Photo Retouching - - How to get highly polished skin? - Page 4

cricket1961 · #46 11-22-2005, 09:19 AM

Hey Mitch!

Nice to see some apply image techniques here. Apply image and Calculations are probably my favorite tools in PS.
The technique you described is a great way to flatten out an image or portions thereof. As long as some of the shape is brought back in with proper lighting, its a step saver.
There is nothing wrong per se with Blurring an image to help with Flesh problems. However, at the hi level there is a noticable "rejection" rate from clients who are seeing more and more how destructive and fake looking it can become when used unwisely. A low level blur, along with a low level noise application, combined with a proper opacity can definetly help things out. A retoucher needs to know when this can be used and when not to. A talk with the client ahead of time on what is to be expected for a end result can decide this issue.
Obviously time is also an issue that can help decide when to use a blur or not. I just finished a large campaign for a underwear company that featured full body shots... lots of skin! Had to be done quickly but realistically. No blemishes, even on the men. A blur came in handy but one would never know it.

Chris

tetsuo · #47 11-22-2005, 09:44 AM

i know i am lazy but anyone looked into Kodak GEM airbrush pro? give the trial a try.

gmitchel · #48 11-22-2005, 09:49 AM

Well that is the goal of all retouching, isn't it?

To do the job with enough craftsmanship that the image is enhanced without looking artificial or otherwise drawing attention to the retouch itself.

I agree that a careless blur can detract from an otherwise fine image. Same is true for any retouch one might consider: color balance, dynamic range, noise removal, sharpening, etc.

Emphasizing "no blur" makes little sense to me. There is nothing about blur per se that should rule the tool out of consideration, IMHO. If people want a stylized look that does not appear too artificial, why not say that.

Like the way people stand and pose for glamour ads is not stylized and artifical to start with.

And Santa comes twice a year, too.

Cheers,

Mitch

P.S. I am not a fan of going back and adding in monochromatic noise to avoid skin that is "too" polished. Just watch your opacity levels for your blends. If you use clone tools, watch the fill as well as the opacity, etc. Let a bit of the original skin texture show through. IMHO, adding noise is telltale, once you are familiar with what to look for.

cricket1961 · #49 11-22-2005, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmitchel

Mitch

P.S. I am not a fan of going back and adding in monochromatic noise to avoid skin that is "too" polished. Just watch your opacity levels for your blends. If you use clone tools, watch the fill as well as the opacity, etc. Let a bit of the original skin texture show through. IMHO, adding noise is telltale, once you are familiar with what to look for.

I agree. I have said as much in other posts on other threads. I fully believe in the natural texture for all stuff is best.

Chris

Try telling my kids that Santa does not come more than once a year! : )

cricket1961 · #50 11-22-2005, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tetsuo

i know i am lazy but anyone looked into Kodak GEM airbrush pro? give the trial a try.

It has its place in retouching at a consumer level in my opinion. You are better off learning how to do it yourself.

Chris

yuccaview · #51 11-22-2005, 12:36 PM

Hi ray 12,
Sorry for delay and I am not sure you wanted me to reply but I will anyway.
The blending brush in painter that is called "just add water" is a wonderfull
blending brush.... it works as if you were actually applying water to dry paint to blend. I am sorry I don't have a site or good sample to show other than my web site www.airbrushimaging.com look at the oil painting detail of the little girls face. That is not the best sample I just have not shown this or talked about it in detail.
The way I use it (just add water brush) is to have the brush opacity set low 10% or so and the size adjusted for the area your working in , small around detailed areas and larger on cheeks forehead etc. This is so simple and makes a perfect blend you can make the image look airbrushed or blend the skin lightly so you don't remove skin detail. I work on a clone a lot of the time just to be safe but you don't really need to. You do need a tablet to get the full advantage of the brush and you do not need to make selections just practice a bit and you can fix any portrait and make it to as polished as you want and it DOES NOT LOOK like a blur tool plus this is a great brush for finishing restoration work. I need to say the brush set at 10% requires you to build on the blending it usually is not a one pass stroke and you need to develop a touch like glazing paint but if you try this you will love it.
Don

creeduk · #52 12-09-2005, 05:43 AM

I keep meaning to dig out my painter software not used in ages. I like the just add water brush and will give this ago, could make some interesting christmas gifts for family. Alot of info in this post and amazing how many ways one can go about a job with our chosen tools.

grafx · #53 12-09-2005, 08:35 AM

You know there is no real quick fix. I just get out the heal and patch tools and use them with your image zoom set to like 400%. Working with really small areas at such a large zoom, you get a virtually flawless look without loosing the texture. A bit anal retentive, but you cannot get away from doing things manually even with the filters and tools (I've actually found dust & scratches useful with large pores!). Don't look for a quick fix or you loose the sense of artistry.

santajuana · #54 12-09-2005, 10:05 AM

Hi, I'm a pro photographer and retoucher, and I've already saw the Rush's portfolio, as I've imagined this kind of work is doing by painting the photo again, if you work in Photoshop just create a new layer and begin to work in it. Use the brush at 30% of opacity. You'll see this work. Oh! this is one of your photos, I took it as a sample.

shellby · #55 12-09-2005, 12:31 PM

Been chatting with the guy who actually did the Rush images and he said that he also uses a method where you choose one of the channels, copy it over onto a layer, then play around with the blend modes. I have had a play and it can have some interesting results. He said that he would try and dig out one of the layered files for me.

OnAir · #56 12-09-2005, 01:41 PM

Blur and noise with luminocity option is very good as a snapshot for a history brush. Using this tool with multiply and screen option, is possible to control all skin structure.
Sample of this technique: http://www.pbase.com/equinaut/image/53038185

shellby · #57 12-09-2005, 03:24 PM

If you go and have a look at my portfolio on www.retouchme.co.uk you will see that I have been using the dodge and burn method - either with curves or a 50% gray softlight layer - and I have been keeping the detail in the skin.

I just wondered how people acheive the RUSH look without blur.

http://www.rush.co.uk/portfolio.htm

I know the guy who did it and he said that he did not use blur / median / surface blur. I believe he copied a channel over (eg the RED channel - as it has the least amt of detail) and then used a blend mode and masks to add the effect where he wanted it to go.

Cheers

shellby · #58 12-09-2005, 03:28 PM

I was actually replying to a post that was here, and by the time I completed mine the post was deleted???

shellby · #59 12-11-2005, 02:29 AM

Here are some more examples of the "polished" look

megl · #60 12-12-2005, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnAir

Blur and noise with luminocity option is very good as a snapshot for a history brush. Using this tool with multiply and screen option, is possible to control all skin structure.
Sample of this technique: http://www.pbase.com/equinaut/image/53038185

That sounds interesting - could you explain a little more specific how you do that ... I'm not sure I get it 100% ;-)

/megl