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
  #51  
Old 08-12-2009, 10:49 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
I've done the skin over again, mind telling me what's wrong with it?

I'm still have to tackle the hair.

LARGE SIZE: http://a3.vox.com/6a0110184cd071860f011018509c8b860f-pi
Much better as I'm only looking the skin. However, you have some dead/flat texture in some areas in the left of the face. There are some kind of textureless "patches" on her cheekbone and nose.
Reply With Quote top
  #52  
Old 08-12-2009, 10:53 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Thanks for the critique, and nice catch on the eye symmetry. I should have definitely gone with the other one.
Reply With Quote top
  #53  
Old 08-12-2009, 11:01 PM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Question Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

I'm looking at the Robert Randal website. It has very good pics, but somehow the pic #7 has a very harsh blown highlight in the knee of the ciclyst. I'm totally wondering why. Not to mention other parts of the body and the flat red in the down part of the t-shirt. Too much obviusly overprocessed in those areas. But why!?!?!?!?

These things I always try to avoid, and even more when doing grayscaled images. Sometimes I push shadows and highlights too much out of the boundaires, but never so much like this (of course, using direct point flash can produce these things, but it looks like more due the contrast in the post):
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Captura de Pantalla 1.jpg (27.5 KB, 41 views)

Last edited by Quantum3; 08-12-2009 at 11:19 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #54  
Old 08-13-2009, 08:53 AM
Markzebra's Avatar
Markzebra Markzebra is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 718
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

You image hasn't come through Mike. If its supposed to be completely bkack, then good job. Ok Straigh talk - reading through this again I realise I was a bit of an asshole.

Quote:
As long as you convert the image to 16bit first and split the frequencies, your end results will be more accurate than high pass.
Of course anything you do will be more accurate in 16 bit, do the high pass in 16 bit, that was my point. Looking at this again, the Apply image DOES not seem to create the blown highlights that high pass does I will agree, but in 8 bit High pass may be better I think because it creates a higher contrast result, and as a result is more flexible.

Quote:
In the next post I'll try to clearly explain what frequency separation does because it's NOT a filter of any kind.
Now ahem, Mike Mike. - I can assure you I know what separation of textural areas does, and how to use two or more layers to divide what people are now seem to be calling 'frequencies', although I don't like the word. This is what I was calling "high Pass techniques". These things ARE NOT a replacement for learning from the ground up, believe me. And I'm somewhat disappointed that someone is posting this stuff on a forum at all. The main reason I say this is because, like I said in another thread, its like giving a four year old a razor blade - open to abuse. There is a school of retouching that does use these methods very extensively, but its so easy to produce very artificial results. Craig.

Quote:
so far image is unchanged
Look at the image Histogram - any filtering process does some kind of damage. The secret to this is analysing differences and using them as repairs only.

L&D means dodge and burn. Using your image as an example the problem with painting on what you are calling low frequency is its - NOT AS GOOD as dodge and burn really for pure tonal work. High 'frequency' that's another matter.

Last edited by Markzebra; 08-13-2009 at 09:30 AM.
Reply With Quote top
  #55  
Old 08-13-2009, 09:45 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
And I'm somewhat disappointed that someone is posting this stuff on a forum at all.

The thing is Mark, in that particular forum, they DON'T BELIEVE high end is actually done using D&B for more than "Painting highlights"


Let me show u so u can understand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Thomas Designs
Dodge and Burn is really only for highlights and shadows, as Stephen said.
To get texture it's a lot of clone stamping, rubber stamp, etc. Then some of us use airbrushing, as well as applying hipass filters and stuff to get hte texture back.
Andrew Evans
www.mplsFASHION.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYPHOTOGRAPHICS
can you name an high end ad level retoucher who uses that? I cannot and i know a lot of them.
Stephen Eastwood
http://www.StephenEastwood.com
Some of the answers in THAT forum

They really don't see the difference between manual work and "Frequency separation" (cof high pass cof)

And I don't think they ever will

Mike on the other hand is experimenting with this and he actually sees the difference (He states that in the other forum)

Have a nice day

x
Reply With Quote top
  #56  
Old 08-13-2009, 09:58 AM
Markzebra's Avatar
Markzebra Markzebra is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 718
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Ok don't worry I'll shut up then Godmother.
Reply With Quote top
  #57  
Old 08-13-2009, 02:20 PM
Cuervo79's Avatar
Cuervo79 Cuervo79 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Guatemala
Posts: 372
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Hmm I come late into the game. but the MM thread originally was supposed to be a technique to sharpen with less noise than using highpass. I did think of using this instead of the "highpass technique" for skin. I guess the thread evolved into a skin smoothing technique than what it originally was.

