captainhooks versions...they looked great! I'd love to read a tutorial if anyone has one or would want to write one, and of course, I'll take any hints anyone has.

Thanks!

Well as it says in the original post, without proper lighting, it's pointless to even try.

But yeah after that a painting with light layer helps, as shown above.

I can light. I just don't know how to post process that well.

Then half the job is done =) I suggest you look at another thread here with similar images and sharp highlights, regarding Dave Hill. There are also many threads about PWL ( Painting with Light ).

Help me here...what is the difference between "dodge and burn" and "paint with light"?

Dodge and Burn usually refers to the tools with the same name, while PWL is when you have a layer filled with 50% grey , set to Overlay, and paint with black or white. Both methods do the same thing but the Dodge and Burn tools have some extra choices like , only burn midtones and so on.

Heres my try ... or version ...

Is's so cool

saby

I asked this once before but never recieved an answer..hopefully this time. Like Pelle said above one can dodge and burn highlights, midtones and shadows. What does CS3 consider a highlight, midtone, and shadow? What am I doing when I burn lets say a highlight vs dodging a highlight vs a midtone?

Dodging means you brighten the highlights,midtone or shadow, and burn is the other way around, as I understand it. I use only PWL ( unless cleaning layer masks ).

How's this?

Thank you pellepiano. I appreciate it.

unfortunately. the lighting for this image is very flat. it does indeed help to have a very good lighting setup. lighting IS everything. but anyway here is my submission. it's a greenberg/hill mix. kind of a combination of the two.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/127/greenbergmeetshillse1.jpg

one thing that helps tremendously when it comes to this style is if you have a background in illustration/painting. because in order to make this effect work good you have understand how not to overdo it and at the same time not underdo it. there really isn't a magic button or action. all i simply did here was duplicate the layer and dodge and burn the hell out of it. i generally use very low exposure settings for dodging and burning and just continuously put on layer after layer. having a good understanding of light goes a long way. because especially with this image. i added shadows that were not really there or just very faint. when dodgin and burning i generally keep most of the strokes set on midtones. i rarely every use highlights and occasionally burn with shadows. hope this helps some.

plasticjakc: I think your version is very good! abit darke ares on the skin, but really nice overall feel! good on ya! maybe I'm wrong, but maybe a dash of yellow would help? or less magenta? hmm....that color correction is what I struggle with the most :)

alfred: Nice eyes!

alfred: Nice eyes!

Thanks, much appreciated!

Nice thread had fun with the try ...

Greets

learza

So, guys...when coming back to the main workflow here...How does a retoucher get balanced results? Since she has a vast collection of pictures I feel that her pictures offer almost the same retouching when it comes highlights...Has she any retouching career in her past?

As a sidequestion:
When do we know, that your own style is unique?

Well its Amy Dresser that does her retouching, so that could be something. That's why the majority of her work 'looks' the same in Post. Look at all of Dresser's other stuff, very similar as well.

Jill Greenberg has been retouching since the early 90s. Thats where she got the nickname Manipulator as I understand it.

I'm not sure if you guys have seen this, but here are some excerpts from an Amy Dresser Interview discussing her techniques:

********************************

"Before i do any retouching... I adjust the overall color of a photo (no point in retouching anything that will be blown out or hidden in shadows in the end).
Most of my color adjustments are through curves (i adjust the individual channels) and an occasional hue/sat layer--- just personal taste. typically desaturate the reds a bit... as most peoples' flaws are reddish in nature, this diminishes some the areas vs. actual bumps. Also, i'm a bigger fan of desaturated images vs. saturated ones... i think i can control the shape of things better when i don't have to worry about weird saturation drop-offs.

I usually work an image up in an all over and gradual manner... kind of general to specific. I refine color as i go along, carve features and remove blemishes sort of all at the same time. This way, if don't spend as much time as i'd like, the image should be fairly presentable if the deadline is sooner rather than later.

Here are the general things i do:

Rubber stamp out major stuff (on a copy of the original layer of course) at 100% on normal mode. I make sure that all the cloning i do is completely unnoticeable. No big blur blobs all over the place or step-marks. Not a fan of the healing brush either.

