Curls

[John 2]

Window Light and white card reflector.

Olympus OM2
70-150mm zoom



Reprocessed at Bobs suggestion.

[saea501]

You might consider smoothing out the blotchiness in her skin. Good picture otherwise.

[wmoore]

You might consider smoothing out the blotchiness in her skin. Good picture otherwise.

What's this obsession with smoothing out skin all the time. What is it with digital photography that everything has to be perfect all the time.

[John 2]

Thanks Bob. I have some tools and so I don't know why I didn't except that I'm not very adept at using them. Revised version added after PP with PhotoTools 2.6 pro.

[Manfred M]

You might also want to ask your subject to look straight ahead so that her eyes are more centred; this tends to give a more pleasing image too. If it were my shot, I probably would have cropped a lot of the right side of the image. Somehow heads that don't have enough space in front of the direction that they are pointing in seem a bit cramped and generally don't work as well compositionally as when one allows more "headroom" on that side of the image.

[Shadowman]

What's this obsession with smoothing out skin all the time. What is it with digital photography that everything has to be perfect all the time.

Warrick,

It all depends on what the mark appears like in print. I once had a friend suggest removing a person's mole, when in reality that mole is as much a part of the person's appearance as is skin tone. I on the other hand suggested removing someone tattoo in post-processing and got an ear full, the reason I thought the tattoo should be removed was it didn't fit in with the period piece the photographer was trying to convey. So editing choices for facial and skin characteristics are often subject to debate.

[Shadowman]

Nice conversion and image.

[chauncey]

What's this obsession with smoothing out skin all the time. What is it with digital photography that everything has to be perfect all the time.

Perhaps you might want to explain your goals as a photographer.
My goals happen to be making the subject as attractive as possible whether it be a flower or one
of my daughters. Think about it...when have you ever seen a documentary picture hanging on
someone's wall or in a hotel room...they generally hang pictures of pretty things.

[Manfred M]

Warrick,

It all depends on what the mark appears like in print. I once had a friend suggest removing a person's mole, when in reality that mole is as much a part of the person's appearance as is skin tone. I on the other hand suggested removing someone tattoo in post-processing and got an ear full, the reason I thought the tattoo should be removed was it didn't fit in with the period piece the photographer was trying to convey. So editing choices for facial and skin characteristics are often subject to debate.

John - you echo my experience. Moles and scars seem to be almost a "badge of honour" to some people and I never remove them in post without getting my subject's permission to do so. I've found that they are more sensitive to the ones on their face than elsewhere on the body. Even then, I might do some photographic "bleaching" to reduce their impact on the image; and frankly, I've never gotten any grief from doing so.

On the other hand, I have never run into any complaints when I remove acne, a stray hair or reduce the sheen on the face. The softening of wrinkles around the eyes, removing dark lines beneath the eyes or other stray "laugh lines" around the mouth have also generally not been something I have gotten into trouble about.

[Shadowman]

John - you echo my experience. Moles and scars seem to be almost a "badge of honour" to some people and I never remove them in post without getting my subject's permission to do so. I've found that they are more sensitive to the ones on their face than elsewhere on the body. Even then, I might do some photographic "bleaching" to reduce their impact on the image; and frankly, I've never gotten any grief from doing so.

On the other hand, I have never run into any complaints when I remove acne, a stray hair or reduce the sheen on the face. The softening of wrinkles around the eyes, removing dark lines beneath the eyes or other stray "laugh lines" around the mouth have also generally not been something I have gotten into trouble about.

I'm probably more critical of my appearance in a photograph than when looking in a mirror.

[chauncey]

Regardless...IMHO, the reprocessed version looks a ton better.

[John 2]

Thanks for the additional comments all. As to the debate, I have a simple view. I wholly agree with Dan. After all, if most people were not in favour of minimising or even hiding their blemishes, Max Factor and its contemporaries would be in a parlous state.

[Manfred M]

Thanks for the additional comments all. As to the debate, I have a simple view. I wholly agree with Dan. After all, if most people were not in favour of minimising or even hiding their blemishes, Max Factor and its contemporaries would be in a parlous state.

Strangely enough, I've had a similar discusion with other photographers and with a number of professional makeup artists.

Somehow people seem to be okay when pictures are taken of their faces, with makeup installed, but they get all uptight when the same effects are implemented in Photoshop. I know it's not rational, but that seems to be a fairly commonly held view.

[John 2]

I do very little portraiture so I don't have the experience but I would have thought that it depends on the subject. For most people, if they see a pleasing shot of themselves, they wouldn't be alerted to the sort of minor retouching that I eventually employed. They would just take it at face value (no pun intended). Professional models might be more sensitised to the minutiae of their looks. However, I don't know?

[Manfred M]

I do very little portraiture so I don't have the experience but I would have thought that it depends on the subject. For most people, if they see a pleasing shot of themselves, they wouldn't be alerted to the sort of minor retouching that I eventually employed. They would just take it at face value (no pun intended). Professional models might be more sensitised to the minutiae of their looks. However, I don't know?

As I don't shoot professional models, all my comments are based on comments from amateur subjects.

As mentioned before, people can be very sensitive regarding moles and scars. If I were to suggest a casual observation, women are more attached to their moles than men are and men seem to be more attached to their scars than women are; but this is certainly not the case 100% of the time.

Depends on the person, I suspect.

[yogirajj]

What's this obsession with smoothing out skin all the time. What is it with digital photography that everything has to be perfect all the time.

I've been asking that same question for years. But the bottom line is, it's about the viewer's perception; regardless if the advice is warranted or not. Personally, when I saw this picture, I thought 80's, and the 80's style, and mindsets. Any of us that has lived through the 80's know that acne and discolored skin was something that was quite common. Personally, I think that the imperfect skin made the shot just as beautiful, simply because it showed her as she really is. It's nice to have tools to correct, but let's not forget that a photo is also supposed to tell a story.

Yogi