[OnAir]

Folder 'correcion' (correction, as I should write normally ) contains curves and hue/saturation settings for the skin tone correction. When applied, it reduces banding in skin tone. Color has changed, as I've changed Photoshop color settings for the picture to remove the embedded profile. Picture become darker, so if photographer started in correction from RAW looking like this, he should apply strong contrast curve and saturate the picture a lot. So, to avoid this problem in future, you have to provide your RGB profile to photographer. If we speak about quick smoothing, I would propose a methode, which doesn't require any additional software, just Photoshop.

1. Select skin, save selection, make layer via copy, name it, say, 'Sharp'. Do unsharp mask to make pores look little bit oversharped, change the layer mode to luminosity.

2. Go back to the Background layer, load skin selection and make another layer via copy, name it 'Blur'. Apply gaussian blur to smooth completely the skin, add noise a little, load skin selection again and make a mask. Brush the mask where you need your details back.

3. Copy Background layer and put it over the 'Blur' layer, make opacity about 60%, so the skin become looking smooth.

4. Reduce opacity of the 'Blur' down, to get some skin structure back.

4. Mix opacity for 3 layers to get desired result.

[Kraellin]

onair,

i like your results. that's pretty similar to byRo's high pass/gausian process. instead of the usm, he's using high pass.

craig

[OnAir]

Yeah, that's even quicker, than mine

[shellby]

If you wish to keep the texture of the skin, pores and hairs, you will need to use the dodge and burn method.

This means lighten the dark areas and darken the light areas until the skin tone is even. Avoid blur if you want to keep the texture.

Do a search for the user: Heyrad as he outlines the non-destructive dodge and burn method.

The actual dodge and burn tools are destructive to the image (ie The pixels are changed). The other method involves creating a new layer, check Full With 50% Gray, Make the blend mode SOFTLIGHT. Then on that layer paint with a soft brush set at 3 to 5% opacity. White for lightening and Black for darkening (dodging and burning)

[pure]

Originally Posted by OnAir

So, to avoid this problem in future, you have to provide your RGB profile to photographer.

thanks for your help!

i am working in ECI-RGB always.
i dont know, i guess the digibacks shoot in Adobe-RGB? no, or in company-own-colorspace maybe, so converting from Adobe-RGB into ECI for example is not bad as ECI is wider and better for skin-tones i was informed by some colorexperts from my Fuji-printer.

do you mean he should shoot with ECI-RGB? i havent the faintest idea of that in the moment.

your "quick smoother" is very very good, a good relationship between time and effect, in my opinion the best.

i will do that in a hurry. ugly deadlines... sorry

when having more time, dodge and burn use to be the method of my choice, too.

thanks

[OnAir]

Originally Posted by shellby

If you wish to keep the texture of the skin, pores and hairs, you will need to use the dodge and burn method.

I use it always, when quality is more important, then timing.

Originally Posted by pure

dont know, i guess the digibacks shoot in Adobe-RGB? no, or in company-own-colorspace maybe, so converting from Adobe-RGB into ECI for example is not bad as ECI is wider and better for skin-tones i was informed by some colorexperts from my Fuji-printer.

do you mean he should shoot with ECI-RGB? i havent the faintest idea of that in the moment.

No, I think, just color settings on your computers should be synchronized. ECI-RGB is good, but if you replace it with different profile, you will see, how the picture, you provided, become dark grayish. So, if photographer does correction, he see on his monitor this dark picture, and apply strong correction. I guess, he did it on other computer?

[pure]

he did it on other computer, but he has same calibrated display than me.
i will develop the RAWs myself (but again in his studio) next time.

yes. true, i tend to switch to CYMK-Proof-View in Photoshop sometimes, to see what will remain. thats not much. it gets darker, and a little more yellow. the dark tones and the semi-dark tones are getting completely lost in CYMK ISO-Proof. but when i raise the semi-dark tone, i get banding, how you call it. i think you mean the harsh kind of blending between dark and medium-dark.

thx

[shellby]

(NOT POSTED BY ME)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shellby
dont know, i guess the digibacks shoot in Adobe-RGB? no, or in company-own-colorspace maybe, so converting from Adobe-RGB into ECI for example is not bad as ECI is wider and better for skin-tones i was informed by some colorexperts from my Fuji-printer.

do you mean he should shoot with ECI-RGB? i havent the faintest idea of that in the moment.


No, I think, just color settings on your computers should be synchronized. ECI-RGB is good, but if you replace it with different profile, you will see, how the picture, you provided, become dark grayish. So, if photographer does correction, he see on his monitor this dark picture, and apply strong correction. I guess, he did it on other computer?
Reply With Quote

[OnAir]

Sorry for that Fixed.

[pure]

from your point of view/aesthetical point of view regarding bad skin,
is soft better than blotchy?

i am finished now, and it looks very soft for the whole body (naked skin). so i blended some parts of the original 30% over it and etched some areas in the masks, which i didnt like

more worse is, its male skin and it looks even more blotchy than women skin, i guess.

i dont know. i am not satisfied for real. its a compromise for me.


i even dont know how it could look real, lets say skin without blotches.
maybe pasting some nice/natural skin into it partially, but where to get the skin and maybe it doenst fit to the skin of the person in the picture, as every pore is unique for each person.

nevertheless i have to send it out on monday. i dont know if its worth experimenting for the weekend.

very difficult subject for me...as i only get soft or blotchy or blotchy softed skin, no homogenic area results to say it in one sentence.

thanks for your attention...and great help !"!

[Kraellin]

here's another method, borrowed from byRo's excellent tutorial on gausian blur and high pass, but adopted to paint shop pro.

this is byRo's quick tut on this:

The Quick Degrunge Technique
(at long last)

1) Make a duplicate layer;

2) Open the Gaussian blur filter and change the radius until the grunge just becomes invisible. Be careful here, getting the radius right is very important. Note the radius and cancel the filter;

3) Apply the High-pass filter at the radius you just noted down;

4) Apply the Gaussian blur on this layer at 1/3 of the radius;

5) Invert the layer (<Ctrl><I>), set the blending to Linear Light and the opacity to 50%;

6) Apply a Hide-all mask and paint white where you want to degrunge.

the ONLY thing different in Paint Shop Pro is that we have no 'linear light' blend mode; at least not that has that particular name. however, we do have soft light, hard light and overlay. for this image i used overlay instead of 'linear light' and it worked fine. my settings were 10 and 3.3 on the filters.

excellent find and tut, byRo!

craig

[pure]

very very very good i must say, thanks

i am getting a little confused now.
i have worked on a real good Eizo and viewsonic, also a Quato intelliproof TFT screens in the summertime 2005, where i didnt saw any of those blotches or hard gradients i mentioned at beginning of my topic here.

i realised this so late now, as i looked at my retouched pictures from summertime which look nice but oversharp and harsh here as they didnt on RGB-Print on Fuji-PHotoprinter in the lab.

no i have an little "cheaper" Apple Cinema Display which displays everything different, very sharp, too sharp maybe, the gradients also.

so i am concerning about problems which arent apparently there, or only light maybe. this is frustrating.

what do you think? is it real or not?

[kev]

All digital backs on the market today have some banding issues, and these can show up in skin. I see them far too often. Best way to deal with it is get the original. Do your own processing. If need be, process the file twice or more and composite them together for the area containing the transition. After that, create a dodge and burn layer (new layer-->overlay w/ fill 50% neutral grey) and just finely dodge and burn the transition. It doesn't take as long as you might think. Then go back, and tell them to hire a proper tech if they don't know how to process files! I knew one photographer who was processing leaf files with an uncalibrated apple cinema display at full brightness. Every file I got from him was underexposed more 2/3 of a stop. It irritated the hell out of me. Anyway that's all for today.

[bart_hickman]

Craig,

Thanks for posting that. I was using something more complex to achieve linear light--your trick isn't quite subtraction, but between soft and hard light, one can always find a good approximation to linear light.

I've also found that applying a curve to the filtered layer to amplify it gives a little extra leeway so you can adjust the opacity slider for some flexibility. The curve to apply is any linear curve that intersects the midpoint (128,128).

Bart

[Kraellin]

bart,

you're welcome. us poor Paint Shop Pro'ers gotta stick together or be overrun by these high-falutin Photoshop folks

yes, hadnt thought about a curve, but makes sense. even a contrast/brighten might work there.

craig