Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Retouching  (Read 7580 times)
Gary Ferguson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


WWW
« on: December 14, 2007, 08:11:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Some great examples of commercial digital retouching (courtesy of The Online Photographer for discovering this site)

http://www.retouchshoppe.com/
Logged
Anthony R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 251


« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2007, 08:54:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Can't say that I'm particularly impressed. Advanced amateur at best.

Quote
Some great examples of commercial digital retouching (courtesy of The Online Photographer for discovering this site)

http://www.retouchshoppe.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160643\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2007, 02:15:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Can't say that I'm particularly impressed. Advanced amateur at best.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160653\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Then show us good or even a couple or B4/Afters on your work

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Anthony R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 251


« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2007, 02:42:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's a real retoucher: http://christarantino.com/
« Last Edit: January 24, 2008, 07:02:24 PM by Anthony R » Logged
Fred Ragland
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2007, 03:13:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Enjoyed your website Anthony and references to Chris Tarantino.  She's at the top of her game.

Fred
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2007, 12:02:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You could check my website,

Here's a real retoucher: http://christarantino.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160710\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wasnt disagreeing (sorry I think it sounded* like it) - just interessted in better sites

And I have checked your site

More URLs to hunt appreciated

SMM


*If text can sound like anything
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Boris_Epix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2007, 09:59:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Anthony,

and I can't say I'm impressed with your work. It's amateur level at best too. Why are you giving the girl such a hard time?

Let's check out some of your work:

Firstly your webpage doesn't fit onto a standard XGA (1024x768 pixels) resolution display. The title reads UNTITLED DOCUMENT. Maybe that's part of the reason why your webpage is not even showing up in the first 100 matches when specifically searching for "anthony rhoades photographer". Maybe having meta-tags would help as well. Then frames suck and scrolling on a XGA notebook to see the entire pics just because you wasted too much space for your header is not optimal as well. Anyway, the webpage is not winning any prices... so let's check out your pics and retouching.


Your eye retouching is really terrible here. The eyes look completely unnatural, overwhite and the contour of the iris is blurred because you're obviously "amateur level at best" with the clone stamp tool.

Then the caruncula lacrimalis (pink body seen in the corner of the human eye) looks really strange too. The single spot on her cheek looks out of place as well on such a smooth picture. And look at the contour of the lip. Specially under the lower lip... awful. And btw the shooting perspective highlights particularly well that her teeth are not perfect. A shot from the other side seems to have worked much better on her teeth.



I guess I have a hard time to understand pics like these as well:
I thought photographers should take pictures of people to make them look better. Not scared and weird. Kudos for the hairstyling but I guess you didn't do that yourself.



WHAT IS THIS??? Maybe you should play again with blending effects and try to get a more uniform coverage of noise. The noise is about 5 times as bad on the subject than on the background. And very unattractive noise too. It looks like you're trying to show how bad your camera is :-)


I have no idea what that is supposed to be. Blotchy and posterization in shadow tones together with NO subject, bad cropping, no message/story, burned highlights and deepdiving blacks.


And that is NOT EVEN amateur level:


These have been all from your Portfolio 1 section. I won't comment the other portfolios as I'm not seing one professional and good picture there.

I really wonder how you got on that high horse.

Let's be friendly and let's be respectful for our fellow colleagues regardless at what level they currently shoot or retouch.

Just for the record: I don't even know the retoucher you called amateur level and I have a couple 30 inch screens (where your webpage works even less well). But some of the work she does shows her dedication and she's going to develop her skills over time. If she's earning 30 $ per image then that is maybe a lot for certain customers and at the same time VERY little to others. She will sure also raise her rate when she gets better clients (photogs) with better customers.

For you to make jokes about her rate is a bit childish... specially if your own rate is a low 60$ per hour. I earned more than double your rate over 10 years ago already.

Live and let live

Cheers
Boris



Quote
ok, when I get back to my office. You could check my website, Portfolio I, if you were so inclined. No befores however. I've taken my retouching site down as I couldn't handle another client and do more shooting than touching anymore.

The person involved with the website posted is what we call 'mid level'. Most photographers with a decent understanding of PS and a good eye can get where he/she is going. Here is a post from another forum by the owner of the website, note the date and rate (I make double that an hour retouching, not per image)
<SNIP>
Here's a real retoucher: http://christarantino.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160710\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
geotzo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2007, 11:04:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I can only agree with you Boris. For some people it is just so easy to make bad coments on other photographers efforts. No one became an expert on anything overnight and comments on forums like this should be towards helping each other rather than comenting in such way. It doesn't matter whose work is better Anthony, but you should realise you have taken this all wrong here.
George
Logged
Mike Boden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2007, 11:40:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Alright, mudslinging aside, I really enjoyed looking at Chris Tarantino's website. Although I'm primarily a landscape photographer, I've dabbled in a fair share of retouching for personal work, none of which you'll see on my website which only showcases my landscapes. Anyways, what I want to know, is how does one get to the next level? Anthony states, "Most photographers with a decent understanding of PS and a good eye can get where he/she is going." If there's any truth to this statement, which I'd like to think that that's where I'm at, then how do I go beyond this? What am I missing or not understanding or unskilled at that is holding me back from taking images to Tarantino's level?

