Pascal Dangin & Box Studios

[vapour]

Does/has anybody here worked for Box Studios or ever been to Box Studios? I am curious as to what it's like behind the curtain. What exactly is the wizard up to?

I'm pretty sure I've read every article about Dangin/Box (The New Yorker, Times etc) but basically I wanted to start a thread to discuss the process of projects in the high-end world and hopefully discuss/expound upon retouching techniques.

[garibaldi]

well i know hes pretty hairy.

[Godmother]

Originally Posted by garibaldi

well i know hes pretty hairy.

so hot!

x

[vapour]

Yes the man the myth the legend.

[vapour]

Man does Box really have this kind of secrecy that no one can/will talk about them?

[SteveB2005]

Originally Posted by vapour

Man does Box really have this kind of secrecy that no one can/will talk about them?

It's a "black art", magician's code not to be released to the inquisitive public. Unless the curtain is ripped, torn down or whisked away, no one has a clue what's going on behind the scene, other than the studio staff.

[KR1156]

who cares? they're good retouchers, doing the same work every other highend agency who employs good retouchers does. I know a few ppl who worked there, trust me, get over it.

[eraanexact]

They seem to get the lion's share of high-end work here, but it's because they're good.

I work with a woman who trained under Pascal, and she's pretty excellent.

[vapour]

@KR1156 - 'who cares, get over it' - I know I get it, but I'm just saying... if there was ever any light shed as to how they do a lot of their work behind the scenes type stuff then it would be easy to get over. The same goes with any 'high end' retouching studio. There's never much explanation amongst this 'dark art'.

@eraanexact - What does your friend have to say about Pascal and how he does things?

[garibaldi]

DOnt be like the japanese and jsut copy what everyone else does, but do it cheaper. hahah bottom line is this and there are so many comparisons you could make... He is just a guy, liek anyone else, using the same computers as most of us, with the same software. he just does it better. Same reason that Michael Schumacher would dog you in a race even in a yugo, or that Paula Dean would make a better grilled cheese sandwich than you could or that Michael Jackson could moonwalk better than anybody else. You can look under the hood, but thats not all of it.

Another example if this helps, look at it like this, all any of them are doing is altering the luminance of pixels. You have a set number of them, and you can go from the darkest to absolute brightest and anywhere in between....now hop to it. Thing is he just knows which ones to change a little bit better than others do

[KR1156]

yes they know photoshop, they know as well as any highend retoucher should....but the difference in retouchers is their aesthetic and artistic vision and dedication to do something the right way. They work on some excellent campaigns, and it takes more than photoshop skills to please their clients.

like someone said recently, i would rather have a retoucher who was 70% artist, and 30% technical.

an example of dedication.....I get a client who doesn't bring in any profit to our company at the moment, and may be the case for a while....but when i retouch let's say and editorial for elle magazine, i do it as well as i do any of my jobs....and if things are looking off, maybe the color work is gone too far, or something is off, i'm willing to start from scratch to please my client. know why....in the end it's my name on the retouching side of that job, and everyone remembers the bad stuff they see.

and on that note, Box and every other highend shop is willing to do the same.

[eraanexact]

Agreed with KR1156.

Also, one of the things I've noticed is that in great beauty and fashion work, the color and contrast moves are done first in adjustment layers on top, followed by any liquifying/body sculpting, and then the actual technical retouching. Getting the color balanced and overall mood established is what seperates a technical retoucher from a true artist.

[vapour]

When it comes to fundamental "color balancing" or "color correcting" is this typically a global move or usually done selectively or locally.

IE. Mask out every part of the image... skin, hair, sky, grass, jeans, top, purse etc etc?

Or like I asked, a global curves adjustment?

Obviously I would assume maybe both, but what do you start with? How do you know when to take your next move?

[Markzebra]

Use your brain Vapour, and learn the stuff upside down. No technical knowledge or tricks ever made anyone any good. OK folks probably last post from me, nice knowing you

[vapour]

I understand the benefits of breaking rules and doing things upside down, but you have to know the rules before you can break them.

Mark I'm not for sure if your comment was just a lash out because you are maybe from a competitive retouching studio then Box, but the point of my question was not to make this dark art of retouching even more mysterious...

