eye pop

[jconti3]

Can someone explain to me how to achieve the "eye pop" look using Gimp? It seems that a lot of portrait photos have an almost fake or alien eye look. Sometimes when it's just on the border of over done it has a cool effect. Anyone?

[Donald]

John

I'm not a portrait shooter. The general concept of making eyes 'pop' as you say, is probably best left to someone on here who does know about shooting portraits.

But, so far as achieving your objective with the GIMP is concerned, can you tell us what you think your skill level with it is? Are you familiar, for example, with layer masks and the 'Free Select' tool. Because I think what you're talking about is isolating the eyes and applying processing steps to them separately from the rest of your image; e.g. the skin.

If you are a relatively new user of the GIMP and are wondering how on earth to find out about using it, the best source that I found is the series of video tutorials produced by Rolf Steinort at Meet the GIMP. Go the Table of contents. There are 155 videos now in the library. Don't start at number 1 and work you're way through - it's not designed to be used that way. Read the contents and choose what you want to learn about.

You do have to remember that the early tutorials now relate to earlier versions of the GIMP. But if you're conscious of that fact, then you can apply the workflows to the version you are now working with.

[Colin Southern]

Can someone explain to me how to achieve the "eye pop" look using Gimp? It seems that a lot of portrait photos have an almost fake or alien eye look. Sometimes when it's just on the border of over done it has a cool effect. Anyone?

Hi John,

We do a lot of seperate operations to eyes when processing portraiture, but to be honest, I'm not quite sure what you're meaning. Can you post an example?

[jconti3]

, Ok, here is an example from andychasteen.com Whats going on here? I am familiar with the free select and layers to some degree.

[jconti3]

maybe not.....I will try that again.

[Donald]

John

Have you worked out what the problem was in getting the image uploaded. if you haven't aleady read it, then please have a read of it in this thread. This will guide you in how to post pictures into your messages.

If you still have problems, let us know.

I think you tried to use the tinypics route which is covered in Post#2 of the above linked tread. They key is to make sure you follow the process right through to step 4 and don't stop when you get a message saying 'success' after completing step 3.

Donald

[Wirefox]

Eye Pop?

[Jack Hogan]

Can someone explain to me how to achieve the "eye pop" look

Cutting to the chase, it is usually a combination of whitening the whites, a little increased contrast/saturation on the iris and a USM step (PS 200/1/3) on the eye/eyelashes.

[AlanP]

I believe "eye pop" refers to enlarging the eyes slightly. In Photoshop it is done with the liquify (bulge) filter.

[jconti3]

I think it was the format of the pic I was trying to get from other peoples sites? Off the subject; the pawn shop down the street has a Vivitar 135mm 3.5 for sale. I already have a Nikon AF-s 55-300. Would there be that much difference in the crispness and DOF between the two at the same focal point? He is asking $80 mounted on an older Nikkorex 35. I'm thinking I could get it for $30-40.

[Colin Southern]

I believe "eye pop" refers to enlarging the eyes slightly. In Photoshop it is done with the liquify (bulge) filter.

I used to do it this way, but it does tend distort the eye. I found a better way was to ...

- Lasso around the eye and brow with generous margins

- Feather the selection (around 50 radius on a full resolution shot of a head and shoulders shot)

- Copy selection to new layer (Ctrl + J)

- Free Transform (Ctrl + T)

- Change height and/or width to around 105%

[Colin Southern]

and a USM step (PS 200/1/3) on the eye/eyelashes.

A "quick and dirty" trick for eyes is to use the sharpening tool set to a strength of 50% (usually 2 or 3 applications is sufficient).

[Colin Southern]

Off the subject; the pawn shop down the street has a Vivitar 135mm 3.5 for sale. I already have a Nikon AF-s 55-300. Would there be that much difference in the crispness and DOF between the two at the same focal point? He is asking $80 mounted on an older Nikkorex 35. I'm thinking I could get it for $30-40.

Probably best to ask this in a new thread.

[jconti3]

, this is what i consider on the edge of over done. At the same time I wish I could achieve this kind of glass like clear "pop" look.

[Colin Southern]

At the same time I wish I could achieve this kind of glass like clear "pop" look.

Hi John,

There's nothing particularly hard about it - they're just localised changes to brightness / saturation / contrast / sharpening etc.

Post a shot you'd like changed, and I'll give you a workflow (assuming you have Photoshop).

[Nomadr]

jconti3 wow those eyes are frightening, IMO people look at too many magazines with fake everything and want their portraits to look the same, the basics are to sharpen the eyes and mouth, obviously the eye is the first thing that a viewer looks at in a portrait but in my opinion it should look natural, cheers martyn ps one tip, you will notice on those photos that they are all looking upwards, it gives you a better eye especially if you can get some white showing underneath the pupil,

[Klickit]

Another way to enhance eyes - not quite "pop" in the sense of that baby up there #shudders# is to use judicious dodge and burn.

Sorry about the shudder, but that just doesn't look good to me at all. I'm sure I can see an alien peering out there...

[Colin Southern]

it gives you a better eye especially if you can get some white showing underneath the pupil,

A good "trick" when shooting is to get the model to lower their chin a little to facilitate this.

[jconti3]

I agree that the eyes look strange and freaky on the baby's. This is an over the top example that I thought would get the point across. This picture was takin from the website of a local photographer who is really busy and, has a great studio full of awesome props and windows in old town. Lots of people love her work and pay good money for it. Most all of her portraits have these scary eyes so I assumed thats what people are buying.

[Steve S]

I agree that the eyes look strange and freaky on the baby's. This is an over the top example that I thought would get the point across. This picture was takin from the website of a local photographer who is really busy and, has a great studio full of awesome props and windows in old town. Lots of people love her work and pay good money for it. Most all of her portraits have these scary eyes so I assumed thats what people are buying.

Alot of them paint in the whites of the eye and use the dodge tool on the center. First set to shadows, next a pass with midtones, and then a pass with highlights. Then a final sharpening. It looks too freaky for my taste. I usaully dodge one pass of each set at 8% brush opacity and then when i'm done ,i adjust the layer opacity to my liking.