Make sure you click on the image to see it full size.
Here is a shot I grabbed quickly tonight at home (in front of a hanging un-ironed sheet). This is about as far as I like to go with skin smoothing. One should never reveal the age of a lady, but let's just say she said goodbye to her 30s some time ago. My goal is to achieve nice smooth skin without looking too blurred or fake. This particular subject did have very nice skin anyway. It should be also noted that the original full sized image looks a look sharper and more detailed than this resampled jpeg.
Best regards,Brian.
Great shot and a GREAT FACE!!!
Thanks David!
That is a colleague/friend of my friend Lea. They stopped by on their way to their work Christmas Party. I grabbed a few shots of the 2 of them, some together and some individually. They were talking to one another non-stop (probably excited about the party), so I had to time the shots while the opportunities arose, lol. In that particular shot, as in a couple of others, I suddenly said "Hey Imelda!" and took the shot as she turned around. Some of the other shots were more posed.
Brian said:In that particular shot, as in a couple of others, I suddenly said "Hey Imelda!" and took the shot as she turned around.
Brian,
Once again you have demonstrated your superb control over skin texture!
I do have a query about the expression though. I may well be barking up the wrong tree here, so please do not be offended.
It struck me that there was something a tiny bit strained about Imelda's expression, as if she had been putting on a smile to please you rather than because she felt genuine mirth. I think this is because the eyes and the mouth do not quite match : the mouth is smiling more than the eyes.
I know there is great variation between people in the eye/ mouth correspondence. I once took a photo of a little girl who really hated to be photographed. She almost would not pose for me, and kept hiding behind her father. Then suddenly she put on a very big smile, but kept her eyes ferociously serious. Her parents were thrilled with the photo (the only one I had been able to take - apparently one more than several other photographers had achieved !). I pointed out that the expression denoted fury and resentment, rather than the cheekiness which they had said they wanted, but they insisted the expression was characteristic, and so we went with it.
Anyway I tried to vary the eyes in your picture in an attempt to work out whether this mismatch (as it seemd to me) really was an important factor. I am sure you could make a much better job of this manipulation. I only did it roughly just to give the general effect.
Anyway, here are the three versions (the first being a copy of the photo you posted). You probably need to click on the image to get all three to show up. Which smile looks the most natural?
Gareth said: In that particular shot, as in a couple of others, I suddenly said "Hey Imelda!" and took the shot as she turned around. Brian, Once again you have demonstrated your superb control over skin texture! I do have a query about the expression though. I may well be barking up the wrong tree here, so please do not be offended. It struck me that there was something a tiny bit strained about Imelda's expression, as if she had been putting on a smile to please you rather than because she felt genuine mirth. I think this is because the eyes and the mouth do not quite match : the mouth is smiling more than the eyes. I know there is great variation between people in the eye/ mouth correspondence. I once took a photo of a little girl who really hated to be photographed. She almost would not pose for me, and kept hiding behind her father. Then suddenly she put on a very big smile, but kept her eyes ferociously serious. Her parents were thrilled with the photo (the only one I had been able to take - apparently one more than several other photographers had achieved !). I pointed out that the expression denoted fury and resentment, rather than the cheekiness which they had said they wanted, but they insisted the expression was characteristic, and so we went with it. Anyway I tried to vary the eyes in your picture in an attempt to work out whether this mismatch (as it seemd to me) really was an important factor. I am sure you could make a much better job of this manipulation. I only did it roughly just to give the general effect. Anyway, here are the three versions (the first being a copy of the photo you posted). You probably need to click on the image to get all three to show up. Which smile looks the most natural? [/quote] Hi Gareth, thanks for the compliment regarding skin texture and also for your observant comments regarding Imelda's facial expression. First off, I prefer the middle image of the 3 you posted. As far as the original image goes - I think the eyes not matching the mouth expression is the result of one of 2 things. I noticed in the posed shots that Imelda opens her eyes a little too wide, trying to make her eyes look larger (I would guess). I have photographed several friends who do this in all of their photographs, regardless of who is taking the shot. Even though it was a 'grab shot' in this instance after calling her name, Imelda most likely knew what I was doing and so still did the eye thing. Alternatively, she was a little nervous (I do not know Imelda at all, she is a friend of a friend) and this showed a little in other shots too. She arrived late to pick up my friend and go to the party and beeped her horn to say "come on, let's go". My friend dragged her inside and asked her to have some shots taken quickly. The original plan had been for them to have a few shots taken before going to the party. The whole thing was quite a rush. It is always great to read your comments, Gareth, you generally look a little deeper into things than most. I guess this is a result of being an artist and a great one at that. Best regards,Brian.
In that particular shot, as in a couple of others, I suddenly said "Hey Imelda!" and took the shot as she turned around.
