+- Portrait Pro Forums (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com)
+-- Forum: PortraitPro software (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Favourite bits (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Ad image - a clean-up too far? (/showthread.php?tid=651)
Ad image - a clean-up too far? - john hawk - 08-24-2010
As a user of PP for several years, I have found it very useful on occasions; however I have to take issue with the treatment applied to the face of the woman shown in the email sent as an ad for the new version, as it shows a level of feature alteration I would never dream of using on one of my portraits.
Yes, I mean the complete removal of her freckles! This , I feel, completely alters her character and is in a wholy different league to the complaints of " plastic skin " if too many features are removed when processing with PP.
This comment is not meant to knock PP, and I would like to hear what other users think of this level of transformation when processing a portrait.
Thanks in advance for any contributions.
John.
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - MKvipBeauty - 09-13-2010
Hi John,
as far as freckles, beauty spots etc. are concerned I always ask the models if they want them excluded during post work or not - it's as easy as that. Around 75% btw are for the removal...
take care
mike
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - gil_13 - 01-26-2011
john hawk Wrote:As a user of PP for several years, I have found it very useful on occasions; however I have to take issue with the treatment applied to the face of the woman shown in the email sent as an ad for the new version, as it shows a level of feature alteration I would never dream of using on one of my portraits.
Yes, I mean the complete removal of her freckles! This , I feel, completely alters her character and is in a wholy different league to the complaints of " plastic skin " if too many features are removed when processing with PP.
This comment is not meant to knock PP, and I would like to hear what other users think of this level of transformation when processing a portrait.
Thanks in advance for any contributions.
John.
John I suspect the idea was to show the extent of clean up that is available...
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - Grinaker - 01-27-2011
It's a good point that it's wise to get the subject's permission before refining a portrait to that extent.
That said, when we hire a model to be the subject of a portrait the model is not the client. If a portrait is for an ad, the client couldn't care less if the model originally had freckles, warts or a missing tooth. The client is paying for a beautiful image and that's all that matters.
Following that logic, this image was for an ad showing how easy it is to go from plain to gorgeous. It would have been a shame to stop at merely better.
Another thought, most photographers are too young to remember the Glamor studios of the 1980s. Women young and old were excited to finally have photos of flawless skin and starlet poses. In those pre-computer days it required a makeup artist with a putty knife. Now a few minutes with Portrait Professional achieves portraits showing the inner-beauty of our customers.
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - Essence of Imagery - 01-30-2011
Grinaker Wrote:In those pre-computer days it required a makeup artist with a putty knife. Now a few minutes with Portrait Professional achieves portraits showing the inner-beauty of our customers.
It takes you that long?
![[Image: frecklesbw.jpg]](http://www.essenceofimagery.com/nikonites/frecklesbw.jpg)
The father is proud of the freckles that he bestowed on his daughter, and this image was his favorite of her.
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - BClews - 01-31-2011
Essence of Imagery Wrote:...The father is proud of the freckles that he bestowed on his daughter, and this image was his favorite of her.
He should be. They are perfect!
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - KirstenMary - 02-02-2011
MKvipBeauty Wrote:Hi John,Exactly. I always ask the subject what s/he wants and go from there. Shockingly, some of them LOVE the plastic look.
as far as freckles, beauty spots etc. are concerned I always ask the models if they want them excluded during post work or not - it's as easy as that. Around 75% btw are for the removal...
take care
mike
BClews Wrote:They are perfect. But who is footing the bill? If she is and if she wants them gone, then they go.Essence of Imagery Wrote:...The father is proud of the freckles that he bestowed on his daughter, and this image was his favorite of her.
He should be. They are perfect!
RE: Ad image - a clean-up too far? - Mista Bumpy - 03-21-2011
I agree with this on on Miss Freckle. I thought completely removing features like freckles would have everyone that knows them wondering, "What happened??!" In fact, unless a subject requested removal, I'll bet many would not care for those results.
john hawk Wrote:As a user of PP for several years, I have found it very useful on occasions; however I have to take issue with the treatment applied to the face of the woman shown in the email sent as an ad for the new version, as it shows a level of feature alteration I would never dream of using on one of my portraits.[/color]
Yes, I mean the complete removal of her freckles! This , I feel, completely alters her character and is in a wholy different league to the complaints of " plastic skin " if too many features are removed when processing with PP.
This comment is not meant to knock PP, and I would like to hear what other users think of this level of transformation when processing a portrait.
Thanks in advance for any contributions.
John.