Are all of these brilliant photos touched up in Lightroom? I'm still pretty new to hobby photography, and my first real introduction to photography was through a photojournalism course so I guess I have a built in taboo about retouching photos even when not using them for journalistic purposes.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GAF Photography Thread of 2016
- Thread starter captive
- Start date
- Status
JadedWriter
Member
Most likely yes, they are retouched. I'm even going to assume the journalist stuff is touched up in...something as well.
VisceralBowl
Member
I'd imagine most of the them are.
Pretty sure a lot of agencies specifically prohibit any kind of retouching on journalistic images.
JadedWriter
Member
Oh well that's interesting, I had no idea. I just assumed they at least touched up the colors or something cause at times they just look rich. Might just be the "full frame" effect I guess. I have no idea.
theepicoftyler
Member
I was interested in this so I just looked it up:
I think it's fine as long as it's minute color balancing and adjustments. Anything else is taking artistic license and is frowned upon.
Not sure what your definition of retouching is, but I can tell you from experience that Getty Images, at minimum, adjusts curves/highlights/shadows on their photos out here on the PGA Tour.
Cuthbert 80
Member
With digital photos I correct the exposure as needed and tweak the tones.
So far with film I'm rarely changing anything. The last two pics I posted are unmodified scans.
QualityPixel
Banned
What/who are you using to scan? The film scans you've posted look great!
I mostly only use raw files so retouching is pretty necessary, as the raw out of the camera is flat.
Had some time to kill and tried shooping a bit. Better at all or nah?
Miami 2016 by Sami Mckee, on Flickr
Miami 2016 by Sami Mckee, on FlickrIt's a Pakon/Kodak F135 scanner. They were used with minilabs until the decline of film.
The best thing about them is their simplicity.
You feed the roll in on the right and the scanner does its thing.
The tricky thing with them is that the drivers only work with Windows XP. If you know VMWare or Virutalbox it's very easy to set up a VM to use with the scanner. That's what I'm doing.
The other thing is the price has gone crazy. There are two versions - F135 and F135 Plus. The F135 Plus scans at 3000x2000 and is faster. The F135 "only" scans at I think 2250x1500. BUT, there's a piece of software called "tlxclient" that lets you scan at 3000x2000 even with the regular F135, but at a very slow speed. The F135 currently sells for around $350 - $375. The F135 Plus is going for $700 - $900.
I just have the regular version, not the Plus. I may or may not upgrade. The extra speed would be nice. But double the money is a lot for a relatively small benefit. But it's probably worth it if you're scanning a lot of film.
Yeah, I can't remember where exactly I heard it but I do recall an account of needing to provide the images straight out of camera (even going so far as to mandate shooting in JPEG) but it seems as though that's certainly not a widespread requirement.
Certainly seems like it's something that would benefit greatly from having a concrete set of guidelines but I'm not sure anything has been setup (or could be governable or enforceable given the broad spectrum of journalstic content out there right now).
JadedWriter
Member
I know for advertising and PR stuff stuff definitely get edited so even light edits for journalistic stuff makes sense, though I would assume you can't just add and delete items cause that's just not journalistically sound. The editing of the images might even be up to the editorial department.
jongkookie
Member
Even some modeling agencies these days refuse retouching work these days.
The one I'm working with right now flat out denied retouching simply because it apparently pisses off their make-up artists. Apparently it's basically telling the MUA that they suck at their job and yada yada yada.
I'm still doing basic stuff like lighting, coloring, sharpness and removing background elements, but for the most part the model itself remains untouched.
That said, they do allow retouching but only if the client requires it and that the model and MUA knows/agrees that it needs to be done. So far though, I haven't had to do it because the MUA's do a damn good job at it, the only problem is that shoots end up a little slower since they have to fix it every 5 mins or so.
The one I'm working with right now flat out denied retouching simply because it apparently pisses off their make-up artists. Apparently it's basically telling the MUA that they suck at their job and yada yada yada.
I'm still doing basic stuff like lighting, coloring, sharpness and removing background elements, but for the most part the model itself remains untouched.
That said, they do allow retouching but only if the client requires it and that the model and MUA knows/agrees that it needs to be done. So far though, I haven't had to do it because the MUA's do a damn good job at it, the only problem is that shoots end up a little slower since they have to fix it every 5 mins or so.
JadedWriter
Member
Well that's cool, I really don't retouch the models too heavily either, I've only really did it once or twice for glaring stuff like pimples or moles occasionally. How the heck does one get picked up by an agency?
jongkookie
Member
The great thing about MUA's is that they know to cover up pimples, moles and all the imperfections before a picture is ever taken so I don't even have to do that anymore. Funny thing is, I have a basic understanding of how retouching works so if they asked me to do it, I'm probably gonna have to spend some time outside of the gig to learn proper retouching lolol.
Anyway, I got acquainted with the CD of the agency through a model that I worked with and the CD liked my stuff and added me to his list of photogs. This is basically an on-call gig and they'll call you if they need you. Since I have another full-time gig as a staff photog, I only do it once or twice a month... only if necessary like if they're desperate for a photog or I need some alcohol/gear/car parts money haha.
