The demystification of dave hill! let's all help!

[Calvinhollywood]

@Steve

You cant tell me 5 people who can do pictures like Fiscus, Dave Hill or Jill.

So many try that... but only a very few can do it.
That makes the style special, cause its not easy.

lg Calvin

[pellepiano]

Clients most often wants a style they can relate to, be it a George Hurrell hollywood glamour shot or a Dave Hill style jeans ad.

Learning different styles, lightingwise or retouchwise is good for business. And copying a certain style is what this thread is all about.

If a Greenberg action exist and works, I would buy it in notime.

[SteveB2005]

Originally Posted by Calvinhollywood

@Steve

You cant tell me 5 people who can do pictures like Fiscus, Dave Hill or Jill.

So many try that... but only a very few can do it.
That makes the style special, cause its not easy.

lg Calvin

No, don't get me wrong, I enjoy the Jill Greenburg style. I hadn't seen anything like it until I read an article about her workflow in a photo magazine. When you see an image by JG, you can be assured she did it. Wish I had thought it up, haha and cashed in the chips

The point I am making is that it's fine to learn and experiment and copy things. I do it myself to learn. But they have a formula that works for them and may or may not work for everyone. Many photographers go out and shoot their subject and try to make it look like Jill Greenburg in Photoshop and then get disappointed because it just doesn't match what they do. And yes, there are actions and plug-ins that are available online to imitate some of these effects, anything is possible. That's why she is so vague about her techniques at student lectures, it's her personal style. But also, she is using digital med format and sometimes scanned film with a ring light and shooting at various focus points for sharpness and then masking it all together for a near perfect image directly from the camera, then the PS post work.

But I am certainly seeing more and more attempted JG clones in magazines, because that's what is in at the moment. In a few months, something else will catch on and another hot thing will surface and we'll all be asking how are they doing it? It;s like what's hot now, what's selling, I'll copy it and cash in. That may happen, it may not

JMHO, neither right, nor wrong

[LESider]

I don't know if anyone here reads the strobist blog but there is a good post about a photographer/retoucher named Joey Lawrence who seems to be doing pretty well for a 17 yr old and has the Dave Hill style down pretty good.
There is a link to his site on which he is selling a DVD describing his workflow and techniques. Here is the strobist link
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2007/10...pher-joey.html

[ge0rge]

What I don't get is that most people refer to it as the Dave Hill or Jill Greenberg look. Maybe its been done before but not in such a mainstream environment. I believe that any attempt made will be instantly labeled "resembling Dave Hill effect/style". What exactly constitutes a picture being of the "Dave Hill style". Everyone sees a photo differently, therefore we could have 100 people doing the same effect and not notice.

[RossF]

Speaking of dave hill, he just put a bunch of new images and behind the scenes videos on his site, some of them give a closer look into his workflow...

[Mtmm]

Dave Hill is a true master of retouching. Question is, are we in need of several Hills? No we are not. We all should find our own style to make photos. There can be only one Dave Hill. His skills are over the top.

www.pakkotoisto.com/mike

[pellepiano]

Mtmm

I dont get it. As a photographer you learn to light the subjects in a variety of styles. It may be classic hollywood lighting a la George Hurrell, Playboy lighting. Why should it not be the same for retouching.Learning differrent styles.

When someone does something unique that gets popular, it will be become a style or genre and used by many others, exactly like some great innovators in music. It makes things go forward, as many people will add to what they learn,

The purpose of this thread is to get the grips on a certain style ( like you obviously have gone thru yourself, with good results ).

Learning about styles is most often the start of something, not the end.

[Mtmm]

I mean that direct copying isn´t so cool anymore. Like in music, Hill is an artist and he has an unique style. Copying that style is like ripping off music. We cannot compare lightning setup to retouch workflow. Light goes from point A to point B and is stricly fysics. You cannot light the subject by so many different ways than you can edit photo in photoshop. But in the end, if person is inspired by Hill´s work(I definitely am), it is a positive thing.

[lxgalang]

Here's my try at it, just a mixture of D&B, desaturation, Curves, and luminosity blending.

http://www.pbase.com/gmonkeh/image/87579940.jpg

[tetragramaton]

Hi guys,im looking for more than 3 weeks to achive something similar to the Dave look,im not intrest to folow his exact model of retoching ,butin the time ofthe digital photography i think evrebody need to see somethink new and fresh,here is my try
original image
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menandar/1589663445/
affter
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menandar/1590405566/

[obosila]

Originally Posted by tetragramaton

Hi guys,im looking for more than 3 weeks to achive something similar to the Dave look,im not intrest to folow his exact model of retoching ,butin the time ofthe digital photography i think evrebody need to see somethink new and fresh,here is my try
original image
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menandar/1589663445/
affter
http://www.flickr.com/photos/menandar/1590405566/

Sweet. Can u tell us a bit more abour your PS work?

