[Ant]

More comments.

[edgework]

Originally Posted by chillin

The facial hair is still there. Short of burning one by one I don't know good method of removing it without altering the skin texture.

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

[schultzy]

My take on your photo. Hope you don't mind me playing with it. I took out the catchlights in her eyes, and added some eyeshadow. Hope it looks decent.

[chillin]

Originally Posted by edgework

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there....
....
Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

Thank you edgework, I'll keep your advice in mind.
You did nice work with the picture.

[skydog]

Ant...I really like this example you provided. Not just the skin, but the lips and the eyes. The moisture seen on the lips and in the eyes is really nice.

[kneff]

Originally Posted by edgework

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

Edgework...I think your pix is turning out great! Yes, it looks like you've put alot of work into it. And your post was very good too.

[Syd]

Originally Posted by edgework

There isn't. One by one. There aren't any magic bullet filters unless you're just trying to please yourself. Ro's Degrunge technique is a powerful tool, but not if it's the only one you use. Likewise the more complex version he also described, using multiple high pass layers. All are just tools, and, like the cloning tool or curves, the minute you leave evidence that you've used it, you've lost the game. The only way you win is if no one can tell you were there.

Everyone says "Natural! Make it look real," and of course, that's a crock. No one looks like this.Anywhere. Ever. Not even Tyra Banks. (She's close, though). The standard today is a long way from the air brushed slick surfaces of Playboy centerfolds from the 70s, but the fantasy is no less rigid. The fantasy now is that this "might" be real skin, and you "might" even find it on someone living next door to you, it's just perfectly flawless "real" skin. (And you won't find it next door, either.)

Here's an effort with just dodging/burning and healing. If it was a real job, I'd probably consider it about half done.

http://edgework.tripod.com/samples/BeautyRetouch.jpg

Really sensible advice Edge, and beautiful work too.

Syd

[edgework]

The thing about Dodging/Burning and in-close work with the Healing Brush is that it only seems to take a long time. Using quicker techniques takes much longer because once you're done, you have to go back and start from scratch and do it right the second time around. (Or third, or fourth, depending on how many quick techniques you try).

Another tip: always start in very close (I did my first two or three passes at 200%) but then, always move out, and repeat. Artifacts that don't appear at 100% magically come together and look like crap at 50%. It's not just a trick of screen resolution, they're there, and at some point in the production cycle, they will appear on a print or proof. If you shrink your magnification by 50%, make your brush size correspondingly larger. That way, you won't actully be obliterating the D/B or healing strokes you already made at full size. It takes a while, but it might as well, since you really can't get the right result any other way.

Another important thing about D/B; it will never be finished. Stare at any image long enough and you'll see myriad imperfections crying out for another pass. At some point, you have to tear yourself away, make like the Marines, declare victory and pull out.

[Ant]

Originally Posted by skydog

Ant...I really like this example you provided. Not just the skin, but the lips and the eyes. The moisture seen on the lips and in the eyes is really nice.

Merci. Great makeup artist, Martin Wieser and photographer and retoucher, moi. I wish it was shot it on film though as the dynamic range isn't what I'd like. Next stuff will be using a P30+.

[Ant]

Edgework doesn't lie. Everyone take note.

[Syd]

Originally Posted by Ant

Merci. Great makeup artist, Martin Wieser and photographer and retoucher, moi. I wish it was shot it on film though as the dynamic range isn't what I'd like. Next stuff will be using a P30+.

[Standing ovation. Loud applause.] Really stunning work. Such attention to detail. I am mightily impressed. I am guessing a project like that took you at least a week. Now I have something to aspire to. Thanks for sharing.

Syd

[Ant]

Just a day and a couple of extra hours to tweak. I'd guess maybe 10 hours total. I separated the background eyelashes in the final. RGB file size 22 x 14 @ 400 dpi.

[cspringer]

Nose looks odd...rather flat/no definition/overprocessed. Lots of hair on cheek.

Originally Posted by Ant

Poor Greg. He thinks he's in the right place, but .....no.

example of an ad beauty retouch: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6148797&size=lg

Dodge and burn.

[cspringer]

Originally Posted by cainam

Ant, seems like you ruined my retouch!

Most of the time I spent on removing your "not always easy to understand" felt-tip marks.

Anyway, thanks for your comment.

Another way to tone down the highlight is to make a Contrast Mask action (google for instructions...very common technique).

Run the action and darken the highlights.
Add a black mask, paint over highlights, adjust layer opacity to match.

This gives you a more natural look.

[Ant]

Originally Posted by cspringer

Nose looks odd...rather flat/no definition/overprocessed. Lots of hair on cheek.

No one asked for your opinion....fault of the capture/small dynamic range/subjective. Additionally, you have no reference file (original) to base your blanket statements on. My file, I am not bothered by the hair and much was already removed.

who are you to judge anyway Action, Button Pusher Boy? Exactly why I've never posted anything for the peanut gallery here before - much akin to taking the rednecks to a wine tasting.