PS beyond a normal edit

[armando_m]

a fun thing to do  but certainly beyond what I would consider a normal edit
SOOC on the left, Edited on the right

liquify to change the face profile , narrow the nose, lower the eyebrows
clone the eyebrows to make them look thicker, remove the bra thing
dodge and burn forehead, bridge of the nose, chin
heal a number of blemishes on the skin
played with levels to change the skin tone
blur the background
something wrong happened on the blouse ... but I did not save the PS file , seems like blurr and something else

[tommiejeep]

Armando, that PP is beyond my pay grade  .  I like the blurred BG and overall I prefer the second but not being there I really have no idea about the skin tone.   These are a bit small to find all of the blemishes that you corrected/ air brushed  .  When I shoot my wife and her friends I turn the images over to her for final PP !

I tried something similar some days back when a female Cabinet Minister inaugurated a new business venture.    My wife and I covered the event but I just used a selective Glamour Glow and soft focus .  Took some year off  .  I'm not sure she liked it, no direct feedback, but it did appear in a couple of other places .
Cheers,
Tom

[elsa hoffmann]

I am no stranger to PS  and have absolutely no problem using it to its full extend - so my comment is not criticism - its a question.

what is your thought process when you do edits like this - when do you decide to go further than editing and do manipulation (liquify etc)
I find I am more conservative when I work for a client - but when shooting for myself - I go crazy sometimes.

Its like Tommie says - sometimes you don't get direct feedback (often actually) and that would actually be very useful.

I also would have liked to see the image bigger.

[Frank Fremerey]

I feel this is a paint job more than a photo. I see that all the time in advertisement. I do not like it.

I feel I am a photographer not a graphics person. So my ideal is to solve a given task photographically.

Light can make a dramatic chance on the appearence of skin and -- hey -- people look the way they look don't they?

If you take people, liquify them and feed them into other people this is called the "MATRIX Machine" world, isn't it?

[Mike G]

Sorry Armando I'm with Elsa(hello again Elsa) and Frank on this one in that the second image is not reality!

Depends of course what the purpose of the photo is commercial or personal!

[elsa hoffmann]

noooo I dont have a problem with the editing - not at all - I was just asking what his thought process entailed
hello Mikey

[armando_m]

This image is from a raw editing contest I'm participating in a different forum,
I have done my fair share of images that I do not like, and if this was mine I wouldn't be happy with it,
and sometimes I have to give the image  to the person I shot because they request for the image.
In this case I do not have to deliver the image to anyone.

I'm sharing it here because I'm amazed on how a few touches in PS transformed the face of the girl ,
what caused me to try this, it's probably my inability to make her look good by just correcting the skin.
My concept of look good is mine and some will certainly disagree.

I'll have to say, it was way easier to transform her without worrying about keeping the look true to the original image.

[ColinM]

I'm sharing it here because I'm amazed on how a few touches in PS transformed the face of the girl ,

I'll have to say, it was way easier to transform her without worrying about keeping the look true to the original image.

So the tools in PS have been tailored for certain "socially accepted" expectations?
Out of interest, would you mind showing us one or two examples of how they work:

• On a picture of a Man's face? Preferrably full of piercings and facial hair!!
• On the face of an animal

I'm just curious

[armando_m]

Colin,

Thanks for commenting

the tools are there , and can be used as each users prefers to do so

I have no other examples where I have used liquify on anyone else's face

[arthurking83]

I have to admit I prefer the 1st over the 2nd .. and not just because of the described edit processes.
The only issue with #1 is the magenta cast of the overall image .. not just the skin tones.

I think my issue with #2 is more to do with the level of contrast on her face, in conditions which seem to lack any contrast at all(it looks overall very cloudy/overcast).
in #1, the difference in levels from bright to dark looks overall flat(nice) and in #2 there appear hotspots as highlights(chin and cheeks) which while not blown out .. still appear out of kilter with the rest of the image.

If you remove the magenta cast in #1, I think would be a more even comparison to begin with.

[elsa hoffmann]

Armando - I get that you mean - and I agree.  Artistic license means that you have a free hand. Why not use it if the situation arises.

"My concept of look good is mine"

- exactly