[MR.BIG]

It is VERY bad , but this is my very first try. Me (far right) with my friends. Starting picture is not so good (Ixus) so .... be gentle : )

5 minutes job, HDR with lucis, but with more , more and more work it can be close

[tetragramaton]

obosila, thanks.
What i've done with the picture was,two HDR conversions,one normal conversion from raw ,and i blended them ,after that i applied some blur to get rid of some overexagerated details like dark places on her skin or some noise as well,because the model couldnt prepare well for the shot,and after that i copied the same layer with the surface blur and apply to it high pas filter,and to the end some dodge and burn ,i didnt have time to apply any cosmetic corrections .
But i'm realising the importance of the output image,i apply the same method to other picture but with different lighting ant background and the result isn't that good.First you need to get good HDR details,but for this you need to control very well your lighting,thats my opinion (any way this picture was't with good lighting)

[RossF]

lxgalang, can you explain how to do luminosity blending?

[hexi]

I love Dave Hills Pictures

here my first try

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...tetaken&size=o

:-)
manuela

[docilebob]

Looks like good old PWL to me.

http://retouchpro.com/tutorials/index.php?m=show&id=249 (#4 on a Google search, BTW)

http://photoshoptechniques.com/forum...painting+light

http://www.my-photoshop.com/bydesign...int-light.html

And others.

[padiQ]

Some good examples posted here!!! well done!

Anyway - i have made a dave hill PS action - you can download it here: LINKY

[cli]

hey the site of dave is been filled with new stuff, now the retouch is more heavy, photos become almost cartoon style what yours...

[superkoax]

padiQ: your action isn't very helpful here...The action gives only a global change with sharpening and some other enhancements...but it's not close to the overall effect DH gives...the highlights are uncontrolled, but the highlights in th dave hill photo's are controlled...Would work more on the dodge side of your tutorials instead of using adjustment layers all the time...

[ge0rge]

That action is not even close. I can get a lot closer without it. I would even go as far as saying that is one of the worst actions I've ever seen.

[drouber]

@hexi: i like your method, please comment on how you achieved that result

[padiQ]

That action is not even close. I can get a lot closer without it. I would even go as far as saying that is one of the worst actions I've ever seen.

I get what you mean... But its useful for learning purposes.

I can get further without the action too. But the fact is, because of the vast potential differences between photos its impossible to make an action which could even come close to an emulation of Dave Hill...

So basically... Yes i know. But its still good for people who want to know how certain things are acheived in Photoshop.

IMHO its more productive than just listing out a why of doing it cos that way will change constantly depending on the image.... the action was created in an attempt to generically offer a 'solution' as opposed to getting it SPOT ON... which it seems, is all you are interested in.

TO be honest... about Dave Hill... His photos look asesome. But i bet they looked awesome before he post-produced them. Its all down to execution - plus all that lighting to bring out the highlights!!

[NimfabebeAida]

Originally Posted by hexi

here my first try

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...tetaken&size=o

:-)
manuela

it's close , but the highlights on the face are too strong. I like the hair and the texture of the cloth. The ray of light doesn't fall right on the person, but I like the mood. U should rethink the lightning, especially on the face.


I honestly think that to achieve the look one must work on a high res. , very well lighted photo.

[djslyda]

here is my attempt, only spent 20mins so its just rough:

http://flickr.com/photos/chris_kenny/1715421031/

[ge0rge]

Originally Posted by padiQ

I get what you mean... But its useful for learning purposes.

I can get further without the action too. But the fact is, because of the vast potential differences between photos its impossible to make an action which could even come close to an emulation of Dave Hill...

So basically... Yes i know. But its still good for people who want to know how certain things are acheived in Photoshop.

IMHO its more productive than just listing out a why of doing it cos that way will change constantly depending on the image.... the action was created in an attempt to generically offer a 'solution' as opposed to getting it SPOT ON... which it seems, is all you are interested in.

TO be honest... about Dave Hill... His photos look asesome. But i bet they looked awesome before he post-produced them. Its all down to execution - plus all that lighting to bring out the highlights!!

Actually I am not all that interested about acheiving the actual Dave Hill look. I do however feel that there is alot of other cool things that could come from knowing a little about his workflow. I have said it many times that his pictures are superb from the get-go and I believe little pp is done. I am more of a fan of the picks found over at studiobild or joeyl. THere is another photo-artist I know of whose work is awesome but its an adult oriented site and I am unsure of the rules here so I won't post a link.

[djslyda]

i wanted to have a go on the original image in this thread but it's no longer available so i tried on this one

[NimfabebeAida]

Here is my try :
I've uploaded it on my retouch profile , in a interactive flash so u can see the original too. http://nimfabeberetouch.deviantart.c...style-68429734

I'm aiming for the CG look. Please tell me what I could improve. Comments and critique very welcome.

[snook305]

Heres something I did in 10 minute with a small jpeg from a Catalogue shoot today.
Not sure if you think it looks Dave Hillish, But similar.
A little time spent and the technique is not hard at all. In my opinion.
Ignore all the Stamps on the image and wings, I was showing a client some brushes I had....:+}
Snook
http://homepage.mac.com/ekphotograph...Arg%20copy.jpg

[subxaero]

i yet dont have the heart to move on adding in a background, but this is my first picture that came out pleasing my own standards

feedback...anyone?

(ps: i'm not doing this to become a copycat. i'm doing this to one day mastering this field. and copying and understanding always gets one ahead pretty good)