For credit, what do you refer to yourself as?

madclark · #1 03-02-2009, 10:52 AM

So I'm doing a lot of collaborations with photographers who are attempting to have their works published and they want to give me credit for my work on the images since it was a trade situation.

I'm reluctant to list "Retouching by [me]" with all the negative connotations of how retouching is used in modern advertising. Nor do I think it's appropriate to list myself side by side with the photographer without indicating my role - "John J.Smth/John Doe Imaging" seems like we collaborated fully on the piece.

"Post-processing by" sounds weird and technical. "Image styling by" sounds a bit vague too. Just "styling" sounds like I did hair and makeup. "Image preparation by" sounds like I was responsible for putting things in a ZIP files and sending to the magazine.

Does anyone have any experience or suggestions?

SilvaFox · #2 03-02-2009, 11:06 AM

Imaging Specialist?

0lBaldy · #3 03-02-2009, 11:09 AM

enhancement modifications made by

skauskas · #4 03-02-2009, 11:13 AM

Photo editing or photo design

madclark · #5 03-02-2009, 11:53 AM

I like photo editing. That doesn't overlap with individuals roles at the magazine itself, does it?

edgework · #6 03-02-2009, 12:17 PM

Visual liar.

Ooops, too direct.

How about Visual Misrepresentation Engineer?

Canna W · #7 03-02-2009, 12:36 PM

I must admit I like 'post processing by....' There's a group a flickr called Post Processing which I use, and to me it just sounds a regular term for retouching and other ps work.

madclark · #8 03-02-2009, 01:11 PM

Does anyone else know if Canna observations seem a standards?

And egdework, if anything I'm a visual diplomat. I help everyone see the same pretty thing they want to see. :-)

skauskas · #9 03-02-2009, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madclark

I like photo editing. That doesn't overlap with individuals roles at the magazine itself, does it?

It sounds neutral as for me. No possibility for bad feelings

Salomon · #10 03-02-2009, 01:26 PM

digital surgeon, photoshop laboratorian, photo illusionist, CGI slave, picture wizard, visual creamer, , ... nerd, geek.

madclark · #11 03-02-2009, 01:41 PM

Let's keep it in the realm of reality Salomon. Funny how this thread has brought out negative things from people who do it. What's that about?

0lBaldy · #12 03-02-2009, 01:50 PM

Check this thread: http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/pho...tml#post205531

madclark · #13 03-02-2009, 02:05 PM

That's an interesting reference OlBaldy but I guess it seems that a title is different than my specific input is on these projects. I mean I would consider myself a photo editor but it seems awkward to say "photo editing by..."

Or does it seem OK to say "John Doe, Photo Editor?"

edgework · #14 03-02-2009, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madclark

Funny how this thread has brought out negative things from people who do it. What's that about?

Probably equal parts self-indulgent cheap nihilism and jaded cynicism, both a function of the awareness that we contribute to the myth of impossible perfection by transforming over-the-hill or under-the-bar actresses, actors and models from their natural flawed state to something that is a lie. And getting paid pretty good for it.

There's an up side though. I had an extended gig with one of the "laddie" mags and when my high-school aged daughter saw how much surgery was involved turning the real live models into the frankensteins that inhabit the photo spreads, her response (and that of all her friends) was "Thank God. I thought they really were perfect." So the secret's out in my house. But elsewhere, who knows? Whatever the result, I'm a part of it, I do it for money and I enjoy the work, though it's easy to get cynical about it all. But heck, even that's cynical. And probably self-indulgent.

0lBaldy · #15 03-02-2009, 03:26 PM

A Title might seem awkward because you are not used to having a Title..

I have had more than one title I was not comfortable in using but nonetheless that was what I was stuck with and they are what I use on my Resumes... People are aware of what the job titles entail and they also lend to a persons credibility.

If you were making a resume what would you put on it?

The people you network with will pay your bills ..not the folks who have negative connotations... when the photographers seek your help... what are they asking for? Thats your Title!

Yowser · #16 03-02-2009, 03:35 PM

Ol Baldy nailed it on the head. I always use either Retoucher or Photo Editor as my title. When you're getting credit for your part in the image you want people to have a clear idea of what your part was, so that if they decide they love the image and want to hire that retoucher they can decipher exactly who that was.

Photo editor is an excellent title for what you are. Retoucher is always first choice for me, but if you're not as comfortable using that term due to the connotations it's associated with then go with photo editor.

Markzebra · #17 03-02-2009, 03:36 PM

"Thank God. I thought they really were perfect." - yep I'm thinking of leaking some before and after images to the teaching profession. Since measuring yourself against the impossible can't benefit anyone.

'Photo editor' sounds near to describing a photographer as Camera Operator - I like 'imaging specialist' though.

madclark · #18 03-02-2009, 04:05 PM

Well I thought the concept and reality of retouching was becoming more and more common and that people were generally more aware of what goes into images in magazines and advertising. Maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe it's a testament to just how good retouching has become.

In any case, your very sentiment has been my guidepost for what I do in images. My foremost concern is to consider what an image would look like if all the elements appeared the best they possibly could be. I don't try to make a model seem younger but rather imagine how they might look if they were completely rested, with excellent makeup and styling, and their skin tone was clear and everything was well lit and their were no issues with the camera or other technical concerns. I don't like to make an image something it's not, but I'm more than happy to render an image to its best possibility. I like to think that I'm making up for the circumstances of real life, not creating a reality beyond real life.

SilvaFox · #19 03-02-2009, 05:57 PM

Thank you madclark.

KR1156 · #20 03-02-2009, 09:48 PM

digital imaging: by madclark?

Markzebra · #21 03-03-2009, 04:35 AM

"Or maybe it's a testament to just how good retouching has become" - in my opinion its getting worse not better, as time goes on. Just bought a copy of Cosmo for a job, and my god, it wasn't like that three years ago.

KR1156 · #22 03-03-2009, 07:02 AM

mark, ps is so common these days, and so easily accessible, you got everyone with an imac and a copy, pimping themselves as a retoucher...

i passed a mag up here in the us 2 days ago, i had to double-take, cosmo maybe, not sure, but even the cover was very poor...i know covers just happen to be pushed a little further than their counterparts in the inside pages of the story, but it was so retouched it was just flat and pastel...the color was so horribly off from reality.

Markzebra · #23 03-03-2009, 09:16 AM

An example, someone just quoted me four hours an image for some Cosmo work, its frightening. Some of the covers now are cardboard masks, sad when you know that nine times out of ten the Photography's Ok on them.

Vernon · #24 03-03-2009, 09:40 AM

Photo Image Enhancement Editor Specialist....junior!

Excuse my frivolity...

Image Editor sounds good to me.

malart · #25 03-03-2009, 10:30 AM

I kind of like Post Process Image Technician

Benny Profane · #26 03-03-2009, 02:58 PM

Pimp Daddy

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Imaging Specialist is a prepress title, so I wouldn't use that.

"Post processing by"...... is pretty cool, although, when civilians ask what I do, I keep it simple and tell them I'm a photo retoucher. They understand that one.

KR1156 · #27 03-03-2009, 03:09 PM

actually, after reading this thread again.....i would just keep it true and simple...

photography by:
retouching by:

there's no negative outlook towards you or whatnot, i mean, why not say retouching. why use tricky words. and any "ad" person who criticizes "retouching"....will surer than shit be the first to say...oh well maybe run it through some light retouching as soon as their client says this image doesn't look good.

zogdart · #28 03-03-2009, 03:47 PM

I would stay with:
Retouch or retouching

One reason would be for keywording in the web. I found a few good retoucher in my city that I collaborate with thru research on the web. I would have give them work only much later if they call themself otherwise!

DJSoulglo · #29 03-03-2009, 04:19 PM

Oddly we used to get credited as:

Colour

That was it.

Always kind of liked it.

Salomon · #30 03-04-2009, 12:56 AM

some humor doesnt hurt anyone eh.. didnt mean to be cynical. title is just vanity when we think of it... imho. what matters at the end is the quality of ur job right ? they wont call you back only for ur fancy name "digital specialist engineer expert"
i would keep it simple: retouch cause everyone gets it, or post processing cause everyone in the field gets it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by madclark

Let's keep it in the realm of reality Salomon.

hey thinking of that, it sounds ironical. we're retouchers right ? we dont sell reality.
...just thought it was funny, dont take it seriously.