JadedWriter
Member
I would love to have that problem. My models are broke.
a few from french alps this year, taken with fuji x100
(you can see more here http://www.sebastianfotograf.com/alpy-2016/)
(you can see more here http://www.sebastianfotograf.com/alpy-2016/)
Honestly, in my opinion that's a whole load of bs coming from people who have never touched photoshop in their life.
It can't possibly be insulting to the MUA as it's something else entirely. You can do so much more with PS than you can ever achieve with makeup IRL, in fact the whole point of it in high fashion is to look unrealistically perfect. But at the same time a good makeup is the perfect base to do just that. Without a good base you won't have a perfect final result. Like real life, but better. I personally value that as an art form and take great pride in my skin retouching. If a MUA is offended by what I do, then I'm not going to work with that MUA. Simple as that.
I don't think any high fashion magazine would do something as not retouch photos. That's like part of the whole process and not an easy or short one either. I spend approx 2 hours on each photo I know will be used for print. Pimples are only the first step of cleaning, if it's needed or not and depending on your lighting, even if it's covered perfectly by makeup, no foundation or concealer can make a bump less bumpy, therefore has to be edited. I would highly recommend the skin retouching tutorials by Phlearn. Only $20 for about 7gb worth of retouching tutorials. VERY good. Essential for any beauty photography imo.
jongkookie
Member
I agree but this agency isn't really a fashion agency in that sense.
Most of their work is like a talent agency that sends models out for trade shows(E3, CES and the like), acting gigs, event hosting, stuff like that so for them it's a "WYSIWYG" situation. The clients want a model who looks like a real person, not some dolled up person who looks unrealistic. They still do fashion shoots and AFAIK, retouches are still on a need to be done basis.
The MUA "complaints" is interesting actually. I don't interact with a lot of MUA's since they tend to be divas, much more than the models themselves, so I tend to stay away lol. I did ask one of my model buddies about it earlier and she thinks MUA's are a scam coz she does all her makeup herself haha. I might be doing a shoot with them in a few weeks again so if the MUA isn't a diva, I'll be sure to ask.
I'm gonna check out that retouching tutorial you mentioned, I don't need it since I rarely do beauty photog but it might be a good thing to learn in the long run so we'll see.
JadedWriter
Member
DSC_1790 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Daredevil Takes Manhattan by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_1785 by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrAgreed. Love this shot.
Ahh I see, that makes sense.
I got an instax mini 90 camera that I love to use, especially for models before makeup and all the stuff they do to them, so I keep polaroids of how they look like without anything. Mostly for before and after purposes though. And I love my instax. Although it's expensive to love it as much as I do.
I do think good makeup that takes like an hour to do can definitely benefit the photoshoot, as makeup that over the top super cakey tends to look great on photos (less so in person imo), but I would generally agree with your model friend - most women nowadays, especially models, already have that knowledge. I'd much rather work with a special effects MUA.
Spent the night outside and went through 2 battery packs for my D7000. 6+ hours of total exposure time between these images. More if you count the frames that I had to throw out because of tracking errors etc.
Messier 63 - The Sunflower Galaxy by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
Messier 101 by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
Messier 3 by Olli Arkko, on Flickr
Messier 63 - The Sunflower Galaxy by Olli Arkko, on FlickrMessier 101 by Olli Arkko, on FlickrMessier 3 by Olli Arkko, on Flickra few from french alps this year, taken with fuji x100
(you can see more here http://www.sebastianfotograf.com/alpy-2016/)
dear god. perfect.
supernormal
Member
Really great night shots.
ricardo_sousa11
Member
Just finished my first Music Video, exciting times, even though it didnt go exacly as planed, im quite happy with the result, let me know what you guys think =)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS_klaEseQ4
*Bonus pic of another project im working on :3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS_klaEseQ4
I have to admit I'm a little bit worried taking shots sometimes. If I want to have a shot of people walking across the street, or a close up of a car - I'm just afraid somebody will come tell me I can't do that but I would assume it's generally within the law to take shots of people, as long as it's not a single person but multiple people.
JadedWriter
Member
Dude, hop onto my Flickr and learn the ways of not giving a fuck, not one solitary fuck....
DSC_1781 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_6247 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_1800 by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrThanks, I was rushing for a train that night, just noticed the lighting and realized I had to take a picture.
Went to New Zealand recently. Kinda wish I had an actual camera, but I don't want to carry a bulky camera with me when I'm hiking and the iPhone does a fairly decent job in my opinion.
A storm is coming by Syrok, on Flickr
K4 by Syrok, on Flickr
Overlooking the Waimakariri Flats by Syrok, on Flickr
Lake Rotoiti by Syrok, on Flickr
A storm is coming by Syrok, on FlickrK4 by Syrok, on FlickrOverlooking the Waimakariri Flats by Syrok, on FlickrLake Rotoiti by Syrok, on FlickrGet a mirrorless! Same job as DSRL, 2x smaller and lighter. As an Olympus fangirl I'll vote Olympus, but the Sony options are pretty damn good too.
Those photos are amazing though. I wanna go to NZ now...
ricardo_sousa11
Member
Thank you
Didnt go exacly as I wanted, couldnt film some parts due to time restrictions, but after all is said and done, im pleased with it =)
I know I should, but there are too many choices. If you have any specific recommendations for light weight (every gram counts when hiking for days ) and rugged cameras I would be grateful.
Thanks! NZ is an amazing place. If you have the means to visit it you should definitely consider it.
JadedWriter
Member
Mirrorless camera's are not big by any stretch of the imagination. Just get like an A6000 or an xt10 and call it a day. What's your budget?
itsbenoclock
Member
Excellent.
I went out again for some stars, didn't really get anything worth my time considering the light pollution, but some nice colours came out of this one at least:
14-Mar-2016-1 by Ben Grady, on FlickrI actually think that the Sony A7 mkII is smaller than the Olympus EM1 or EM10. I have EM10 and it's pretty small, but some of the Sony cameras or Canon PowerShots fit into a pocket. Sadly I can't say any more than that as I don't have experience with Sony.
No idea what my budget for a camera would be. Can't see myself spending much more than 400, though. Not sure how far that gets me. Would be for landscape photography only.
Canon Powershot.
Olympus and Sony mirrorless cameras are a bit above that budget + lens investment.
supernormal
Member
Just finished my first Music Video, exciting times, even though it didnt go exacly as planed, im quite happy with the result, let me know what you guys think =)
*Bonus pic of another project im working on :3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS_klaEseQ4
Absolutely gorgeous. If I may ask what was the budget, and how long did you shoot?
ricardo_sousa11
Member
Thank you,
We shot for a few weekends, and the only time we had with the band was around 2hrs. For this one the budget was extremelly low of around 1000€, since it was my first, and being in Portugal a country in financial crisis, its hard to push budgets higher. However for my next works I intend of pushing the budgets Higher. It was extremelly hard to work with such a tight budget, and having to pay people or ask them for favours, also building and buying all lightning and "set" (which I had never done) was an immense pressure.
This is one of my main reasons to want to leave this country and move to London/US, a Budget for something similar to this in either of those countries should be of about 10k€ (and in that case, it would be possible to rent a Black Magic / Red camera and have a better product). Im working with my own gear, and on my own, it can be extremelly stressfull but also rewarding.
What im doing now, to ease the process, is try and get some works in other places and ask lower than average budgets, for example, if I'd ask 5k€ to make something like this, its enough to travel anywhere and film, and still make more than what I can do here.
supernormal
Member
In the case of your video, which is on par with many bigger acts, how do you think a bigger budget would have helped you. Of course having more money allows you to get things done faster, but what part of the visuals would have changed if you had a bigger budget.
ricardo_sousa11
Member
Well, first of, atually getting actors to play the roles instead of friends. In this case the whole thing is done around the fact that we do not have actors, so we cannot have acting demanding scenes because they simply wouldnt pull it off. And working with people who arent used to be on camera, makes us having to re-do a lot of shots due to unexperience.
There would also be a huge bump in quality, better camera, better lenses, and a gimbal stabilizer/sliders and what not. Moving to a Black Magic/ Sony FS system, would mean we had 10 bit color science and much more dynamic range, which would be on par with what you'd see in a Rihanna or any other major star music video, because that dynamic range is what gives the video a filmic look. Even though I believe the video itself is somehwat filmic in its grading/colors, this is a very time consuming method, and all shots need to be extensivily graded in order to look this way. With this video (as well as all my others that you can follow here - https://vimeo.com/156891323 ) everything is shot either handheld or with a shoulder rig, and then digitally stabilized, this creates some creative limitations, because I cannot do fast pans and some other sequences because the digital process would be ruined.
Also lighting, which was severely hurt by the low budget, we were supposed to have 15 lights hanging from the ceilling for lighting/decoration, but that alone would costa round 200-300€ and we simply could not spare that much money, so we had to improvise with what we could.
And last but not least, it would grant us acess to other locations, there was a scene where she's leaving her house, that we jumped to a random house and filmed it, in fact, most of our filmings are done in private places, illegally, so we decided to scratch that scene off, since it was likely to give us some trouble.
Im all in favour of making our best with the little of budgets we have, im proud when people can say "it looks professional/high end" when it was actually done with so little money. But having a bigger budget doesnt mean I would spend it just because its there, I would apply it in specific areas that I would think could upgrade the overall quality of the project, yet keeping it as unexpensive as possible. It may not seem like it, but a small bump in the budget, and changing the gear slightly would produce high end content, similar to what we are used to seeing from big stars.
JadedWriter
Member
You know I really gotta hand it to my discussions with Supernormal regarding photoshoots and lighting and stuff like that cause it actually comes in handy. I had a brief photoshoot with a professor after he gave a brief interview for something for work. He was really um well...dude was fucking tight, but I eventually just started talking to the dude about his family and life in general and it really loosened him up. Which allowed me to get a really good shot of him actually giving a smile that doesn't look like he devours kids. I used one flash, shot it through a diffuser umbrella and that set up delivered, I just needed something light and portable.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked