July 05 Discussion Thread

[T Paul]

Add your comments, questions or general discussion about the July Contest entries as well as the contest itself here. This is also a great place to share your techniques or ask others about theirs.

[chrishoggy]

As you will see from my entry, glamour work isn't my thing. But it has made me look in to it. Searching through, I can see there are many ways of getting the glamour effect. Also there are many different looks to a glamour finish, so I will be interested in what look people go for.
I liked the B/W idea of the first entry, gives a totally different feel to the photo

[Caitlin]

TPaul - you really know how to pick them! This one is tricky, and has a lot of challenge to it!

I wanted to get a view on the definition in this situation of a glamour portrait - ie. how much 'plastic surgery' I might be able to get away with? If this was a photographic model to appear in a magazine I would make more alterations, than say, if it was someone wanting a picture of themselves to hang on the wall. Any chance of some clarification on this point?

[Kraellin]

caitlin,

i had the same question. i went back and read the rules again. the only stipulation seems to be that you must keep it as a photo, not photo art. that leaves a LOT of room for adjustment as far as i can tell. for instance, i see no reason why you couldnt completely replace her hair if you wanted to, as long as it was realistic hair. change her dress as long as the dress is more or less real. and so on and so forth. but you wouldnt want to make the image look like a water color or oil painting. and i think that's the point here. keep it looking like a photo that you could put in cosmo and have folks believe it is a photo. but that's only my interpretation and i've 'interpreted' wrong before

ultimately, it's going to be the voters that decide if your image stuck to the rules or not.

also, i agree, at first glance this seems like an easy assignment, but there are some tricky areas here. so, good luck to all

Craig

[T Paul]

First off, I try to keep the rules to a minimum as not to hamper any creativity. That being said, the idea of this challenge is to “glamorize” the existing photo. Consider that the client wants her image turned into a model-look. I would stay fairly true to eye and hair color. You can add highlights, but I wouldn't completely replace or alter her hair. I believe the key is to “enhance” what is there without making the person look completely unrealistic. The client wants to improve "her look", not change herself into a completely different person.

Some people may want to try a little digital plastic surgery. Try doing the basic retouching steps first, then experiment with the highlights and shadows before you start “nipping and tucking”. You'd be amazed how much you can contour a face by simple working with the highlights and shadows of an image. For instance, a simple change to them can dramatically change the shape of nose.

Some basic approaches:
Skin

Smooth texture, remove blemishes and major wrinkles
Remove hot spots (shininess)

Hair

Eliminate fly-aways/wispy hairs
Fill in gaps

Eyes

Brighten Whites
Soften under-eye circles
Remove distracting catch lights
Enhance color

Eyebrows

Reshape if necessary
Remove stray hairs

Nose

Soften hard shadows on sides of nose

Lips

Reshape if necessary
Enhance color
Add or even out highlights

Face

Improve highlights and shadows

[Kraellin]

arrgh! ok, this new 'amendment' quite possibly just voided quite a few hours of work. i went strictly by the 'keep it a photograph' and was well within those parameters. i didnt base this on the model coming to me and asking for work, but rather the photographer or editor coming and saying, 'ok, make this the best you can as long as you keep it as a photograph'. this amendment changes all that. i changed a number of things that the model, herself wouldnt have wanted changed, but that a fashion magazine wouldnt necessarily care about or mind.

and i know the voters here. they read and follow the rules exactly when they vote. with this new guide i'm gonna be out of the running if it's strictly interpreted. so, now i dont know whether to go back to a MUCh earlier save or take the risk and go with how i've been going. i hate 'late' rules!

Craig

[T Paul]

The above was not a rule change.

The rules don't say you can't change the hair color and so on. I was just suggesting that most glamour shots are kept true to the original image as well as offering some suggestions to help those that have never enhanced a photo before.

As long as you keep it as a photograph and don't convert it to photo art then you are technically meeting the rules. So go ahead and glamourize it as you see fit. This competition is open to creativity.

[Caitlin]

Hmmm... I don't think we are ever going to get a challenge where the boundaries are crystal clear! *lol* I guess that is the nature of the art.

I hadn't thought to actually replace facial (or hair) features.

You can change appearance A LOT working with what is already there though. Altering shadows can have a dramatic effect. Sounds like that is acceptable, and as reshaping lips, eyebrows etc is mentioned obviously subtle facial modification is ok. I have certainly seen glamour photography (You know the stuff you see on display in shopping 'malls') where people's appearances change quite considerably through various airbrushing techniques.

