Emerson Head Shot

Appreciate comments on the following.

First photo is where I started. 2nd is my retouch. First time retouching a portrait without PP10. Love to hear comments on the PS work, as well as anything else. Thanks!

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Looks really nice on my phone, gives it a nice punch that doesn't look overcooked.

On my screen, calibrated, it looks over cooked and her eyes seem over sharp...

tmoore323 wrote in post #15873400
On my screen, calibrated, it looks over cooked and her eyes seem over sharp...

Thank you. I can see point about the eyes. When you say "overcooked" can you be more specific?

mattograph wrote in post #15873244
Appreciate comments on the following.

First photo is where I started. 2nd is my retouch. First time retouching a portrait without PP10. Love to hear comments on the PS work, as well as anything else. Thanks!

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

The first photo is a very nice image ripe for retouching. So good job on getting a good "blank canvas" as it were. Soft light (good sized light source), nice shallow DOF, etc...her expression is questionable but I'm guessing you're interested more in the technical aspects right now.

It appears you changed the shape of her face. Her right jawline shows telltale signs of the liquify tool. I really don't think she needed any reshaping. I might have pinched in on the bridge of her nose a bit but that's it. She has a nice face shape.

Increasing contrast invariably accentuates facial blemishes and wrinkles. Even on a photo that small I can see a fair level of blotchiness, especially on her chin. How are you retouching? I would look into a technique called "frequency separation" - discovering that was the key for me to be able to conquer macro-lumpiness and blotchiness. As a trick, put a B&W adjustment layer on, and pull the red slider way down. It should make the lumps, blotches, and blemishes stick out like crazy.

I think you may have taken a bit too much red out of her skin. Combined with the darkening of the irises, it makes her look more like vampire and less like a beauty model.

joe

charro callado wrote in post #15873752
The first photo is a very nice image ripe for retouching. So good job on getting a good "blank canvas" as it were. Soft light (good sized light source), nice shallow DOF, etc...her expression is questionable but I'm guessing you're interested more in the technical aspects right now.

It appears you changed the shape of her face. Her right jawline shows telltale signs of the liquify tool. I really don't think she needed any reshaping. I might have pinched in on the bridge of her nose a bit but that's it. She has a nice face shape.

Increasing contrast invariably accentuates facial blemishes and wrinkles. Even on a photo that small I can see a fair level of blotchiness, especially on her chin. How are you retouching? I would look into a technique called "frequency separation" - discovering that was the key for me to be able to conquer macro-lumpiness and blotchiness. As a trick, put a B&W adjustment layer on, and pull the red slider way down. It should make the lumps, blotches, and blemishes stick out like crazy.

I think you may have taken a bit too much red out of her skin. Combined with the darkening of the irises, it makes her look more like vampire and less like a beauty model.

joe

Wow. Spot on brother. Its like you were looking over my shoulder.

I did push her jawline. First time I ever tried it. Too much I suppose.

I am using joel grimse technique. First time I have tried it. I going to head back to the file and give it another go.

Thank you so much for all the input.

mattograph wrote in post #15873903
Wow. Spot on brother. Its like you were looking over my shoulder.

I did push her jawline. First time I ever tried it. Too much I suppose.

I am using joel grimse technique. First time I have tried it. I going to head back to the file and give it another go.

Thank you so much for all the input.

No offense to Joel Grimes, but he's not really known for his retouching. I'm sure he's decent but his techniques are probably very suited to his overall photographic style - dramatic, 3-D-ish, intense, etc. If that style speaks to you then he's definitely a good role model. But realize that when you're working with professional models with pristine complexion and great makeup jobs you can get away with a lot more in photoshop. It's not going to translate to "normal" people.

Retouching is all a function of time. There's no silver bullet. PP and Portraiture can do OK but I can pretty much always tell when they've been used because they are so heavy-handed - there's no precision. In the end you just have to figure out how much time you want to spend on an image.

charro callado wrote in post #15873960
No offense to Joel Grimes, but he's not really known for his retouching. I'm sure he's decent but his techniques are probably very suited to his overall photographic style - dramatic, 3-D-ish, intense, etc. If that style speaks to you then he's definitely a good role model. But realize that when you're working with professional models with pristine complexion and great makeup jobs you can get away with a lot more in photoshop. It's not going to translate to "normal" people.

Retouching is all a function of time. There's no silver bullet. PP and Portraiture can do OK but I can pretty much always tell when they've been used because they are so heavy-handed - there's no precision. In the end you just have to figure out how much time you want to spend on an image.

With that in mind, going to run back through the process and tone down some of his more drastic moves. See where it leaves me. Stay tuned......

mattograph wrote in post #15873445
Thank you. I can see point about the eyes. When you say "overcooked" can you be more specific?

Overcooked means you over processed it, but I see your on the right track now

Lighting seems flat and as beautiful as she is; she's not among the 10% who look good straight-on vs. slightly angled.

The edit has washed the color out of her skin and hair in an attempt to add lighting that should have been there to start with. I'm not among those who know how to fix that after the fact apart from some very subtle punch but I find taking a WB shot in the same lighting helps. It avoids destroying natural color when it's a little over-tweaked since you can at least apply the same edits to the WB shot and adjust color.