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.

IHP related question.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 02-07-2011, 08:01 AM
mistermonday's Avatar
mistermonday mistermonday is offline
Moderator
Patron
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,028
Re: IHP related question.

That is a excellent explanation of IHP by Godmother. If you are interested in the mechanics or the math of this technique (also known as bandstop or degrunge) checkout this tutorial http://retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=213 and a couple of other related to it, in the retouching tutorial section.
Regards, Murray
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 02-07-2011, 08:06 AM
Godmother's Avatar
Godmother Godmother is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 814
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermonday View Post
That is a excellent explanation of IHP by Godmother. If you are interested in the mechanics or the math of this technique (also known as bandstop or degrunge) checkout this tutorial http://retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=213 and a couple of other related to it, in the retouching tutorial section.
Regards, Murray
I personally advice against doing a BAND PASS - Unless is highly controlled, for rushed work, only in small portions in a fashion (not beauty, not close up) image.

x
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 02-07-2011, 08:16 AM
mistermonday's Avatar
mistermonday mistermonday is offline
Moderator
Patron
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,028
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godmother View Post
I personally advice against doing a BAND PASS - Unless is highly controlled, for rushed work, only in small portions in a fashion (not beauty, not close up) image.

x
Yes, agreed. The intent was to provide some insight into the math and what is actually happenning at a pixel level. This technique is good for very subtle applicication at a macro level. When applied to fine details the results will quickly wreck an image unless you are looking for a smooth fashion look.
Regards, Murray
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 02-07-2011, 08:41 AM
Godmother's Avatar
Godmother Godmother is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 814
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermonday View Post
the results will quickly wreck an image unless you are looking for a smooth fashion look.
Regards, Murray
Actually - the "smooth fashion look" IMO doesn't look like what u get with small radiuses or band pass

There's "good" smooth and "bad" smooth

Working with fine texture in a fashion image most of the times is overkill.

x
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 02-07-2011, 08:59 AM
Karlington Karlington is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts: 50
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godmother View Post
• Working on the stamp layer, go to Image/Adjustment/Brightness-Contrast and reduce the contrast to -50 making sure to tick the “Use Legacy” box. (This step corrects the base layer to apply a regular HP)
It will reduce the contrast, making it look faded. But in itself will not reduce the effect.
HOOOOLD ON!!! Tried this step out and just to make things clear here... Is this some new kind of way of getting around the "High Pass sucks problem", that I usually solve with the apply image technique you've taught Natalia?

If so, I'm a very happy man since this is a so much quicker fix.

Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 02-07-2011, 12:50 PM
mistermonday's Avatar
mistermonday mistermonday is offline
Moderator
Patron
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,028
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlington View Post
HOOOOLD ON!!! Tried this step out and just to make things clear here... Is this some new kind of way of getting around the "High Pass sucks problem", that I usually solve with the apply image technique you've taught Natalia?

If so, I'm a very happy man since this is a so much quicker fix.

I hope Natalia won't mind but I am stuck in the dentist chair waiting for the hygentist to arrive and my iPhone wants to keep busy
Yes, this is another alternative to to creating an accurate High Pass providing that you make sure the Brightness/Contrast -50% has the Legacy box checked. For all intent and purposes, this method yields the same results for High Pass as the Apply Image method does. However, if you are performing a frequency separation where the low frequency is made with a blur other than Gaussian Blur (like surface blur or Dust & Scratches), then you need to use Apply Image or your resulting separation will not be exactly the same as the unseparated layer.

Regards, Murray
Reply With Quote top
  #17  
Old 02-07-2011, 01:19 PM
Godmother's Avatar
Godmother Godmother is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 814
Re: IHP related question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermonday View Post
I hope Natalia won't mind but I am stuck in the dentist chair waiting for the hygentist to arrive and my iPhone wants to keep busy
Yes, this is another alternative to to creating an accurate High Pass providing that you make sure the Brightness/Contrast -50% has the Legacy box checked. For all intent and purposes, this method yields the same results for High Pass as the Apply Image method does. However, if you are performing a frequency separation where the low frequency is made with a blur other than Gaussian Blur (like surface blur or Dust & Scratches), then you need to use Apply Image or your resulting separation will not be exactly the same as the unseparated layer.

Regards, Murray
Of course I don't mind

Exactly what he said. That's why I teach the Apply image method as it gives you the freedom to use any kind of blur.

x
Reply With Quote top
  #18  
Old 02-07-2011, 03:51 PM
Karlington Karlington is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts: 50
Re: IHP related question.

Thank you so much Murray and Natalia for sorting this out! Maybe I'll stick to the Apply Image technique after all since it's easier to have one to rely on every time.

Hey Natalia (and the rest of you guys here), I just wan't to say a big thanks for all that you've done for the retouching community. I'm on my way of making my self a living out of this and that wouldn't be possible if it weren't for you.

So thanks a bunch. You're great!
Reply With Quote top
  #19  
Old 02-09-2011, 06:23 PM
nebulaoperator's Avatar
nebulaoperator nebulaoperator is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London
Posts: 390
Re: IHP related question.

Thank you Natalia for sharing your knowledge. it does shows impressive results this technique. Still deeper texture annoying. I have tried those steps in Ebony.PSD file Low Dust & scratches and it does not solve the problem. Overall skin texture improved dramaticly no hills no bumps.
Reply With Quote top
  #20  
Old 02-10-2011, 10:41 AM
nebulaoperator's Avatar
nebulaoperator nebulaoperator is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London
Posts: 390
Re: IHP related question.

Well, pixel by pixel is time consuming. But the method Natalia shows very quick way of doing it. I don't know if this method is widely accepted by pro retouchers. But to me it looks like those dark pores were dramatically reduced.The only thing i can't work out is what are the settings she used for AI. I should ask you about it Natalia I hope u not gonna charge me for it? i am kinda very skinned at the moment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermonday View Post
Nebula, The combination of Dust & Scratches and the AI (Applied Image) layer is a type of frequency separation and is a variant of the technique described in the following thread called "High Pass Sucks" at ModelMayhem. The link is here:
http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?th...=439098&page=1
The curve which is clipped to the High Frequency (AI) layer reduces contrast of that layer unilaterally by pinning all all of the pixels which are brighter than 128 and increasing the value of those pixels which are lower than 128, to 128. By separating the image at a carefully selected radius (in this case a low radius representing mostly the pores, what you have done is an "on mass" Dodge of the pores. You can see it better if you zoom in to 200 or 300%. If the opposite side of that curve were "grounded" or pulled to 0, the contrast would have been lowered by lowering the value of pixels > 128 to 128. The net effect would have been to burn on-mass edges below a certain radius.
This technique is clearly exponentially faster than doing a pixel by pixel D&B which can be hugely time consuming when you have an image such as this one. Like every technique that affects large numbers of pixels with the same adjustment, you need to be very careful where and how you use it.
Regards, Murray
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
Akvis Chameleon question thevision AKVIS Support Forum 3 01-15-2011 03:15 AM
jewelry retouch question dmwt Photo Retouching 6 01-12-2011 03:41 AM
CMYK question justarookie Photo Retouching 22 01-07-2011 01:42 PM
Question (P65+ related) DJSoulglo Photo Retouching 4 08-15-2009 07:31 AM
Photoshop CS3 question. Janelle Arnold Photoshop Help 6 03-06-2008 01:15 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:34 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