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.

Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 01-10-2011, 04:50 PM
fraiseap fraiseap is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 104
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godmother View Post
Resquing a bad shot

X
Agreed. Too many people think Photoshop can do this but it can't.
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 01-10-2011, 05:33 PM
Boneappetit's Avatar
Boneappetit Boneappetit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 762
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

I'm not a photographer, but I can tell when a pic is good (I think, hehe). I guess the responses on this thread are related to beauty or fashion retouch. I guess it all depends on the target or purpose of the photo. Both can be good, bad, maybe 1 is good and the other not. Maybe the original is better than the processed one. I agree with Natalia about judging photographers by vision and ability. But for instance if you are going to do an HDR work you need to process the photo even if you are a purist, either with an HDR program or not.

In beauty retouch, (commercially speaking) you always need to do at least some post process, like stray hairs and small blemishes, etc. So my bottom line is this, both are important, if I'm wrong, then why do photos need to be retouched?, if they are so good, they can go directly from shooting to magazine production...

Retouching is like music, in a recording you don't just record and take it directly to CDs reproduction. It needs a final mix down and a mastering before you can hear it on the radio or sell it. And as I said before, the better the base, the better the results.

Last edited by Boneappetit; 01-10-2011 at 08:54 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 01-10-2011, 07:25 PM
chinchillakilla's Avatar
chinchillakilla chinchillakilla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: manchester UK
Posts: 33
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Being a proffessional photo restorer to me both are equally important. No matter on the skill of the photographer things can still happen be it problems with the elements,flaws to the model or anything. you need us as much as we need you. You need both aspects for a picture to fully work we work side by side and there is no shame in that.
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 01-10-2011, 08:48 PM
P_fuzz P_fuzz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: london, sao paulo
Posts: 231
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

I would say is the final image as well... photoshop should be seen as a part of the process, just as another tool to get where you want as a photogrpaher.

and we all know that there are no miracles in photoshop... a shit photo will always be shit, even if 'touched to death!

I do appreciate the craft of photography and I work the hardest to get my photos as near as possible as the final image in my head, but I guess this appreciation for craft is something that only us "photogeeks" appreciate...

so, back to my answer, the final image is what it counts!

xx
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 01-11-2011, 01:48 AM
Repairman's Avatar
Repairman Repairman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 683
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Assuming that someone is paying us to come up with the goods, the end result is all that counts. The photographer is the 'tool' of the art director and the retoucher is the 'tool' of the photographer. Everybody brings something to the party.
R.
Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 01-11-2011, 11:44 AM
cyberphonics cyberphonics is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 20
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Thanks for all of the replies guys! It's just a topic I was really interested in hearing other people's opinions on and thought this was a good place for it.

I feel like it might be moving a little more towards whether or not good retouching is as important as good photography and vice versa to make a good picture, though, instead of about what "value system" leads to what you consider to make a good photographer.

Spinning off Boneappetit's parallel, what would you consider a talented musician? I'm sure many of us have encountered musicians who sound great on CD and on the radio after their tracks have been professionally produced, yet when you hear them in a raw state just sitting there playing and singing into the mic with little to no support, you think, "Holy jeebus, he sounds like a croaking turd..."

Some would say that if a musician sounds terrible without help, they aren't all that good and are more inclined to lean towards musicians who sound good on their own (and subsequently, that much better when produced). But some others would say they expect musicians not to sound as good on their own and therefore don't mind certain imperfections.

That's kind of what I'm asking here.

If your opinion of how "good" a photographer is leans more toward the quality of his or her work before it's had any help or if you're more likely to just look at the afters and make allowances for some issues in the original images as not really making or breaking your opinion of that photographer?

Making it clear, I'm not talking about mistakes or oversights, but the photographer's actual work as he intended it to come out of the camera. What elements do you appreciate or overlook that leads you to settle on him being great?

Put it this way. For those of you who think a certain photographer is terrible or have seen some images and thought, "Ugh, this guy's bad. I wouldn't even want to work on these", what qualities made you feel that way? Would you be likely to change your mind about that photographer if, after those images were retouched, they were actually beautiful?

If not, then wouldn't you say you place more weight on the befores when judging the quality of the work he does?

Off topic, touching on another one of Bon's comments, "Both are important, if I'm wrong, then why do photos need to be retouched?"

