RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Photo Retouching "Improving" photos, post-production, correction, etc.

Super-clean beauty retouch

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #41  
Old 07-20-2009, 07:58 AM
Markzebra's Avatar
Markzebra Markzebra is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 718
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Quote:
without the hours required by dodge and burn,
The image in the center took me 45 minutes work. The image on the left is the original, center is my quick retouch, right is your blur. Apologies the image lost its color profile, on uploading and looks a little washed out.

Quote:
This is completely false. You must have not read very far in this link - it's full of proof: http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=439098
I did read that. Sigh - in detail: He's used Linear light BECAUSE the particular Apply image in 16 bit, that he has used, is only delivering a low contrast High Pass. Take his technique (run it through in the Action) - and compare it with an 8 bit high pass (same radius) at about 50%. This means make a solid gray layer underneath, and take the high pass down to 50% - its precisely the same result. The Apply Image is doing nothing original, in fact its doing a worse job than a straight High Pass. NOW there is one genuine advantage revealed by all this, used by many smarter retouchers already - that of using high pass techniques (if you need them for texture and sharpening) in 16 BIT!

Taking areas producing different filtrations based on tone (actioning them) and masking them, what Natalia is talking about, is the best achievable way to get these techniques work. In the end it will still look filtered though, and I'm sure she will agree with me.

Quote:
You may think this technique is gobbledegook, but other high-end retouchers and photographers disagree with you. For example…
Ahem, I better make no comment there specifically. I think that there retouchers who do a specific type of work, forced to work to deadlines, I've recently have been asked to consider this myself actually. It all depends on your client what he (or she!!!) is willing to pay. I never said otherwise to this. The most successful of these FAKE techniques is actually a airbrush(blur) and re-texturise approach, this says "screw real skin texture and light completely".

Just don't ever use that crap in your folio. There are retouchers out there who's PDF's I've seen myself - you just immediately recognize - yep plastic skin. The experienced eye can immediately see the difference, never underestimate this.

Last edited by Markzebra; 08-08-2009 at 01:31 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #42  
Old 07-20-2009, 11:03 AM
Godmother's Avatar
Godmother Godmother is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 814
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
In the end it will still look filtered though, and I'm sure she will agree with me.
Of course

I want to do a video tutorial (proper one) and I felt forced to include a "FAST" way to get things done - this is copy pasted from the "theme" notes I have:

High Pass Thing: The quick and dirty way of D&B
*How to
*When to use it
*When not to use it
*What does it do
*IMPORTANT: Not abusing the High pass thing
*How to chose %

Sadly - because I believe every image should be perfect - The client doesn't always have the budget to pay for "Perfection" or the time to achieve it.

I did Dove last week - got 6 images monday evening to be delivered Thurs morning. I explained to the client, I need a working day per image at least - she explained it to the client... the client said: Do the best u can we need them for a meeting. So u do the math.

x
Reply With Quote top
  #43  
Old 07-20-2009, 03:50 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

I'm sorry I was rude to you Mark. I can see you know quite a bit about retouching, and most of this is my own fault for not explaining my process properly.

I generally do my work in 16 bit, so I didn't even consider the 8 bit angle, although the genius' on that site have already developed a workaround technique for 8 bit images as well as lab. Here's an example of a 30 minute skin-clearing session I did today that would have taken hours and hours with dodge and burn, although dodge and burn would give much more precise results. It's family, so there was no need for high-end d&b. Mind taking a look at the full version and telling me what's lacking? I really do value your opinion. Everything in this retouch was done with frequency separation healing, plus I did high frequency sharpening before I uploaded it. Now I have plenty of time for the fun stuff -- dodge and burn carving.

http://a4.vox.com/6a0110184cd071860f011016333a94860b-pi

I found out one of the major problems I'd been having. The frequency separation is done by using 'add mode' apply image (invert checked) on a gaussian blur of the original. This subtracts the blur, amazingly leaving the details. Instead of using a high value for the gaussian blur, I assumed a lower value would preserve more detail in the high frequency layer, which is the opposite of the truth.