[Kraellin]

ok. thank you, T Paul

Craig

[T Paul]

Smile, I never like to see work go to waste!

[T Paul]

Note, the photographer/model (it was a self portrait) will be viewing the contest threads to see the results.

[kiska]

TPaul, there is a minor typo in the rules. .......the deadline is 24 JUNE 2005.

[T Paul]

Thanks for the catch Kiska. It has been changed to July.

[Ms Bay]

TPaul, so far all of the entries are beautiful remakes, but I thought you said it was to look like a photograph. Practically all of them look like paintings or drawings (hence, photo art). I read the rules of the contest and the additions that you added, and I could have enhanced her more, but I am trying to stay within the rules. Am I confused and making a lot of to do about nothing? Thanks.

[CJ Swartz]

Originally Posted by Ms Bay

TPaul, so far all of the entries are beautiful remakes, but I thought you said it was to look like a photograph. Practically all of them look like paintings or drawings (hence, photo art)...

What makes you think of these entries as "paintings"?

The ones that I have looked at could have been shot with a camera in front of their background. Faustina's work gave the subject glowing perfect skin, and sparkling eyes -- but I can see it as a photo of a person with those traits (or the makeup to look like those traits). Retouching techniques can create that improved look -- painting or airbrushing over the skin does not create a "painting".

What is the "look" that makes you think that rules have been broken?

[Ms Bay]

CJ, evidently you did not read all or perhaps understand my post. I did not say all of the entries look like photo art, nor did I mention any particular entry. I was asking TPaul what I thought was something to help me concerning my entry in the contest. Each person is entitled to their own opinion, that is why there are votes for the entries.

[Caitlin]

I thought it might help to get a definition of a glamour portrait. I don't know that this definition helps at all though as it seems to require the model to be partially nude! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography.

In my google browsing I didn't find one site that gave really definitive examples of glamour photography, but I'd suggest anyone in doubt does a search with goggle images with the words glamour portrait and look at the examples that come up.

[chrishoggy]

I think the point CJ picked up on, as I did was:
Practically all of them look like paintings or drawings (hence, photo art)

[Caitlin]

Originally Posted by chrishoggy

I think the point CJ picked up on, as I did was:
Practically all of them look like paintings or drawings (hence, photo art)

Maybe that is the test of a 'good' retouch? To me this contest is not that different in aim to the wedding portrait a couple of months ago - make her look really nice, but so no one can tell you did it. (IF they hadn't seen the before)

Personally I don't think all the entries so far look like 'paintings' - some of them maybe do push the boundaries a little too far for my taste, but the majority I think are quite beleivable portraits. I think the important thing is that she looks great, and you can believe with enough good lighting and lots of makeup she could look like that.

[Ms Bay]

Caitlin, good suggestion. I, like you, went to Google and put in "glamour shots" and with the sites I went to, the photos looked lovely, but still looked like natural skin without the shadows and different colorizations of the skin as some air brushing and enhancing does do. They also did not have the extra smooth skin that make the models look unnaturally plastic. I'm by no means a pro at glamour shots and I probably don't have the expertise that some of the entrants do, and I did not say anyone was breaking any rules, I was just asking a question to make sure that I was doing the right thing. As I said before, the entries so far are beautiful and I wish everyone good luck. I think I'll just withdraw my entry and just enjoy the contest for other's interpretations and use the site for learning.

[Marthig]

Hi guys and gals !

I think we must not forget RULE #4 !? Let's just have fun doing whatever we think is the best method.

Before starting to work on any of these challenges or contests and after I have a sketch in my mind one of the nicest things I like to do is research for photos to use -most I don't but still pick them up- in a particular project, for this one I had zillions of pretty ladies with nice hair styles to "implant" in the model, now ... well I will try to fix her hair in the best possible way !

One thing that I am not sure you have noticed, the model has the most perfectly symetrical (1 or two "ms" ?) features I have encountered so far.

OK , thanks for reading my 2bits.

regards - Martha

OOPS "rule #4 - Have fun, is from another contest/challenge sorry about that TPaul .

[Caitlin]

Don't withdraw MsBay! Everyone's interpretations are different, and yours is just as valid as anyone else's! One thing I have noticed is a lot of people have made amendments to their entries already, so I think there is a lot of uncertainty about how to approach this one.

