Pro methods of Retouching hair?

[mayday]

Does anyone have any advise on pro methods of removing crosshairs and stray hairs? To clone is'nt good and the healing tools not much better. I
've tried dodge and burn on a softlight gray layer, but that does'nt always work well.

I'd appreciate any tips or advice anyones willing to give!

[Ant]

Intensive, careful cloning. No healing. Sometimes utilizing darken mode. Often a nice piece of hair or curl is placed over trouble/rats nest areas. 81% of all the retouching I do is on hair campaigns of late.

If you are having trouble, you are not being careful enough or not putting in or willing to put in the time to do it right. Hair is just skin. It's all the same really. Critical time.

[mayday]

Thanks a lot for that information Ant. I really appreciate the advice from a pro like yourself. At least I now know the best method to follow

[edgework]

Originally Posted by mayday

Does anyone have any advise on pro methods of removing crosshairs and stray hairs? To clone is'nt good and the healing tools not much better. I
've tried dodge and burn on a softlight gray layer, but that does'nt always work well.

I'd appreciate any tips or advice anyones willing to give!

The cloning tool obliterates texture, the healing brush turns drastically different color and value combinations (like black hair on pale skin) into shapeless blobs. Combine the two, you get the best of both worlds. Clone out the drastic variations, then smooth over the transitions with the healing brush. It's never just a 1 or 2 step process. Sometimes you need to coax each small area back to where you want it to be. That's the problem with retouching, it's never dramatic, push-button stuff. Just small, simple moves, repeated over and over, building up the effect gradually.

[DamonJames]

Natalia Taffarel has a video tutorial on retouching fly away hairs available for free.

If I remember correctly,

make a new layer, set it to darken.
Clone stamp tool, 100%hardness, 100% opacity, and set its blend mode to darken ASWELL.
Use a small brush, just big enough to cover the hair strand, sample from just next to it, paint over.
It retains most of the texture because of the hardness and full opacity, but only retouches over the highlights, most loose hairs have caught more light and appear lighter. For darker fly-aways, make a new layer but set it to lighten, and same for the clone tool.

so pretty much what Ant said, but with more explanation.

Very time consuming but it's the best result i've seen

[Pari Retouch]

Here you go: http://vimeo.com/25667413

For me, one video tutorial is mightier than written tutorial of hundreds of words :P

[ray12]

To repair or add hair...or to fix cross hairs...I will often use the clone tool with the align mode checked and set it at 100% to straighten hair or to fix cross overs. I will place the sample point next to hair samples that will fix the problem...then I will place the clone point itself right on the bad hair and then move down. Its like transferring the good piece of hair to the bad hair area... and the align feature will keep the samples matched up even if they are some distance apart.

Over the years I also have saved up a library of hair samples...some nice straight hair shot in hi-res in various colors. This way I can create perfect hair samples to clone and transfer from. I will often clip a curves layer to the source hair texture... and make the curve to create a perfect color match for me... in addition to the textures. Sometime having library based hair samples is the sanest way to get the work done...your bad hair might be bad all over...and you need a really good piece of perfectly matched hair to fix the bad hair. Samples also makes great patching material for holes in the hair, ears sticking out, fixing up blotches in bad cutouts...or by adding in straight textures to patch up crossed hair.

Whenever you can...start making a sample library every time you come across some nice hair, beautiful curls, or great textures...you will be happier and happier over time... because you will have source materials to fix problems with.

Attached is an example of the kind of library a pro shop might create in house... to always have perfect hair available to help fix up various hair problems.

Cheers,

[drode]

Truer words were never spoken.

Originally Posted by Ant

If you are having trouble, you are not being careful enough or not putting in or willing to put in the time to do it right.

Knowing what to do and when is important but long hours of slow painstaking effort is the hallmark of a quality retoucher.

[AKMac]

Referring to Natalie T's tutorial quoted earlier - she works on a layer in Darken Blend Mode with a tool also in Darken Blend Mode. Why both in Darken mode?

[Godmother]

Originally Posted by AKMac

Referring to Natalie T's tutorial quoted earlier - she works on a layer in Darken Blend Mode with a tool also in Darken Blend Mode. Why both in Darken mode?

Because the modes in the clone tool don't work on an empty layer - the layer needs to be blended darken or lighten for it to work

[sixtwo]

Sorry to bring up an older thread, but after watching the Natalia's video, there is something I am not understanding....
If I mimic her steps, new empty layer in darken mode, and clone tool on darken mode, when I go to clone the fly away hairs, or anything for that matter, nothing happens?
Now, if I duplicate layer in darken mode, and darken mode on clone tool, everything works fine.
Am I missing something? Does it matter whether it's a blank layer or not?

[Der_W]

You probably set your clone tool to sample the current layer only. In the toolbar on top chose Sample: "Current and below" or "All layers" and it should work :-).

[sixtwo]

That was it!
Thank you , Sir!

[Caravaggio]

Originally Posted by Godmother

Because the modes in the clone tool don't work on an empty layer - the layer needs to be blended darken or lighten for it to work

In Natalia's video, Beauty and Hair Retouching, High End Techniques, series 2, she clones in darken mode on a blank layer set to normal to fix hair. That series was made for CS4. Has something changed in CS5 so that choosing a blending mode for the clone stamp tool in the options bar and then cloning on an empty layer set to normal no longer works?

[Der_W]

No changes, it just doesn't work the same.
If you set the layer to "Normal" and the stamp to "Darken", you'll in your first pass clone in "Normal" mode on this layer (so you can actually lighten pixels as well) as there are no underlying pixels to work with. Now on your second pass, you can't make anything from your first pass lighter, but only darker, because the "Darken" mode in the stamp works with the underlying pixels.
If you also set the layer mode to "Darken", you'll only darken your image in the first pass already.

Both methods can work, but personally sometimes I find that "Darken" mode produces some artifacts, so I have to use "Normal" mode to fix this.

[Caravaggio]

Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense.

[daygraphics]

Ray has some hair samples at his disposable - which is a good idea. I agree with all of the above. I might also add that there are often areas within the existing hair that can be cut and repasted in position and maybe some liquify to get the bend, curl that you want and then some careful blending.

[skoobey]

I have a question considering this technigue.

What is the best way to stamp, or the best source point? Which is the preferred brush size and hardness?

If I do it as i saw and heard was right, and that is to clone form the one side and then the other, I often find that i get more repeated patterns than I would like.

I find it most useful when using a brush that is slightly bigger than the thickness of the hair and then zig-zag sampling from both sides on the adequate layers(lighten and darken), thus covering the hair completely from the one side, then completely form the other and so back and forth. I use next to the hardest setting for the brush hardness( one [ press down). That seems to give the best results. Also, I find this way of using the technique useful when tackling those rat's nests or frizzy areas.



AM I MISTAKEN?

[kav]

Originally Posted by skoobey

I have a question considering this technigue.

What is the best way to stamp, or the best source point? Which is the preferred brush size and hardness?

If I do it as i saw and heard was right, and that is to clone form the one side and then the other, I often find that i get more repeated patterns than I would like.

I find it most useful when using a brush that is slightly bigger than the thickness of the hair and then zig-zag sampling from both sides on the adequate layers(lighten and darken), thus covering the hair completely from the one side, then completely form the other and so back and forth. I use next to the hardest setting for the brush hardness( one [ press down). That seems to give the best results. Also, I find this way of using the technique useful when tackling those rat's nests or frizzy areas.



AM I MISTAKEN?

Nice necro. If you're going over a few pixels in brush size on a typical photo, you're using the wrong tool. If I need to replace a larger area, I rebuild it. I start cloning when the areas get too small for rebuilding to make sense. Even in rebuilding you may have to use various segments. It has to be close enough to where you can shade it to perfection in the end without compromising detail, which means doing the previous steps with as much precision as possible. The thing is learning to break difficult work into steps (without being sloppy on any of them) rather than allow it to get to a point of banging your head against the wall.

Cleaning up strays and cross hairs is easy. The annoying thing is dealing with continuity in large amounts of hair. Since you mentioned rat's nests and cloning sources, you have to use your brain. Look at where you are taking your references. In the end as I stated you'll never solve complicated problems by cloning alone.

[skoobey]

That is what I do, but there are images where most of the hair is frizzy, and it is an intentional hair style, so what then, how else am i supposed to patch up hairs which are dominating the picture without adding to it? I clone them out?

Perhaps it's just practice practice practice and I shouldn't be zooming in as much.

[kav]

Originally Posted by skoobey

That is what I do, but there are images where most of the hair is frizzy, and it is an intentional hair style, so what then, how else am i supposed to patch up hairs which are dominating the picture without adding to it? I clone them out?

Perhaps it's just practice practice practice and I shouldn't be zooming in as much.

I think I know what you mean here, but obviously I'm not looking at one of these photos. Cloning really doesn't produce good results beyond a brush size of a few pixels. When you talk about zig zagging and stuff, you're trying to turn it into a set method when it really needs to just be about whatever would allow it to retain texture and follow the lighting. Zig zagging may seem to help, as then you aren't just producing an exact obvious copy of the other hair that borders it, but as I said you need to examine the image as you work. I wouldn't zoom out too far on cloning work. I'd keep the brush hard most of the time, somewhere in the realm of 70-80%.

If you're covering a lot of area as opposed to a few pixels in a given area because of the number of hairs that must be cloned out, the clone brush on its own simply isn't going to deliver the needed results. If you really must work that way, do it on a blank layer and be prepared to apply further adjustment to that data after you're done cloning. If a blending mode is required, set the blending mode you need on the blank layer itself.

[skoobey]

You misunderstood my question. Why isn't there proper plural for the "hair" noun . I could say her hairs, yet it may sound as if I were refereeing to Cousin It.

I use a really hard brush, one step down is like 85% percent(maybe even 90%), which I do soften if the region is out-of-focus. I only clone what appears to be a single hair, never a hair strand. Yet, at the resolution of 10mpix of my camera and a close-up head shot, single hair can be as thick as 6 pix(given the focus shifts). Also, depending on the lightning I may also find additional width of the hair because of the reflection off the hair and/or the shadow of the hair.

I do all the work on a separate layer, and the blending modes are darken and lighten, accordingly.

[kav]

Originally Posted by skoobey

You misunderstood my question. Why isn't there proper plural for the "hair" noun . I could say her hairs, yet it may sound as if I were refereeing to Cousin It.

I use a really hard brush, one step down is like 85% percent(maybe even 90%), which I do soften if the region is out-of-focus. I only clone what appears to be a single hair, never a hair strand. Yet, at the resolution of 10mpix of my camera and a close-up head shot, single hair can be as thick as 6 pix(given the focus shifts). Also, depending on the lightning I may also find additional width of the hair because of the reflection off the hair and/or the shadow of the hair.

I do all the work on a separate layer, and the blending modes are darken and lighten, accordingly.

You sound like you're trying to be detailed about this which is good. Cloning at 6px in width hits a point where it starts to become a difficult tool for the task at times, especially if you're hitting a lot of area with this. In a high contrast area, it can be problematic. You should still pay attention to your clone source, but even if you do it perfectly, you may have to smooth out the lighting on your work at that kind of brush width. I'd clean up all the hairs, then go back in and do the shading to ensure that it matches. You can use an oscillating curve (sometimes referred to as a solar curve) to check for problems in the tonal continuity beyond what you can see on your display.

The biggest problem I see is trying to solve it with one thing rather than chipping away at the problem. Does that help or am I still misinterpreting (no sarcasm intended)?

By the way..... maya is a bitch of a program to learn.

[skoobey]

I think I've gotten some good advice from you, and also anyone else who'll read this topic in the future. So, thank you.

Yes, Maya is difficult, but it is the only 3d program that makes actual 3d objects instead of polygons.

[kav]

Originally Posted by skoobey

I think I've gotten some good advice from you, and also anyone else who'll read this topic in the future. So, thank you.

Yes, Maya is difficult, but it is the only 3d program that makes actual 3d objects instead of polygons.

You're welcome. Oh and I only picked maya because it's the most popular one amongst the shops here. Maya experience = big plus if I ever need a job at one of them. I'm getting pretty comfortable with it, and my background in photography (quite a few years ago) translates well when it comes to lighting in cg programs .