Dodge and burn small light and dark spots and areas... anything that distracts and jumps out at me-- always set on midtones at about 3-4% with the fuzziest brush you got with "other dynamics" selected so the pen pressure is in effect. This is where i spend the bulk of my time. To speed this up, i have programmed the 2 buttons on my pen to be the short cuts for decrease brush size and increase brush size.

Even out the skin tones to be basically the same hue, saturation through out a figure/face/image. i'll use the lasso with a fat amount feathering on it and circle/trace areas that i want to adjust. Again, i favor curves. These typically will be very subtle in nature... with the middle of a channel's curve just pulled up or down a notch or 2

"I refer to already existing highlights and exaggerate and/or simplify them. This is one of those things that will come naturally if you've done a lot of figure drawing, otherwise, it just takes practice. I have a few methods of doing this and sometimes i use one... sometimes more.

1--more dodging and burning! I almost always do some amount of carving directly on the retouched image by dodging and burning– pure and simple. 0% hardness brush, still at about 3-4%. It's a good idea to do this on a second copy of the retouched layer just in case i get carried away and something starts to look weird. In case the client
says "woah, too much!"-- it's easy to lightly mask out what's overkill."

"make 2 curves layers... one curve pulled down, the other pulled up. I fill both masks black and then paint in areas on the individual layers that i want to carve down or up (0% hardness on the brush, 100% opacity, 1% flow). This is method make a low-impact on your file size, but i dislike it because i have to switch back and forth between layers. ."

"make a new layer, fill with 50% grey and set that layer to "overlay" and paint black or white (again, 0% hardness on the brush, 100% opacity, 1% flow) to carve down or up. This method sometimes adds more saturation to the carved shadows than i would prefer

"plain old painting white on an empty layer set to "normal"-- 0% hardness on the brush, 100% opacity, 1% flow, "other dynamics" selected. I do this to every image i work on

" this may possibly be my only "trick." This has to be done as a final step or it will magnify any so-called-flaws that are white in nature. Make a new empty layer on top of everything. with pure white selected as the foreground color in the tool bar go to Select > Color Range. The whites of the image should already be selected by default. Move the fuzziness slider so the slightest dusting of selection will be made (click selection radio vs. image radio), hit OK. Fill this selection with white. Mask or erase out what is too
much. sometimes i blur this layer a bit

********************************

Well its Amy Dresser that does her retouching, so that could be something. That's why the majority of her work 'looks' the same in Post. Look at all of Dresser's other stuff, very similar as well.

Jill Greenberg has been retouching since the early 90s. Thats where she got the nickname Manipulator as I understand it.

I have heard that as well, that she has doen all her retouching her self! But then again I feel that some of the picture look very similar to amy dressers retouching....

SISTERE: NICE!!! Where did you read this?? thanks!

I did a tutorial ages ago based on that post Sistere.

Can be found here;

Here it is (http://www.enigma-photos.com/AmyTutorial).

It's been getting on average about 200 hits per day for the last 4-5 months.

SuperKoax: That Amy Dresser thing was posted on this forum ages ago, it even had one of her layered PSD files attached to it.

You can find it here:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/j3h635

It's quite good to see, however most of the skin work isn't on that PSD, so there's no cloning/healing to be viewed.

Decided to have another go at the initial image from this thread. Or, rather, add some additional steps that I neglected first time around.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/fauxGreenberg2.jpg

I did a tutorial ages ago based on that post Sistere.

Can be found here;

Here it is (http://www.enigma-photos.com/AmyTutorial).

It's been getting on average about 200 hits per day for the last 4-5 months.

Nice! Really nice tutorial! I found the quotes using 'Wayback Machine' on some defunct site; but I am thrilled to have found yours where I can actually see some of the techniques compared side by side. Excellent!

Damien

so she took lolypops away to make them cry, heck she should just come to my studio for one day. she would have enuff crying babies. lol. thats a first, make a baby cry instead of make them stop. lol

Carving layer is done here:

"make a new layer, fill with 50% grey and set that layer to "overlay" and paint black or white (again, 0% hardness on the brush, 100% opacity, 1% flow) to carve down or up. This method sometimes adds more saturation to the carved shadows than i would prefer

so she took lolypops away to make them cry, heck she should just come to my studio for one day. she would have enuff crying babies. lol. thats a first, make a baby cry instead of make them stop. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I26UhE1njFc

just see the interview there...some blogs on the net has come a looooong way to eat their way in to her patience...lawsuits against bloggers and her husband has even joined in to the fight against them...

I was really astonished by the pictures when I first saw them, back then I was wondering how she made them cry. And then people started to react and she told openly about it....NOT A GOOD IDEA! In USA, there are some very angry parents with small children :D

blogs from people:

http://thomashawk.com/2006/04/jill-greenberg-is-sick-woman-who.html

http://www.kantor.com/blog/2006/06/jill-greenberg-child-abuser/

we tend to over react in the USA and this is another example of that, i think forcing your kid into beauty pageants is much worse than what Jill was doing...

Pixel: I probably diverted the thread towards this matter with my last post. I agree to a point where the reactions that people are stating regarding her pictures. MAKING children cry is no way to do it! maybe wait until the child is dead tired without nap time...then you have some very nice potential picture just waiting to be snapped! I think that using tricks like Jill did with the lollipop is to exploit defenseless human beings! It's not right! But to react so strong about it isn't something I would do...I think that Jill should maybe change her thoughts regarding these types of picture so she doesn't make the same mistake twice! In the interview it doesn't see that she regrets or understand her actions. Has she doen the right thing when so many people reacts so bad? Or are all other people wrong and she is right?

MANY THOUGHTS HERE :D

if i was jill i woulnt regret anything. you are being way too sensitive, man...that is what is wrong with the army today...too many mothers. Toughen up a little bit, so what the kids are crying, kids cry, who cares. What matters is she got a shot you will never be good enough to get, and she did it by taking candy from a baby. Maybe you can learn something from her...maybe not.

Nice! Really nice tutorial! I found the quotes using 'Wayback Machine' on some defunct site; but I am thrilled to have found yours where I can actually see some of the techniques compared side by side. Excellent!

Damien

No problems my good man. Hope it helps you out. It certainly did with me when I wrote it.

As a side note I only maybe really use two or three of those techniques... especially the 50% grey overlay/soft light method (called 'carving' earlier)

if i was jill i woulnt regret anything. you are being way too sensitive, man...that is what is wrong with the army today...too many mothers. Toughen up a little bit, so what the kids are crying, kids cry, who cares. What matters is she got a shot you will never be good enough to get, and she did it by taking candy from a baby. Maybe you can learn something from her...maybe not.

hehe...! So, I'm a mother? hehe...wow! You are truly mature in your way of discussing, I must admit it was really funny to read! To debate on your statements, Jill is a VERY good photographer. But sometimes people go a bit too far to achieve good results!

Yes, I admit, I'm not even close to her results, but so are probably everyone else in here! What is it to learns from Jill? Well, that going too far is really too far! As a father I wouldn't let anyone do this too my son, so the parents to these kids should also think twice!

That's just the point. The parents of those kids consented. They probably even got good monetary compensation. What would be the difference if Jill jumped around a corner and yelled "BOO!!!"?

Does it emotionally scar the kids for life? No. In fact, I bet none of them even remember that day. So to say it's going too far is silly. Especially to label it as exploitation. If all the times I've been exploited in my life was because someone stole my lollipop, I'd be a happy happy man.

just cut the crap guys. Everytime I tried to find a tutorial about Jill Greenberg's work it always ended in controversy about her crying children work. This thread started out very nice and this is actually my first post and I joined because of this thread, so helpful thanks to Pellepiano, Sistere, and Enigmaphoto.
Take the debate about her crying children work somewhere please! I believe we have enough discussion of that.

Btw, when you reply there is a small note on the top of the box, quote:
"(If your reply is off-topic, please start a new thread instead)"

Need to say clearer than that?

there is nothing more honest than face of a child could be

saby

Dodge and Burn usually refers to the tools with the same name, while PWL is when you have a layer filled with 50% grey , set to Overlay, and paint with black or white. Both methods do the same thing but the Dodge and Burn tools have some extra choices like , only burn midtones and so on.

why filled with 50% Grey??
50% grey will be invisible in the overlay mode so you dont have to fill the layer with 50% grey. Just a new layer set to overlay is enough.

^^ It's helpful to me personally when I want to view only the overlay layer to see how my brushstrokes look.

I dont use a grey layer myself but I once read a good explanation on why its used ( that I now have forgot ). The difference could be how photoshop handles transparency in different blend modes, opposed to a filled area.

Havent noticed any difference when testing though.

That's just the point. The parents of those kids consented. They probably even got good monetary compensation. What would be the difference if Jill jumped around a corner and yelled "BOO!!!"?

Does it emotionally scar the kids for life? No. In fact, I bet none of them even remember that day. So to say it's going too far is silly. Especially to label it as exploitation. If all the times I've been exploited in my life was because someone stole my lollipop, I'd be a happy happy man.

Yes, the parents are to blame as well! That I'm agreeing on! But to say that it's ok to do it since the kids can't remember it later in life?!

We agree to disagree...

just cut the crap guys. Everytime I tried to find a tutorial about Jill Greenberg's work it always ended in controversy about her crying children work. This thread started out very nice and this is actually my first post and I joined because of this thread, so helpful thanks to Pellepiano, Sistere, and Enigmaphoto.
Take the debate about her crying children work somewhere please! I believe we have enough discussion of that.

Btw, when you reply there is a small note on the top of the box, quote:
"(If your reply is off-topic, please start a new thread instead)"

Need to say clearer than that?

Don't be so full of your self here...BOOHOO...You look for Jill tutorials! Not my problem you can't find them? I mentioned this as a side thing in my opening post when starting this thread! So cut the BS when you call this off topic! This has nothing to do with off topic since it's her techniques/workflow that's being discussed in photo/retouching!

I admit that I diverted the discussions a little bit when I mentioned this situation earlier, but it's nothing to cry over is it? This is the last time I'm going to mention it! so wuhu!!! :D

there is nothing more honest than face of a child could be

saby

Nice feel over it, sab!

thanx Gerry

saby

I think my latest photo-shoot resulted in a somewhat 'Greenburgian' shot:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2280/2141908781_559b560524.jpg

I think my latest photo-shoot resulted in a somewhat 'Greenburgian' shot:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2280/2141908781_559b560524.jpg

what did you do for post work and what was your lighting setup?

Nice thread here... great superkoax

By the way... amy is a lovely person....she dont have secrets.

I guess Amy WAS the retoucher of Jills pictures. I am not sure

lg Calvin

I don't think jill did anything wrong with the kids.
If you go to the mall, Go see Santa Claus and check out how many kids are scare to sit on santa's lap...and how many are crying...but yet the parent's still want's the picture!

I was at the mall yesterday and i saw this quite a few times... Espacialy around that age!!! are there bad parent's ? did you check your own photo's when you where a kid if you where crying in some of them? does that mean your parent's where bad if you have picture of you crying? All i'm saying is at this age they will cry for almost anything. So i don't see anything wrong. i'm sure the parent's that where there are responsable and loving parent's. there was no slaping. just taking away a candy.

that's my opinion.

Here is sort of Jill lighting, but the PP is still lacking.

Might as well give it a 1-2 try.

-C

PELLE: Nice one there...like the funny situation you've created..

Mrkronk: Looks very good with the facial expression and the highlights, but the side lighting is too bright! If you look under his jaw it looks liek his head has been placed on top of the body due to the lighting there...can you make the skin there equal to the rest of his neck?
I just added my edition...hope you don't mind? :)

I tried to take down the higlights on his neck and tried to get more texture of the burned out areas on the sides there...nothing much, but some...

Superkoax,

Thanks a tonnes for the input / retouch - much appreciated.
I figured a lot of the issues are best fixed in the actual shooting process... things to change for next time I suppose.

I'm workin on smoothin out those hard lines right now... ill upload my rendition when I finish.

Thanks a lot though, respect.

-C

Superkoax,

Thanks a tonnes for the input / retouch - much appreciated.
I figured a lot of the issues are best fixed in the actual shooting process... things to change for next time I suppose.

I'm workin on smoothin out those hard lines right now... ill upload my rendition when I finish.

Thanks a lot though, respect.

-C

care to fill us in on your process?

I came across a video of her today on you tube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-juHi5Zxik&eurl=http://strobist.blogspot.com/search?q=jill+grenberg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byt3_EhuyyU&feature=related

i taught some people would like to see some of her lighting set-up!

i got the answer!

$3,000+ worth of lights and modifiers
$20,000+ camera and digital back
$500+ DJ

the ingenuity of post processing: priceless

and for everything else, there's retouchpro.

good one namphoto!

but you can have the same look for a lot cheaper.

a decent canon. some cheap strobe's (light is light)

and put on your favorite CD

I still have my photogenic that i bought years ago, recycling is slow but the outpout is still 5500K. 2 silver unbrella. you rent a ring flash. 2 grid light. + a hair light and your on business!

I came across a video of her today on you tube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-juHi5Zxik&eurl=http://strobist.blogspot.com/search?q=jill+grenberg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byt3_EhuyyU&feature=related

i taught some people would like to see some of her lighting set-up!

nice, thanks for sharing this with us!

i got the answer!

$3,000+ worth of lights and modifiers
$20,000+ camera and digital back
$500+ DJ

the ingenuity of post processing: priceless

and for everything else, there's retouchpro.

Hehe! I feel your hungerfor more money and feeling a bit lost to the end results since the shoots are done with high end equipment, BUT she started out somewhere right!?

Gwen steff type greenberg. Low res.

Gwen steff type greenberg. Low res.

looks nice, what does the original look like?

good job xfx. can you tell us something about your workflow? only dodge and burn
or filters too?

I can move this question if it doesn't fit. Those with lighting experience what exactly is Jill using here? What is the cost of each item? What is the alternative if one is on a budget? If I have no lighting except a 580EX would you invest in the type of lighting Jill uses or something else. You may say it depends on the effect I want to achieve, but lets say I want a sound good basic flexible portable reliable system. I could pay $3000, but less is better and value is more important than name unless value/name is the same.

XFX: Very nice feel to that! did you light this subject? Or did you just retouch it?

I can move this question if it doesn't fit. Those with lighting experience what exactly is Jill using here? What is the cost of each item? What is the alternative if one is on a budget? If I have no lighting except a 580EX would you invest in the type of lighting Jill uses or something else. You may say it depends on the effect I want to achieve, but lets say I want a sound good basic flexible portable reliable system. I could pay $3000, but less is better and value is more important than name unless value/name is the same.

youre probably looking 2000 per light, assuming she uses profoto lights or something. Ive seen her use parabolic umbrellas somewhere and those go up to 5000 each. so, two front lights, two hair lights, one overhead fill, and ring flash. over 10,000 for her set up.. OR buy four of those 580ex, umbrella adapters, two reflective umbrellas in the front, two DIY gridded flashes for hair lights, and buy an a good ringflash (most diy or cheap alternatives to a ringflash suck.)

my set up is just 2 AB800s with refletive umbrellas, one EF 500 for hair lighting. I like it so far.

Pixelzombie: Thanks. I'll think about it. :)
Meditom: D&B and some sharpening technique. Thanks.
Superkoax: 7 Light setup and PP. I'll upload and post link for bigger image. Thanks.

My point of view regarding equipment: It's not very necessary to spend what greenberg really have. As long as u have a decent and lots of lights(watever brand that is), know how to use them like how to meter the the 3 lights in front and a darn good PP workflow, i think it'll be close enough to get the effect. I may be wrong but just speaking thru my experience.

i second XFX

Light is Light. I have profoto, speedotron and photogenic. I started out with photogenic back then, i found them second hand on ebay. I can put any soft-box or umbrellas i want on them. what you need to check is what kind of accesory you can hoock up to them. i just did a test with 4 different umbrellas. from profoto $$$$$ to aurora -$ and there is not a huge differece between them. the hardest to find is the ring flash beacause there is not that many compagny who makes them. if you what one there usaly made to go on a power pack. you could by a profoto or other brand and go to specialize shop and have the end cord change to fit on a speedo or other brand. but again you would need a power pack. the thing with self contain flash is when there high (like a hair light) you need to climb on a lader every time you make an adjustment + it's harder to find beauty dish or some accesories depending on the brand + the recycling is usaly much slower. I would recomand on finding second hand power pack with strobes. but to acheive what jill is doing you don't need 30 000$ worth of equipement. You could rent a ring flash for a day! and have 5 cheap mono blocks to do the same. 2 grids + 3 silver umbrelas.