I have a multitude of books and have read more than enough tutorials online until I'm bug-eyed. I guess what I want to know is if there is anything I'm unaware of outside of books and online tutorials. If not, then does it simply take years of practice and refinement to step up to the next level?
Logged

Shedaoshai
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57



WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2007, 12:25:55 PM »
ReplyReply

amateur level, pro level and so on ... who cares?
at last the biggest pros are who are making the most bucks$! and not the one who makes the softes skin with natural pores and that stuff. Nobody pays you 2 weeks of top notch retouching unless it's for e.g. wellas main campaign.  

Retouching isn't such a big deal of talent, it's more about how many time your client is going to invest into making the picture better. Look into the magazines or  main print ads, they're never flawless!
Logged
Anthony R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 251


« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2007, 01:35:40 PM »
ReplyReply

LOL to all, and most especially Boris. When I have more time I will respond. Good chuckle so far though.
Logged
david o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310



WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2007, 05:26:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
LOL to all, and most especially Boris. When I have more time I will respond. Good chuckle so far though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I think you've been a little rude with the guy...
Tarantino is great but what was it for starting...

And, I am sure it's true for a lot of phot. around, it takes time and work to improve... Dig into your archive and you'll find that your first shot were not as good as you would ask yourself now.

 
Logged
geotzo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2007, 05:59:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Alright, mudslinging aside, I really enjoyed looking at Chris Tarantino's website. Although I'm primarily a landscape photographer, I've dabbled in a fair share of retouching for personal work, none of which you'll see on my website which only showcases my landscapes. Anyways, what I want to know, is how does one get to the next level? Anthony states, "Most photographers with a decent understanding of PS and a good eye can get where he/she is going." If there's any truth to this statement, which I'd like to think that that's where I'm at, then how do I go beyond this? What am I missing or not understanding or unskilled at that is holding me back from taking images to Tarantino's level?

I have a multitude of books and have read more than enough tutorials online until I'm bug-eyed. I guess what I want to know is if there is anything I'm unaware of outside of books and online tutorials. If not, then does it simply take years of practice and refinement to step up to the next level?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160865\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well i think you ve got this right. Being a photographer and a photoshop tutor I have been asking myself the same questions (and my students me). Apart from some books and tutorials it doesn't seem to be anything else. I believe the best answer is "Practice makes perfect". There is also personal talent involved, because knowing photoshop well is not enough. I believe I know photoshop to a very good level, but then a couple of my students have come up with some brilliant retouched images that I was partly jelous of. Not that they used some tools I didn't know, but how creative the had been with them tools. I mean being technically perfect with the mechanisms of photography doesn't make you a good photographer. Aesthetics is the toughest deal for me. Back to photoshop if you keep trying, practicing, attending some good seminars and presentations, experimenting with different aproaches to what you try to achive with photoshop tools, I very confident you will get to your personal style and technique. There is no single way to get good resaults on what you do in photoshop.
Regards,
George
Logged
geotzo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2007, 02:21:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Take a look at this site and tell me your thoughts:
http://www.taylorjames.com
Logged
MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 744



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2013, 10:27:09 AM »
ReplyReply

i was about to post the taylor james site but somebody beat me too it.
can't say the OP is a good example of top quality retouching, theres loads better work out there, i dont mean just the advanced comps/cgi of taylor james either, i thought the beauty stuff was OTT and a bit crude IMHO, sorry if that offends anyone but there must be better sites out there worth posting up
« Last Edit: September 25, 2013, 10:33:00 AM by MrSmith » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 994


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2013, 06:19:17 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't think the op's retoucher was bad, just standard fare on what goes on today.

In regards to Taylor James they are excellent problem solvers but much of their cgi work looks like animation and if you like animation that's great but . . .

If you get a chance check out Asylum in LA     http://www.asylumfx.com/index/strip/commercials/recent    well . . . actually were in LA cause they closed their doors with 36 projects
in house because the couldn't complete on the numbers with other emerging countries. 

Shame man, cause those guys are great, check out the commercials section and play the Porsche commercial, then look at the making of and you'll see cgi and wireframe that looks real.

IMO

BC
Logged

tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 674


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2013, 07:54:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Good retouching is seamless, and not obvious - there are some supernatural situations that obviously shows that they have been modified, but again the modification is smooth and seamless.

Not everybody can do retouching, just because you have a copy of photoshop - does not make you are retouching - neither does having a camera make you a professional photographer.

Like any craft - you need to practice, and its best to practice with the best, those who set the new standard

Henrik

PS: I am still learning
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 774


« Reply #17 on: October 31, 2013, 07:10:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Reminder that this thread is six years old.  A lot of retouching has been done in that time.
Logged

Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1083


« Reply #18 on: November 26, 2013, 10:28:42 PM »
ReplyReply

funny thread...Love the LKaven time check...hehe
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2508


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #19 on: November 27, 2013, 12:07:46 AM »
ReplyReply

funny thread...Love the LKaven time check...hehe

Look at reply #14 and do time cross check with #13.
This already dead thread got un-digged from its grave by someone trying to promote himself as a retouching service.
Its just a spam artifact coming to live again.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad