First High End Glamour Retouch (Dodge and Burn)

Jason Dulin · #1 11-15-2009, 11:16 PM

This is my first attempt at pixel level glamour retouching. I used the 2 curve technique for the skin texture, as well as a softlight D and B layer for larger areas of adjustment. Used a healthy bit of Liquify on the face and hair, lowered the shoulders and selective color for skin tone.

I must admit that I did not use the bright layer enough on the dark tones and she does still have a somewhat freckled appearance still. I still don't know if I am happy with the overall color of her skin as well.

This still does not have the great natural perfect skin tone that I am after from retouchers such as Carrie Beene. I would love to get some advice on this.

This is my first attempt and also first post so I would love any insight you Dodge and Burn Ninjas have for me

Photographer: www.mikecarrollphotography.com

My site: www.heavytheory.com

Before and After - http://www.flickr.com/photos/2915379...04004/sizes/l/

LightFantastic · #2 11-15-2009, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Dulin

I must admit that I did not use the bright layer enough on the dark tones and she does still have a somewhat freckled appearance still. I still don't know if I am happy with the overall color of her skin as well.

Welcome to the site Jason. I think your retouch looks great; in regard to the freckled appearance you mentioned, I actually think it's often quite beautiful to leave some of that in a photo. I know the trend on forums is to completely take out any trace of former color or "flaws"...but these are often beautiful. Case in point, one of the most GORGEOUS photos I've ever seen of Tyra Banks is bedecked with freckles along her nose. And it made the cover of magazines.

I'm not sure of whose quote this was, but I recently saw in someone's signature: "Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should..." If you wish to remove any freckled appearance, then I understand. But I just wanted to stress that you don't always have to. I think your work looks great and I'm eager to see the feedback you get from others.

I would like to see more clarity in the hair, but perhaps you did this on purpose? Since her head is already turned away from the camera, it would be great if her hair could be a focal point...it would make for a visually more intriguing photo.

Sinisa · #3 11-16-2009, 09:17 AM

hi jason!
the skin and hair looks good but the eyes look frozen and unnatural. i also think that the silhouette is too clean and sharp, i would soften it a little.

i don't think this falls into the high end category though.

sinisa

madclark · #4 11-16-2009, 11:49 AM

I think you did an excellent job, especially on the hair, which I HATE to do. PIA.

Anyway, a couple comments:

I like that you increased the size of the flower accessory in the back to balance the pose, but it now seems to be floating a bit off the model's head. I would tuck it closer and mask the hairline over it to make it appear more attached.

Second, you've massaged the lighting around a lot but you've taken some shadows and highlights out of reality and so the overall effect seems a little unreal.The most striking area to me is the forehead right under the hair. In the original, the model naturally had a little dip there, you see that shadow. If you had just corrected that, to make the brow ridge more smooth, I could understand, but you've pushed the highlight higher on the forehead. It alters the 3-D perspective of the lighting and creates a very subtle "unrealness" to it. You have to be aware of the lighting in the original and visualize the subject in 3-D to make corrections that are true to that if you are going to try to alter different shadows and highlights independently.

Finally, I think because of how you massaged these highlights and shadows and liquefied some areas, you've introduced a bit of "frozen in time" syndrome to the model. There is a loss of depth to the figure and changing the anatomy in the neckline give a bit of the impression of popping a new head on an existing body.

Please don't think that I don't think you've done a fantastic job. Many of my comments are only things a retoucher might notice. But they should be looked at because even an untrained eye can sense when something seems not quite right even if they can't identify it. It's a point of interpretation in that you took a more robust and solid looking model in a moody pose, a more tradition Greek goddess figure, and tried to mold it into a more glammy neutral caucasian model. It's not to say that it shouldn't be done, but if you do, be very aware of the physics and anatomy in the image to keep the alteration as undetectable as possible.

Good work and can't wait to see more!

Jason Dulin · #5 11-16-2009, 12:06 PM

LightFantastic:

Thanks so much for your comments! I hear you on not taking things too far. Just like in many art forms, less really is more. I may leave the freckled appearance, though I still would like to get some advice on improving the skin texture.

Sinisa:

I understand what you are saying about her eyes. They do have sort of a lifeless look to them I suppose. I still like them, but I would love to hear what you may suggest to improve on them. Also, what do you mean that the silhouette is too sharp?

madclark:

Thanks so much for weighing in and really being critical. I can use all of the suggestions and help I can get.

I think you do have a valid point about the flower. Perhaps it does look a bit unattached. I may work on that. So what you are saying about the dimensional lighting is that I have strayed too far from reality? Perhaps I didn't leave enough shadow on the forehead? I hear what you are saying about taking too much shadow and losing definition in the neckline. I debated that myself while I was working on it.

Oh, and definitely don't feel like you are offending me. I really do enjoy open critique and I take it very seriously.

Thanks guys!

Flashtones · #6 11-16-2009, 12:12 PM

I would like to know your hair techniques.

Jason Dulin · #7 11-16-2009, 12:20 PM

Thanks Flashtones. As far as the hair, just a healthy bit of liquify, as well as clone stamp on darken mode to get rid of bright strays. I also patched a gap in the hair with a sample from nearby. I increased the contrast on my softlight layer.

Flashtones · #8 11-16-2009, 12:56 PM

nice, thanks

HennadiyK · #9 11-17-2009, 05:57 PM

Very well done. Make sure not to remove important shadows. This is the hardest part of D&B.
Ex: you've removed her right collarbone.
Great job on the hair though...

Jason Dulin · #10 11-18-2009, 10:06 PM

HennadiyK -

You have proved yet again that the more you look at an image, the less you see.... I really did remove part of her collarbone... Hadn't even noticed. Thanks for the good eye ;p

AngeloLorenzo · #11 11-19-2009, 01:07 AM

I think Madclark nailed it. My one additional complaint are the highlights. While they seem clean and white in the original, they've been burned down to this very slight yellow. I think it loses a bit of 'crispness' because of that.

Godmother · #12 11-19-2009, 05:02 AM

I don't agree with most said in this thread.

I think u nailed skin

The hair... it looks a bit soft on texture and the shadows in the don't have a lot of detail (You D&B too much)

The eyes are too bright but it is as the photographer intended (You could make them darker and add a catch light, but you should check with the photographer)

Edges are not too sharp, they are sharp enough. I love tones and the warm highlights.

What I hate is the flower. You can't... let me say that again, you CAN'T enlarge an object like that, it doesn't only blur it but you lose quality and it 'll look very odd in print.