The more I work with this technique, the more I like it. It feels vastly more precise from high pass detail preserving -- you guys should try it! Here's the action to separate the high and low frequencies. Use a gaussian blur between 5 and 10 for normal (for us) size images. Try cloning on the high layer, and sampling colors on normal brush blending mode on the low frequency layer to even out tone. Make sure to use it on a 16 bit image.

http://www.nunuvyer.biz/Photoshop/Frequency.zip


EDIT: Actually, I don't think there is a workaround for 8bit yet.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg c2.jpg (97.8 KB, 77 views)

Last edited by mikedimples; 07-20-2009 at 04:30 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote top
  #44  
Old 07-20-2009, 03:57 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Oops, cloned out some important moles. I'll put those back in.
Reply With Quote top
  #45  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:21 PM
Flashtones Flashtones is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 956
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Mike, I don't have a horse in this race, I'm learning from both of you, but for comparison purposes I think it would help if you'd demonstrate what the best of your technique can do on the original image again so we can compare with Mark's samples. Apples to apples, etc.
Reply With Quote top
  #46  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:28 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Ah, gotcha. I'm about to leave for the day, but I'll put it up later tonight. Thanks to everyone still keeping an eye on this thread.
Reply With Quote top
  #47  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:29 PM
Markzebra's Avatar
Markzebra Markzebra is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 718
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

AS THOSE IMAGES STAND AT THE MOMENT - it looks like you were trying to catch me out.

A lot of that image looks like relatively crude L&D. There are areas that are untouched, and have the original texture sharpened slightly. The highest res I can 2000 pix high, and that's not high enough to say for certain, there is no real pore detail in the original image. It has had detail work, someone has gone in, and done some detailed cloning or healing. Dropping back of tone is not consistent, and obviously brushed, suggesting dodge and burn.

Having said all that - Yep to me, even at that res, it still looks slightly filtered in some way sorry to say. Maybe its just the way you have approached the L&D.

You would have to work a higher res image to prove your point.

As for the rest of what you have written, I NOW think its best to ignore that. You haven't tackled any of the points I made.
Reply With Quote top
  #48  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:38 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

You're right. I'll properly respond to your points later tonight.
Reply With Quote top
  #49  
Old 08-12-2009, 08:24 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Sorry it took me much longer than one night to reply. Better late than never!

I've been working quite a bit with frequency separation since my last post, and I think I'll be able to do a better job of explaining it this time. First let me respond to a post by Mark I neglected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
Take his technique (run it through in the Action) - and compare it with an 8 bit high pass (same radius) at about 50%. This means make a solid gray layer underneath, and take the high pass down to 50% - its precisely the same result. The Apply Image is doing nothing original, in fact its doing a worse job than a straight High Pass. NOW there is one genuine advantage revealed by all this, used by many smarter retouchers already - that of using high pass techniques (if you need them for texture and sharpening) in 16 BIT!
I still don't think you fully understand what was said in the thread. Here's proof that's it's more accurate than high pass(7th post in the thread). "The image below is the difference between a HP + GB solution for frequency separation and the original image. Processing was done in 16bit mode with a 5px radius when the image was 800x527." -Sean Baker

As long as you convert the image to 16bit first and split the frequencies, your end results will be more accurate than high pass.


In the next post I'll try to clearly explain what frequency separation does because it's NOT a filter of any kind. I'm about to go do that lip retouch now that I have more experience with frequency separation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
AS THOSE IMAGES STAND AT THE MOMENT - it looks like you were trying to catch me out.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with that expression. I even tried googling it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
A lot of that image looks like relatively crude L&D. There are areas that are untouched, and have the original texture sharpened slightly. The highest res I can 2000 pix high, and that's not high enough to say for certain, there is no real pore detail in the original image. It has had detail work, someone has gone in, and done some detailed cloning or healing. Dropping back of tone is not consistent, and obviously brushed, suggesting dodge and burn.
I'm also not familiar with L&D, but I have a feeling I'm going to feel stupid once I know what it stands for. I went into that image, separated the frequencies (so far image is unchanged), and did quick, extremely sloppy cloning on the high frequency layer. The beauty of working only on the HF layers is that cloning doesn't pick up tone. It's extremely forgiving, but looks precise.

Any tonal changes were painted in on the low frequency layer. I just used lighten or darken mode with the standard brush, color pick what I want, and paint away. As long as the frequencies have been separated properly, the painting is done under the texture, looking very convincing.

I'm about to redo that lip retouch now that I've got a better understanding of the technique.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg example.jpg (26.1 KB, 46 views)
Reply With Quote top
  #50  
Old 08-12-2009, 10:43 PM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikedimples View Post
What do you mean by the right side? Did you mean the picture on the left (the 'before'), or did you mean the right side of her face?
Meaning you've chosen the left eye for the symmetry. I would chose the right eye because it looks with more character.
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New beauty Retouch fryday Critiques 10 08-02-2010 03:07 AM
40 beauty retouch tutorials!! r_dg Photo Retouching 6 10-06-2009 06:56 AM
Retouch Beauty Apinantn Photo Retouching 3 07-21-2009 01:50 AM
Beauty Retouch Nienna Critiques 13 05-07-2009 11:24 AM
Beauty retouch! ellefolk Photo Retouching 11 04-29-2009 12:11 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved