![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Llama
|
We've all had this experience: photographing models whose skin is less than perfect (as in, most of us).
How do you minimize the effect of bad skin with your lighting? Is it purely a software issue with you now? Soft filters? Frankly, I see value in using the "less sharp" lenses and cameras in the studio to give me a head start here. __________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register your free account today and become a member on PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photo Forum, gaining access to posting privileges, contests, free plug-ins and other downloads, unlimited online storage for your photographs, reviews, free marketplace listings, and much more. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guanaco
|
Can't you just dial back in-camera sharpness and/or avoid sharpening in post? Don't some folks like to put vaseline on their lens? My dentist has a microscope and my 5 o'clock shadow looks absolutely disgusting on that thing :-\
|
|
__________________
Oregon, USA<br />Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Dromedary
|
Quote:
I find if I use a soft filter then I loose that sharpness in the eyes that makes them pop. |
|
|
__________________
http://www.photosbymorgan2.com -Canon 1DS Mark II, Canon 1D Mark II, Lenses, studio equipment and many antique cameras |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Bactrian
|
Placing a softbox very nearby helps if you don't want to go the PS road.
Most of the time however I do a bit of PS work and some creative sharpening to get the eyes, clothing and hair sharp and the face not. The best way is to find a way that suits your style and learn to use it as second nature, make some actions for example. Some people use neatimage on the skins, it seems to work good for some people. Greetings, Frank |
|
__________________
www.frankdoorhof.com http://shop.itccomp.nl/doorhof for DVDs www.twitter.com/frankdoorhof |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Vicuna
|
The very best way to fix bad skin is to have an excellent make-up person. They are worth their weight in gold - if your client can afford it use one.
Cheers |
|
__________________
Mark Thomas www.markthomas.co.za "Judge art not by what others say, but how it makes you feel" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Bactrian
|
Without a good makeup artist a shoot is a no go for me to be honest.
Sorry, never thought to mention that :-\ |
|
__________________
www.frankdoorhof.com http://shop.itccomp.nl/doorhof for DVDs www.twitter.com/frankdoorhof |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Bactrian
|
Most of the time the skinsoften filters make the picture look unnatural, many spots (?)
You can use the blurring technique best and use a clone tool with a high opacity to clear away bad area's. |
|
__________________
www.frankdoorhof.com http://shop.itccomp.nl/doorhof for DVDs www.twitter.com/frankdoorhof |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Vicuna
|
While I agree that if the subjects skin is really bad only a great makeup artist and perhaps a little retouching will help, but there is a lighting technique that can help enormously with both bad skin, and aging. It's called beauty lighting or "butterfly" lighting. It involves a rather large chimera or soft box placed in front of and above the subjects face so the light fall flat on the subject rather than from the sides, and a strip light below the subject and about one stop less power than the top light.
Remember, the only reason we see lines, bumps, and three dimensional objects is because shadow accentuates them. If the light is even, and diffused, irregularities in the skin will not be as visible. If you overexpose the shot just enough you can clean up the skin quite well. You don't want to over-expose so much that you lose detail, but just enough that you lose any unwanted detail. Makeup can take you the rest of the way. This is a technique that I and others have used for lighting actors, and television personalities that need a little help. I will dig up a picture to illustrate soon. Please forgive the long message. |
|
__________________
Lorenzo Bevilaqua http://www.lorenzobevilaqua.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/lorenzobevilaqua |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Vicuna
|
The woman in this shot has fairly good skin to start with, but the lighting helped to smooth away wrinkles, and de-emphasize any problems. I will try to find more examples.
|
|
__________________
Lorenzo Bevilaqua http://www.lorenzobevilaqua.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/lorenzobevilaqua |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Alpaca
|
Quote:
a) At the time of shooting, making sure the light is "soft" and is "de-emphasising" blemishes rather than emphasizing them. I do not make use of the "classical" methods like soft filters & "less sharp" lenses anymore because the same effects can be more effecitvely achieved in the "digital" darkroom. I prefer to start with "as much" as possible (in this case, skin details - good and bad ones) so that I am in control what will show up on the final picture or not. b) In Photoshop, I emoving blemishes (wrinkles, pimples, hair etc.) with the "patch tool". I always work with "snapshots" so that I can compare the "before" and "after" results. It's very easy to loose track and correct too much. I find it extremly important that the removal of skin blemishes does not change the "character" of the face; certain features (lines, spots) are defining elements of a face and should not be removed. For more extreme corrections ("glamour look"), I selectively apply "Noise Ninja". I am a vigurous opponent of "canned" softening actions and smiilar; they typically distroy much too much detail and result in a very artifical "rubber duck" look. I have tried many techniques. My conclusion is that there is no way around using the "patch tool" to treat face / picture individually. "Good" skin fixes are very subtle. Nowadays, "canned" skin fix solutions come with every software and can even be downloaded for free on the Internet. Everybody can apply such actions, but not everybody can apply subtle but effective retouches that "enhance" a shot (versus "changing" it). Kind regards, Andy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Vicuna
|
Alice, I am veeeery new to this but I will tell you what I have used with mixed results.
In Photoshop..... 1: I select a portion of skin (say the legs) using the magic wand* 2: hit ctrl j for a new layer 3: Apply a 5.0 Gaussian Blur 4: In Layers I reduce the opacity of the blur layer until it looks good (usually down to between 30 & 50%) 5: Blend both layers I have found that it isn't necessary to be too exact with the wand selection and you can experiment until you get as close as possible to the desired effect. The purists out there might cringe at this method but for web quality shots it has helped me reduce the flaws in the skin. You have to be careful thought as if it is overdone the skin looks too false. __________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register your free account today and become a member on PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photo Forum, gaining access to posting privileges, contests, free plug-ins and other downloads, unlimited online storage for your photographs, reviews, free marketplace listings, and much more. |
|
__________________
Everyone has a photographic memory, some just don't have film.<br />Auckland, New Zealand. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| « » |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Need your help on skin tone | felix.reichardt | Portraits / People | 9 | 11-16-2006 09:06 AM |
| The Skin of a Strawberry | Waleed | Macro and Close-up Photography | 3 | 08-05-2006 03:00 AM |
| Skin tones from S3 | Ken Price | Fuji Forum | 20 | 07-07-2006 02:29 PM |