Hi Gareth,
thanks for the compliment regarding skin texture and also for your observant comments regarding Imelda's facial expression. First off, I prefer the middle image of the 3 you posted. As far as the original image goes - I think the eyes not matching the mouth expression is the result of one of 2 things. I noticed in the posed shots that Imelda opens her eyes a little too wide, trying to make her eyes look larger (I would guess). I have photographed several friends who do this in all of their photographs, regardless of who is taking the shot. Even though it was a 'grab shot' in this instance after calling her name, Imelda most likely knew what I was doing and so still did the eye thing. Alternatively, she was a little nervous (I do not know Imelda at all, she is a friend of a friend) and this showed a little in other shots too. She arrived late to pick up my friend and go to the party and beeped her horn to say "come on, let's go". My friend dragged her inside and asked her to have some shots taken quickly. The original plan had been for them to have a few shots taken before going to the party. The whole thing was quite a rush.
It is always great to read your comments, Gareth, you generally look a little deeper into things than most. I guess this is a result of being an artist and a great one at that.
Many thanks for your very kind remarks!
Thanks too for your more detailed explanation of how the sitting went.
Brian said:...Imelda opens her eyes a little too wide, trying to make her eyes look larger (I would guess).
Many women try to make their eyes look larger, and some can keep it up for hours, "like a cow looking at a passing train" was how the portrait-painter, Sargent, described it. Often I find the best shots come early in a sitting, before the sitter has remembered her mission to keep her eyes open!
I greatly admire photographers like Terry O'Neil and David Bailey who, with a combination of charm and rudeness (depending on the sitter), are able to provoke a reponse which is totally unselfconsious. Very few, even amongst the big names, are able to do this consistently in my opinion. I would love to have that talent, and try my best in my own way. If that fails I fall back on explaining what is so wrong with that "passing train" look. Far and away the best book on expression I have come across is Gary Faigin's, and I sometimes use pictures from that to explain. However it is much better to get the effect with a little light flirtatiousness - if you can do it !
http://www.garyfaigin.com/book.html
One option, which seems at first sight to be the obvious one, would be to search through all the photos in a sitting and choose the best two. One with a perfect expression, but perhaps defective in pose and lighting, and the other perfectly lit and posed but with a defective expression. Then manipulate the well posed one to make its eyes and mouth resemble the one with the best expression. I have so far found this to be impossible, except in cases where the differences have been very small.
Brian said: Brian,
I've been playing around uisnd a combination od Paintshop Pro and Photo-PAINT X5 and now can't live without both. Now that i have a granddaughter and get phone images and all others having both works well. Th hue map is great in PSP but i stil need PP.
thanks for the link to the book on facial expressions and for your comments regarding 'getting the most out of the sitter'. I don't mind having a joke with, or lightly flirting with a subject if it helps to relax them and get a more natural look. It is what I usually do, although it is a little more tricky in a rushed situation. I also find paying honest compliments helps a lot too. It is definitely all about making a person feel relaxed. I noticed that in the shots where both Imelda and Lea posed together - Imelda was far more relaxed and her expressions were completely natural.
If time allows what I usually like to do is sit and chat with someone for a few minutes before even starting to take shots. I then continue that conversation right up until the moment of taking the first shot, and even in between shots at times. Leaving the subject smiling about something I just said is a great lead up to the first shot.
David Milisock said: Brian,
Hi David,
what are the main features you like to use in PSP which you prefer over, or don't find in PP? I have looked at each trial version of PSP in the last 5 years or so and it always seems to be packed with new features. A lot more than PP, sadly. However, I always end up just sticking with PP as I much prefer the layout, the speed at which I can do things and the more logical placement of features. I didn't like the layer palette in PSP (3 separate componentsfor one layer is such a space-waster compared to a single layer in PP or PS which still shows a thumbnail, title and clip mask icon). I also found the menu items less intuitive:there are 3 menu items which are normally covered by only 2 in other programs. I also found the controls in dialog boxes to be fiddly and the dialog box previews to be small and hard to use. For example, from memory, if you want to use an eyedropper to take a reading in say the Levels diaog - you cannot click on the image on the page to do so! You have to click on the relatively small preview window image and this is unacceptable for me. I also found if you select 'preview on image' (instead of only getting a small preview in the before and after window) the program was relatively slow. Having said all that PSP did have some great features such as a proper full screen Mesh Warp, a really good noise removal tool, lens correction tools, a proper healing brush and several others.
I guess it will vary from one person to the next. For what I need to do - I correct colour/brightness/contrast, manipulate body shapes (digital weight loss or relocation), smooth skin, add special effects from time to time, separate a subject from its background to then change the background, etc. I find PP is very fast to get the job done. I have found nothing better than PP's Cutout Lab for separating a subject from its bacground. PS's new masking tools are good, but not as good in most cases (even though they are very fast to use at times) and PSP's similar tool was not as accurate or featured when I tested it on the latest trial of the program. The tool that removes unwanted elements from an image was nowhere near as accurate as Alien Skin's Image Doctor plugin or PS's Content Aware Fill. Also, I find PP's tone curve tool to be fantastic and better than the competition.
What is the Hue Map feature you mentioned? I don't remember seeing that one.
Brian said:What is the Hue Map feature you mentioned?
I was intrigued by that reference of David's too! I found this tutorial:
http://www.designertoday.com/Tutorials/Paint.Shop.Pro/911/Individual.Color.Adjustments.Corel.Paint.Shop.Pro.7.Tutorial.aspx
It looks interesting but I do not think there is anything I really need it for myself. However, you never know...