[cazubi]

I agree with Caitlin, MsBay, don't withdraw. Each piece is different and that is good. There are always going to be a big variety in styles and interpretations in these contests and differences of opinions.

Cathy

[TwinbNJ]

Why would anyone withdraw an entry? ---- I did mine as if I was doing one for myself. Now maybe I "cross" lines" at times -- but hey my grandchildren are going to think I was the most beautiful grandama! LOL

Now as far as "air" brushed skin -- OK go to google and do a search, then look at the cover of magazines at the grocery store ----- very different! LOL

I am not even going to bring up the children beauty pagents! Extra smooth skin, eye lashes and make up -- yup.

I say do what you feel makes this beautiful woman look glamourus --- that would make your entry you.

I did not do a search of how to make someone glamourus --- I just looked at a beautiful woman and went from there.

Best of luck to everyone === T- very nice challenge!

[T Paul]

When I think of Photo Art, I think of a photo that has been converted to look like art work in a variety of medium such as a watercolor, oil, pencil, charcoal and so on.

As for this contest, keeping it as a photo doesn’t mean it can’t have some flare to it. Many special effects that are created digitally can be achieved in regular photography through filters, darkroom techniques, backdrops, lighting, special film and so on.

Some possibilities are:

Black & White
Sepia tone or other tinted tone
Dreamy Photo (Soft Blur)
High Key
Low Key
Double Exposures
Infrared
Warm tones/Cool tones
Silhouettes
Panning and other techniques to create movement
and many more

There also might be some confusion in that you can add make-up, touch up hair, smooth skin, retouch the face, change the background, change the color of the clothes, and even resize some facial features while still keeping the image a photograph. This is a "glamour" retouch.

Here are some sites with some Before and After samples:
Glamour Retouching
Touch of Glamour
Digital Retouch
Glitter Guru
Beauty Retouching
Photo Retouching Tutorials

[Kraellin]

i think the bottom line here is 'do you recognize what you see here as basically a photograph with some enhancements or as something else?'

take it the other way around. let's say you take a picture of a kabuki actor all made up in heavy covering. now, let's say you took that same person in that same pose but without the makeup and then added it yourself in photoshop to look exactly the same as the first one. and bringing it a little closer to home, let's say this model in the contest was all done up by a professional stylist, makeup artist and dressmaker and the cameraman used a number of camera tricks to make things even better still. it's all doctored, but it was done before the shot was taken. and trust me, i know some folks who could do this and you'd believe it was photo art.

the thing is, 'glamour photography' IS very much like 'photo art'. you could almost call it a sub-division of photo art. and that may be where the confusion lies. the difference, to me, is, when i look at the final rendering does it look more like an art piece or a photograph. and in all the entries i've seen thus far, they all qualify [u[primarily[/u] as photographs. there is a line you might cross and i can certainly understand msbay wanting a better definition of where that line is for her own entry. as you can see from my own question in earlier posts, i thought T Paul had moved that line. he didnt, but i thought he had. i think msbay is looking at the same question; where do you draw that line. it's a fair question.

Craig

[Caitlin]

I agree it is very confusing! For instance Flora just posted an entry and made the comment "I know I bent the rules a bit with her hair" and I thought "huh??". Putting her in a purple wig may be bending the rules, just giving her a neater hairdo is quite the opposite - it's exactly what 'Glamour Photography' should be I think - taking away the imperfections, and 'tarting you up' a bit, and more too possibly. I think it'll be a real shame if people are scared to make 'artistic alterations', in order to make it a more attractive and glamourous photographic image. Now, as some one has already mentioned, then there's that kid's peagent stuff - that's in another ball park again - from what I've seen sometimes VERY un-photographic looking.

[Caitlin]

Looking at the entries so far I guess I'm a bit surprised that only one so far has tried to complete the top of the lady's hair. So just wanted to confirm that doing so, and for instance changing the dress to be more 'glamourous' are appropriate in this contest?

[Kraellin]

ya know, i think we can overthink this. if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, chances are, it's a duck

the ONLY real criteria was 'keep it as a photo'. so, if it looks like a photo...

Craig

[T Paul]

Quack, Quack....

Originally Posted by T Paul

You can add make-up, touch up hair, smooth skin, retouch the face, change the background, change the color of the clothes, and even resize some facial features while still keeping the image a photograph. This is a "glamour" retouch.