Skin texture

[lkroll]

I'm a huge fan of byRo's Degrunging technique. In combination of other things (i.e., air brushing/smudging, cloneing, and/or healing brush work), you can get pretty good results.

Hope Nancy doesn't mind me using one of her images. I've been working on another way to degrunge using Adaptive Contrast Enhancement (GIMP). Dup for a total of three layers, run ACE on the Top layer and set to Grain Extract. Merge down and set to Overlay at 50% Opacity. Now dup the base layer and blur the middle layer and adjust the Opacity (hat's off to byRo for this as part of his quick technique that I used here). Copy the Base layer on Top and commence to erasing. Now I did not do any cloning or healing brush (GIMP doesn't have a healing brush) work. Just wanted to show this variation in it's pure sense. Note that facial indentions turned into pimples. lol

[NancyJ]

Ant, you're just showing your complete ignorance of image theory. Just because you do it by hand doesnt mean your method is superior - far from it, there is increased opportunity for human error in a manual technique.
The technique - or certainly the variant that I use, is dodge and burn but it takes a fraction of the time.
In the attached image, the skin has been smoothed using dodge and burn - it took < 1 minute and aside from the masking and computational time, it would take that amount of time on a 3Gb file (many of which I have worked on) absolutely no blurring was used in this image - what was used is a solid foundation in digital image theory. But ofcourse, if you knew as much as you think you know then you'd know how it was done and know why it is faster and superior to a manual technique. Yes there are still flaws that need to be fixed by hand, but they are few and quick to fix.
But I'm sure you'll say this one is blurred and glowing too - still not backing up your statements with facts or evidence though are you? You think its blurred because you know that gaussian blur was used in the process and presumably you think its glowing because you think I'm using a technique that I'm not. There is no edge glow in my technique.

As for your valid critique - I did do a 'find all posts' by user before posting last night and what I found was around 90% rude obnoxious trolling or otherwise pointless posts and at a push 10% containing genuine constructive critique or helpful commentary.

You're such a 'busy man' and your time is so 'expensive' yet you find plenty of time to berate those you consider to be '4 year olds' in comparison to yourself. My time is very expensive but I'm not a busy woman, because I make a damn good living working 20 hours a week. Theres a limit to how much money you actually need or could usefully spend.

Unless you're prepared to put your money where your mouth is and back yourself up with more than just your self-inflated ego, you're just a little man trying to look big on the internet.

[Ant]

You are hilarious. Your image looks like crap. Stop while you are way behind.

[NancyJ]

Originally Posted by Ant

You are hilarious. Your image looks like crap. Stop while you are way behind.

yet again you completely miss the point, further showing your ignorance and fail to back up your opinions and statements with anything based on fact

[Ant]

What is your point? I'd love to know. If someone gets paid to blur something or take a shortcut that means it looks good? no.

Your continued personal attacks are amusing. FACT. I don't care what your technique. It's the end result that matters. Your examples do not look good. You would be laughed at. This isn't 1992. That may fly in Norwood or West Sussex or Oklahoma, but not in the real world.

It's the end result that matters. Your end results, no matter the methods achieved to get there, do not look acceptable.

The FACT is you are a button pusher and advocating button pushing. The results are not the same. Your kind are found all over - most especially in photography. Take the science and tech part of everything, but can't make a decent image for the life of you.

There is a reason people pay many thousands of dollars for work on their ads. The effect they are after cannot be created by pushing a button. FACT.

[Ant]

I refuse to respond further to this thread. If you find me rude, so be it, and my original statements stand. Get thicker skin, don't ask for a critique or GFY.

[Lasa]

Ant.. Not wanting to waste your time but could you please give us...button-pushers.. a thrill and post a before and after. Don't bother wasting your time on one of the images from this forum, but maybe one of the ones you've done in the past? It would take tops two seconds of your time but we'd be eternally grateful to see how it could and should be done.

Thanks,

Lasa (a button-pusher with high hopes)

[LESider]

"Business is business, why pay $700 for something you can get for $200?"

you can't get it for $200, you know the statement.

I want it good,fast and cheap.

you can have it fast and cheap but not good
you can have it good and cheap but not fast
you can have it good and fast but not cheap

same with retouching

you can have it fast and cheap but blurred
you can have it good and cheap well not really it will probably still be blurred
you can have it good and fast but it will cost you $700+

I come to this forum to learn, and I have learned about quick not so good ways of doing things that are great when on set shooting and need to give the client an idea of how an image will look down and dirty. I have also learned how things should be done for my style of work and it is d&b with no shortcuts.

I miss Shelby being on here as she was always was pushing for the best way to do something and never was satisified with all the short cuts offered up. I think she learned all she could here and moved on and hopefully after a while she will be back to help others.

I have to say that for me there are only a few people who have really helped me progress. Shelby,Hayrad,cricket1961 and Ant.

I like to see a good harsh critique over all the pussyfooting that goes on here. If your here to learn be prepaired to hear the truth.

[KR1156]

i did about 20 min of d&b on nacys pic, and left her degrunge on the right side.

def not looking to waste my time arguing with anyone, just posted it to show my OPINION of realistic looking skin opposed to blurred.

obviously it's still a little blotchy, without the resolution, i can't burn the counterparts to where i sloppily dodged.

--but my point being, this method is a lot more time consuming, but once you get the hang of it, it gets a whole lot faster, and can be a whole lot more worth it.

even on lower end pieces.

you may like it, you may think it sucks, whatever. could care less, but i would help anyone if interested.

[chillin]

Who is Ant? http://anthonyhague.com/

[Lasa]

Seems NY sent in its top reps...all of which are outrageously gifted retouchers... I for one stand in awe of their talent and presense here..

Lasa, button-pusher-extraordinaire

[TheVeed]

There are a number of threads right now, in addition to this one, with people asking about skin and texture.

Skin is probably the #1 factor when it comes to retouching, be it high-end or for home use.

But like so many have already stated, there are a multitude of various methods that people can choose from to retouch skin.

It would be interesting if we had a gallery or challenge or something, where we all had the same image, and used different techniques on it. That way, people would have a better understanding of what they want to achieve, how much time it would take, and how they could incorporate certain techniques into their own personal use. I think something along these lines would be a good learning experience for everyone, really, be it novice or expert.

And that's the point of this forum, to share the wealth.

[SchlinkyMalinky]

It's all down to the time versus results equation. The more time you spend the better results you'll get. Doing a cover shot? (not that I ever have) spend a day on it and it'll look great. Whizzing thru an album of friends and family? Setup a degrunge action and spend a couple of minutes on each.

Ant, fair enough you think you're the 'dogs' but so often on forums you get one person like you who rants and rants, when push comes to shove they turn out to be worse than everybody else. So post something or STFU.

You can say what you like about my attempts, I've been doing it two months as a hobby and this place has been a great resource. Who knows (the way it's going) maybe one day I might actually commit to trying to make a go of it professionally but for now I'm happy soaking up all the knowledge I can.

[jjjay00]

Ant, judging by your Avatar and the tone of your signature statement you obviously think you are better than everyone else here. So I ask you, W H Y D O N ' T Y O U G O A W A Y? Because clealry, and according to yourself, you have better things to do, are much more talented, we produce atrocious examples, are glad handers...oh and the list goes on. So why don't you take your too good for everyone attitude, snobby, up yourself remarks, offensive opinions and get the f outta here? Gotta laugh, you're such a fool and you don't even know it...lol

[wooden_bender]

I'm mostly a lurker on these forums but I just had to reply to this thread. Instead of Ant going away, how about people get some thick skin when someone says they don't like your work. There have been many threads where Ant's given some really good advice and yes there have also been many threads where his only advice is "it sucked, quit trying to retouch." And on most of them, after looking at the image I tend to agree. I'd rather have someone that's gonna be up front and critical about my work than someone who "sugar coats" things all the time. I'm glad there's someone like Ant on these forums. I have to admit I'm a dreaded "button pusher." But thanks to reading posts from him and others on here, they've shown me the "error of my ways" so to speak. The only way you're going to get better at anything is from people pointing out what you're doing wrong, not people telling you how well you're doing things right.

(sorry... I got a little "quotation marks" happy there)