Post disappeared intae the ether. Lazarus not working either; can't be bothered rewriting the whole post...sorry![]()
Last edited by tao2; 17th October 2014 at 01:02 AM.
I think James did exactly what he was asked. Not James's fault that some kilt wearing gentleman with a strange dialect prefers the harsh lined freckled version....
She looks pretty good in either photo but it was interesting to know how long a less than 10 minute photoshop job takes to do using the old manual method.
This is one reason that most portrait photographers of the analog age would shy away from formats smaller than 4x5 inch and actually preferred larger formats for ease of hand retouching...
Hi L.Paul
Ah did edit that post tae say that ah understood why it was retouched; if it was in the context of a billboard or front of house, cinema photo enlargement - but that , IMO the original was still better. Opinions, they're still OK?Sadly... publicists, like many photographers, don't want folk tae see what's there, rather, an illusion - who's gonna pay for warts an' all?
PS Accents, dialects, kilts ?
Ah use an accent here, ye widnae unnerstan' meh dialect, so eh temper it tae suit a cosmopolitan membership.
As for kilts, ah have 3. Tae me, that's an embarrassment of richesses, not an overabundance.![]()
Prefer the real one