There are people in MM like godmother said, who know that there's no substitute for D&B, Ronald N Tan comes to mind but most of the people there when talking about retouching are looking for the quick fix but still want realistic results. There haven't been threads lately on the subject in the MM forum but each time one comes out it becomes a who's who of blured vs realistic...
Reply With Quote top
  #58  
Old 08-18-2009, 04:00 PM
Visna Visna is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Montréal
Posts: 4
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Hi all!

It's good debate!!! Any shortcut to bypass D&B? Yes it's possible!!! But's it's still a D&B technic after all. I busted Portrature plugin and I could achieve that with simply Photoshop. I have the same level of control and no need to spend money.

But, the goal it's to have more precise control to speed up the workflow. D&B it's one of part of the tool to retouch photo, not the only one solution for all purpose. First, it's to develop your eyes about the Highend trend and how to balance the retouch.

I made a script on Photoshop that's give me a control on many layers of the skin for shadow and highlight separatly to gain time. But, skin it's the not whole image. A lot a job to do on other side.

And for your Frequency... No matter 8 bit or 16 bit... You could achieve simply by mixt the same image with one is inverted. I use smart object to have playback control on the effect.

Last edited by Visna; 08-18-2009 at 06:28 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #59  
Old 08-19-2009, 07:53 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Welcome to Visna, I had a couple of questions about your post if you don't mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visna View Post

Any shortcut to bypass D&B? Yes it's possible!!! But's it's still a D&B technic after all.
---
What do you mean by this? This is not a dodge and burn technique.



Quote:
And for your Frequency... No matter 8 bit or 16 bit... You could achieve simply by mixt the same image with one is inverted. I use smart object to have playback control on the effect.
---
Wouldn't mixing an inverted image with itself leave you with grey? I don't understand this technique, mind elaborating?
Reply With Quote top
  #60  
Old 08-19-2009, 08:22 PM
mikedimples's Avatar
mikedimples mikedimples is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hollywood, California
Posts: 238
Re: Super-clean beauty retouch

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuervo79 View Post
There haven't been threads lately on the subject in the MM forum but each time one comes out it becomes a who's who of blured vs realistic...
---
Are you saying that whenever the topic of frequency separation comes up in the Model Mayhem forums, it becomes a blurred vs. realistic war? I thought I'd read the two topics dedicated to frequency separation, mind linking the other ones? Even if it's a flame war, there might be stuff I haven't read about it yet.

Here's the newest low frequency topic on Model Mayhem: http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=487490

Here's the original one:
http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=439098

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
You image hasn't come through Mike. If its supposed to be completely bkack, then good job.
---
Wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
but in 8 bit High pass may be better I think because it creates a higher contrast result, and as a result is more flexible.
---
The grey that comes as the neutral color in the high pass layer is limiting. With the separated high-frequency data, you can run a curves adjustment on only the fine detail in your image. The result of the contrast is decided from the sharpening you do to the fine detail (high frequency) layer. Remember, the sharpening process in this technique involves separating the fine detail, then smart-sharpening it separately from the rest! The blurry, low frequency data where the halos usually form are left untouched. I don't understand the logic of why you think high-pass is more flexible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markzebra View Post
Now ahem, Mike Mike. - I can assure you I know what separation of textural areas does, and how to use two or more layers to divide what people are now seem to be calling 'frequencies', although I don't like the word.
---
How do you use more than two layers to divide it? I really don't know and it sounds interesting.

People area calling it separating the frequencies because that's what it is. Here's how Sean Baker explained it, "The thread referenced deals with separating a 2D image into its component waveforms (or at least as well as we're able with the tools we have) and using that information for various purposes (emphasizing the high frequencies to sharpen, de-emphasizing intermediate frequencies for skin smoothing, etc.). The term 'spatial frequency' was taken out of writing from Dr. Livingstone at Harvard."

Here online encyclopedia article on it: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O13...ncyfilter.html

(More to come... I'm paranoid about accidentally hitting back and losing the whole thing.)
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 03:48 AM.


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