To be honest, I think the answer to that is the same as with a lot of things. Because that just happens to be the standard we set. I don't believe any picture "needs" to be retouched any more than a woman with blemished skin "needs" to wear makeup.

Barring technical issues that would make the picture "unviewable", like really poor exposure, since I'd say a picture you can't see kind of defeats the purpose of a picture - but even that might be intentional.

We set aesthetic trends and conventions and by doing so, create the need to conform to them in order to keep up. That isn't really proof of their objective importance. Just of their importance in a certain context.

So I do agree that retouching is important because we expect it to be done by expecting things to look a certain way. It does, however, lead to a separation between people who make more allowances with their raw work than others because retouching is expected and for me, the line drawn between them is how I personally rate the quality of their work as photographers.
Reply With Quote top
  #17  
Old 01-11-2011, 02:29 PM
Boneappetit's Avatar
Boneappetit Boneappetit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 762
Talking Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberphonics View Post

Spinning off Boneappetit's parallel, what would you consider a talented musician? I'm sure many of us have encountered musicians who sound great on CD and on the radio after their tracks have been professionally produced, yet when you hear them in a raw state just sitting there playing and singing into the mic with little to no support, you think, "Holy jeebus, he sounds like a croaking turd..."

Some would say that if a musician sounds terrible without help, they aren't all that good and are more inclined to lean towards musicians who sound good on their own (and subsequently, that much better when produced). But some others would say they expect musicians not to sound as good on their own and therefore don't mind certain imperfections.

That's kind of what I'm asking here.

If your opinion of how "good" a photographer is leans more toward the quality of his or her work before it's had any help or if you're more likely to just look at the afters and make allowances for some issues in the original images as not really making or breaking your opinion of that photographer?

Making it clear, I'm not talking about mistakes or oversights, but the photographer's actual work as he intended it to come out of the camera. What elements do you appreciate or overlook that leads you to settle on him being great?

Put it this way. For those of you who think a certain photographer is terrible or have seen some images and thought, "Ugh, this guy's bad. I wouldn't even want to work on these", what qualities made you feel that way? Would you be likely to change your mind about that photographer if, after those images were retouched, they were actually beautiful?

If not, then wouldn't you say you place more weight on the befores when judging the quality of the work he does?

Off topic, touching on another one of Bon's comments, "Both are important, if I'm wrong, then why do photos need to be retouched?"

To be honest, I think the answer to that is the same as with a lot of things. Because that just happens to be the standard we set. I don't believe any picture "needs" to be retouched any more than a woman with blemished skin "needs" to wear makeup.

Barring technical issues that would make the picture "unviewable", like really poor exposure, since I'd say a picture you can't see kind of defeats the purpose of a picture - but even that might be intentional.

photographers.
Alright ! Going a bit back, what I meant to say is, that music and retouching, are the same in the "post or re-production context", since there is a difference between playing live, where if you sing some notes out of tune, you cannot delete that, and do it again, contrary to retouching where you can go back and fix it, even if you are doing a live video for RP, drawing or painting is not the same as singing, unless you are recording it.

I'm going to quote Natalia again and say, a good musician is the one who has vision and ability to produce good music, with the difference that this musician "could" play or sing, or just make music for other people to play.

That explains why there are some natural musicians (photographers), that don't know anything about "music" (photography) and they are excellent in what they do, even famous all around the world. On the other hand there are graduated musicians (even Magna Cum Laude) and they cannot improvise one note (playing in a band) by ear...

So i'd say in photography and retouching you got more room to "fix" things just because you do it privately, among a small group of three friends, you, camera and computer.

I'm sorry I took this space to talk about music, just wanted to clarify my last comment.

Last edited by Boneappetit; 01-11-2011 at 04:58 PM.
Reply With Quote top
  #18  
Old 01-11-2011, 06:11 PM
cyberphonics cyberphonics is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 20
Re: Do you judge by the befores or the afters?

It's okay, Bon, music is awesome LOL
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
Calvin Hollywoods Before and Afters rka81 Photo Retouching 0 11-11-2010 07:56 AM
few before and afters for your approval fstr21 Photo Retouching 6 07-02-2010 06:48 PM
Before and Afters... alisty Critiques 11 06-15-2009 12:29 PM
Just Saying Hi, Some Before and Afters Here... moleculeMike Photo Retouching 1 12-15-2008 08:39 AM
Can the masses judge quality? Ed_L Salon 6 03-04-2004 03:17 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:42 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