I just want to encourage a 'high end' conversation on here so that there actually can be some creative room to move forward with these fundamental tools.

Use my brain...

- It didn't come naturally when Photoshop loaded that I could make a mid-tone mask by using a gradient map with black on both ends and white in the middle

- Or that I could use a 50% gray layer on Soft Light and paint with white and black to creatively dodge and burn a portrait similar to almost painting to transform a photo

- The Photoshop resource disc didn't come Luminosity Masks so that I could adjust my highlights and my shadows locally

- There wasn't an action for lasso-ing portions of an image and creating a Curves adjustment layer for local contrast and color control

- I didn't automatically think to desaturate my dark dark shadows to eliminate color cast

No... all this was learned by forums like Retouch Pro or Googling for tutorials etc etc. So while my question may have seemed, perhaps, juvenile to some for me I'm just wanting to learn something new or at least get a new perspective on the tools I already have and know.

[BellaAllure]

great stuff here! I didn't know some of that stuff either vapour..until you just mentioned. I'm a newbie!

[jaduffy007]

I'm "new 'round these parts", but I have to say that so far, each thread I've opened with anticipation of learning something has left me terribly disappointed. Vapour, I think your thread idea was great. Too bad everyone seemed more interested in presenting airs of superiority versus sharing anything of value.

Vapour, thanks for mentioning the mid-tone mask and luminosity masks topics. I guess I will turn to google vs retouchPro in hopes of learning about those topics.

[mikedimples]

Originally Posted by vapour

- I didn't automatically think to desaturate my dark dark shadows to eliminate color cast

Not to mention lightest lights. Great info, any newbies lurking should study this post.

[seattle-light]

Of course, Vapour is right. But then so is everyone else.

There are a whole lot of techniques that high-end retouchers are using out there that aren't readily apparent from reading a book about Photoshop or even a book that focuses specifically on retouching (most are just scratching the surface, because going deeper would be almost pointless as it would simply lose most readers).

And some of those techniques border on alchemy or even rocket science (to the point that you wonder how anyone ever figured out how to do that).

But the fact is that everyone is using different techniques in different combinations. There is no simple (or complex) formulaic recipe for doing great retouching. And I'm sure that Box Studios approaches each image in a slightly different way and that every person working there will approach any given image a little differently.

The idea that there is a proprietary Box Studios method or workflow seems a bit of a stretch in my mind. But the "dark art" of Box Studios doesn't seem all that mysterious.

If you put a group of highly skilled retouchers together in a room -- people who eat, breathe, and sleep retouching -- and get them to work together for a few years, they're going to share their ideas about retouching and techniques. Over time, you're going to develop an incredible brain trust of retouching and visual problem-solving techniques.

If they're working on each other's files, they may come up with specific ways to name layers and an order for layering the work so that they can walk into each other's
files without being completely lost -- a kind of loose, collective working method.

If you have ten people who've worked for ten years each with some of the best photographers and agencies around, you've got 100 years of collective work experience and an even greater wealth and diversity of collaborative, learning experiences. So the potential for creative cross-pollination is incredible.

Putting a group some of the best retouchers together and tasking them to do even better work seems like a recipe for doing great work. How's that for a secret formula?

I've been retouching for quite some time, but I learn something new with every single person I work with. Sometimes the biggest learning is from the people who are "greenest" (maybe because they haven't yet learned the proper way to do things, so they've accidentally found a completely different way).

I for one would love to hear Vapour explain how he's using mid-tone masking.

But the "Tell me how how they're doing it" question is not as simple as it sounds (and it's kind of lazy). I can see why people get tired of it. Because you're basically asking how a highly skilled group of people with 100 years of experience in retouching on thousands of projects would approach retouching differently and expecting that approach to be distilled into a few paragraphs (when it would be difficult enough to pick up if you were in the room working with them day in and day out for a couple years) or in a list of their ten proprietary magic-bullet techniques.

Some of the best retouchers I've worked with have a very limited bag of tricks (surprisingly limited). But they know exactly how to use them to achieve the desired results.

I would suggest that you concentrate on refining fundamentals, and seek out specific techniques to address specific problems as you need them. Asking how Box Studios does it is a question that simply could never be effectively answered in a quick post. And it seems more productive to build up your own skill set and add specific techniques as you need them than to try to follow Box Studios. Build your own robust toolbox.

Solve one problem at a time until you have no more problems to solve. And don't worry about running out of problems. As you solve one set of problems, new ones will appear to take their place (and usually the new ones will seem more complicated that the earlier ones, even if they are minor problems in comparison). Perfection can seem like an elusive thing.

Hope you are doing well. Take care. Alan.

[vapour]

Originally Posted by seattle-light

If you put a group of highly skilled retouchers together in a room -- people who eat, breathe, and sleep retouching -- and get them to work together for a few years, they're going to share their ideas about retouching and techniques.

Isn't that what RetouchPRO is suppose to be, but without the boundaries of a location based office? BOX is limited to those retouchers sitting in that logo-less black building in New York. RPRO, to me, is limitless.

Originally Posted by seattle-light

But the "Tell me how how they're doing it" question is not as simple as it sounds (and it's kind of lazy).

I'm not lazy. I wasn't asking for a consolidation of 10 years of retouching to a single paragraph. This is a forum. So I was wanting to start a high-end DISCUSSION by starting with one paragraph and hopefully lead to more posts then that... dare I say, DAVE HILL thread.

[seattle-light]

Dear Vapour...

I wasn't suggesting that you are lazy. I was saying that it's kind of a lazy question. But probably it would be more accurate to say that it's a really broad question -- and one that is likely to elicit general responses or flippant comments. Oh where would one even begin?

If you want better answers you must start with better questions..

I don't think there's a Box Studios method, but if you can identify a few specific things that you think they're doing particularly well you might get some more useful responses (as compared to flippant ones).

Probably easier to demystify it one chunk at a time.

There is certainly a considerable talent pool in RetouchPRO to draw on and to cross-pollinate ideas and share working methods. And much to be learned.

But then there is something to be said for actually working together in the same place every day in an environment where you can compare notes and share ideas in real time and even occasionally watch over one another's shoulders.

Add to that environment that everyone is entering with high level skills and everyone has an adeptness to learning new techniques. That makes for an incredible learning environment.

Hope you are doing well. Take care. Alan.

[zganie]

Why does this matter so much?
This and other threads likes this
The Trick !
Hard Work and ORIGINALITY
Not what someone else is doing
zganie

[Insensitive.]

I swear people on here seem to have a never ending attitude problem. It is quite amusing.

[vapour]

Originally Posted by zganie

Why does this matter so much?
This and other threads likes this
The Trick !
Hard Work and ORIGINALITY
Not what someone else is doing
zganie

Who was asking for a trick? The question is about technique. Originality? Is it now unoriginal to use Photoshop for retouching?

It's been hard work discovering the above mentioned techniques while sifting through the many threads here in RPro and Google and I was hoping this thread could consolidate some 'high end' techniques and moves that some of the best retouching studios use on a daily basis.

[seattle-light]

Dear Vapour...

Might be a good idea to describe your own working methods and techniques and then ask for people to add to that. That way you'll be putting something real for people to learn from and respond to. Seems like that would be more interesting than vaguely asking what Pascal is doing (especially since no one seems to really know what he's doing in the Box). Wouldn't seem like a vague open-ended question. Wouldn't seem like Box Studios envy. And would likely get you some terrific feedback on specifically what you're doing and not doing.

Hope you are doing well. Take care. Alan.

[vapour]

Originally Posted by seattle-light

Might be a good idea to describe your own working methods and techniques and then ask for people to add to that.

Are you f@#$%ing kidding me? Why don't you actually read this thread before posting.

Originally Posted by vapour

Use my brain...

- It didn't come naturally when Photoshop loaded that I could make a mid-tone mask by using a gradient map with black on both ends and white in the middle

- Or that I could use a 50% gray layer on Soft Light and paint with white and black to creatively dodge and burn a portrait similar to almost painting to transform a photo

- The Photoshop resource disc didn't come Luminosity Masks so that I could adjust my highlights and my shadows locally

- There wasn't an action for lasso-ing portions of an image and creating a Curves adjustment layer for local contrast and color control

- I didn't automatically think to desaturate my dark dark shadows to eliminate color cast

That is a sufficient amount of techniques to begin a high-end conversation.

[jaduffy007]

I'm with you Vapour. Not to highjack the thread, but...

When I use a 50% gray layer / set to Soft Light....many times when I paint with white on skin to dodge I get a *stroke* of reddish artifact. Any ideas where I'm going wrong?

Thanks

[ShadowLight]

try using the "dodge" tool instead of painting white
handle with care - a little bit at a time

[vapour]

Originally Posted by jaduffy007

I'm with you Vapour. Not to highjack the thread, but...

When I use a 50% gray layer / set to Soft Light....many times when I paint with white on skin to dodge I get a *stroke* of reddish artifact. Any ideas where I'm going wrong?

Thanks

Thank you for understanding.

When I have a problem like that I just ignore it and get my "carving" or dodge and burning done. Get a good nice shape, then go in and fix those discolored areas afterwards with a Curve adjustment layer. So just lasso (with a nice feather) that area that is reddish and bring up a Curve lum and bring down the red channel.

[seattle-light]

Dear Vapour...

I've carefully read all your posts in this thread, and I'm aware of some of the things that you've come across that aren't fully explained in the commonly available literature. Let's call that list that you've requoted so generously (as if it's evidence that you're using your brain) "Five Things That Weren't Readily Apparent To You". I assume that some or all of these are now clear to you but once were not -- or is that a list of things you'd like explained?

And I suppose that any one of those items would be worthy of discussion.

But the list is hardly an explanation of your approach to dealing with images. It's not even an explanation of any of those techniques. It's just a list, and it's not helping to answer your questions. It's just a list of techniques without any kind of context or explanation.

If you're looking to recreate or demystify a high-end retouching process and to discover new techniques, then you need to have some place to start. (Since Pascal hasn't sent a twelve-step primer for us all to consult as to his proprietary dark arts working methods...) I thought since you started the thread that it might make sense to take your workflow and then have people add on to that or make suggestions as to alternate approaches or refinements.

And maybe that would lead to a general workflow and a collection of techniques and methods that people could refer to all in one place.

I am not questioning your intelligence or your ambitions for discovery and learning. And I never suggested that you weren't using your brain. I was actually defending you earlier in this thread when someone suggested that you weren't.

I'm just trying to help focus the question and to get a sense of what you're doing so maybe you can actually get some useful answers. But it's hard to give directions to someone who's not explaining where they are or where they're trying to go. I'm looking for a some reference points, so that people have a question to respond to or at least something real to react to.

But what you are currently saying isn't making sense to me. It's as if you're saying (and you'll have to forgive my digression here):

- Intermittent windshield wipers
- Gear shift
- Custom leather seats
- Cooling system
- Highly polished red finish

How does Ferrari make such amazing cars?

It still doesn't give you anything to really respond to so you get an answer that is something like "Passion, power and precision" or "Late nights with beautiful women and lots of espresso in the morning" -- and these answers wouldn't help you to understand how they make a Ferrari. But people will often answer a question in exactly the way it is designed to be answered.

If I were to outline my approach it would probably look something like this...

Look at the image carefully to understand what's working and what's not.
Determine a plan of action/vision as to what you want to do with the image.
(what needs to be "fixed" and the overall look, mood and feeling of the image)
Replace, move, and change parts.
Extend areas as needed.
Cloning. Healing.
Skin Work. Fabric Work.
Selective adjustments.
Dodge and Burn.
Overall adjustments.
Walk away.
Look at it fresh and make adjustments/refinements as needed.

That's not getting into any specific methods or techniques, and I don't always work in that particular order (and there will be cases with more general steps), but it's a beginning of breaking the retouching down into a step by step process or framework that can then be fleshed out with the particulars of method/technique and then refined with alternative approaches for different situations.

Compare two questions:

How does Dave Hill do it?

How does Dave Hill get that sharp detail and nearly monochromatic look in his images?

The first question will get you an incredibly wide range of answers (some flippant, some trying to give you a serious response), but most of which won't address your desire to learn the techniques being used. The second is asking a much narrower question that is likely to yield a more specific response.

Hope you are doing well. Take care. Alan.