Software - - PortraitProfessional software

Doug Nelson · #1 03-05-2007, 11:37 AM

I'm not 100% certain this is a good thing:
http://www.portraitprofessional.com/content/gallery.php

Ant · #2 03-05-2007, 11:45 AM

meh. there are others too. great for the wedding photog or something, but it all comes down to blurred over imperfections and small jpg captures that didn't have much detail to begin with. Plus, tiny jpg samples.

anything that says Professional, Collectors Edition, Expert, etc. has to be looked at as not.

BillFrey · #3 03-05-2007, 12:02 PM

Respectfully, Ant.

Your replies are often negative, but seldom give us advice on how to improve. Sharing your knowledge would benefit all of the members, especially those who are struggling to learn and 'do it the right way'.

I for one would love to learn how the professionals do retouching.

Bill

Doug Nelson · #4 03-05-2007, 01:06 PM

I was more concerned about how it reorganized the faces around. Not sure that's something you'd want automated (if at all).

videosean · #5 03-05-2007, 02:44 PM

It's not completely automated... I tried the trial. Doesn't work so well if it's not a straight-on portrait and it's far from a one-click fix

Ant · #6 03-05-2007, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillFrey

Respectfully, Ant.

Your replies are often negative, but seldom give us advice on how to improve. Sharing your knowledge would benefit all of the members, especially those who are struggling to learn and 'do it the right way'.

I for one would love to learn how the professionals do retouching.

Bill

respectfully, how is this apt to the posting? I said only that the software didn't do anything for me, nor will it in the future. Might be nice for someone, but not the big picture. there is no 'right way' in PhotoShop when it comes to a lot of things - most especially retouching. However, in terms of retouching, there is always the end result looking "right".

EDIT: perhaps you should read more of my postings. I do give advice. If it isn't sugar coated, well, it's not. There is an enormous amount of that here and that is a major contributor to the lack of 'ways to improve'. Practice makes perfect, so does being objective of your own work. There are plenty of examples available to compare to.

BillFrey · #7 03-05-2007, 03:04 PM

oh well, I tried to be nice.

I really didn't expect you to change that easily. Keep on making fun of those of us who aren't pros and get your giggles.

Ant · #8 03-05-2007, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillFrey

oh well, I tried to be nice.

I really didn't expect you to change that easily. Keep on making fun of those of us who aren't pros and get your giggles.

sigh. you still didn't answer my question as to how your post was apt to what I posted or even the thread title or its contents. I'll take that and what you have just said as you being stumped for an answer and then trying to attack me. I don't make fun of people. If you have an issue with me, take it to pm.

mistermonday · #9 03-05-2007, 04:03 PM

Doug, I agree with you. It may be OK to blur the blemishes and smooth the skin, etc. However I feel it crosses the line when it warps the cranial bone structure and face. It may look more aesthetically appealing but it is not representative of the real person.
Regards, Murray

lilsip · #10 03-05-2007, 08:56 PM

There is something really weird about the way the faces change shape after the filter is applied. They look kinda doll-like and unnatural. The eyes get spaced apart and the whole face is sort of ballooned out slightly.

In fact, I liked most of the portraits better "before." But then, I prefer more natural-looking retouches. In particular, the first one I saw was a woman with, in my opinion, some nice character-y wrinkles in her face that should have stayed. In Katrin E's book, she mentions that you shouldn't take away tooo many wrinkles or it looks unnatural.

Why get your picture improved if it doesn't even look like you afterward?

Akarat · #11 03-19-2007, 04:52 AM

it's the best semi-auto retouching software that i've tried
but it's not enough for commercial use

Akarat

Cassidy · #12 03-19-2007, 09:26 AM

well Akarat, it takes you part way there

Greytata · #13 04-27-2007, 05:14 AM

I am a newbie at these foruns, but here's what I think about the software: I also agree that no one in the world do need their face changed in terms of morphological appearance, but when using the software, what I do is after the initial automated action, put all the "face" values to "0", just to get the original face. Afterwards, I can play around with the other settings, keeping in mind to preserve as much as possible the real appearance of the person in question and emphazise skin tones, etc. And we can obtain good results very fast. I am a no dedicated portrait photographer but I find the software useful, just when I need it to do things in a quick way. Cheers