# It can not be that complicated.



## perryfletcher

I have been working for over a year trying to do the animated look of Robert Alvarado. I have done everything from smudging, dodging, burning,, curve adjustments, levels, ect. I do not think there is much I have not tried. Yesterday I looked at the picture I have posted below and started to reverse engineer it. I came to this conclusion. It really can not be as hard as I am making it. I think he is using some type of add on to photoshop or using a difrent program all together. He produces images fast, which leaves me to believe that everyone else and myself are over complicating it. Does anyone have any idea how this type of image is done? I am starting to loos sleep trying to figure it out.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/temp_hs_A_p.jpg


----------



## D-50

This shot is done more with lighting and makeup than post processing.  I'm sure he enhanced he eyes and smoothed the skin a bit in post but I bet the unprocessed image looks prety close to this one.  Photoshop, although fantastic is no match for solid lighting, good skin, and great make up.


----------



## Alex_B

I would say, just as D-50, lighting + lots of make-up. And then some overprocessing in photoshop.

actually, on looking at that image again, the blonde girl has her make-up done rather poorly on her forehead, right where her hair starts. There you can judge _how much_ make-up was really used!


----------



## perryfletcher

The only problem I have with the make up is the fact in Robert's other pictures the legs, arms, hands all look animated like the face.


----------



## Alex_B

Make-up is usually also applied to other parts of the body than the face.

Not sure though if Robert does it that way as well.


----------



## perryfletcher

If you look at his profile on http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?id=15033 and scroll down he has 2 pictures. 1 in a paint room and one of a bilbord in a city which makes me think he uses some other type of program to get these looks other than photoshop.


----------



## Alex_B

.. or some secret set of automated photoshop actions 

on those pictures you can certainly see some heavy processing has been done to achieve that airbrush like effect.


----------



## perryfletcher

Here is a before shot I found he did on photobucket.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/beeeeefore.jpg


----------



## perryfletcher

here is the light set up
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/Setup.jpg


----------



## perryfletcher

here is an image he did where I know he did not use a bunch of make up.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/everyone_A.jpg


----------



## perryfletcher

here is some early work without the somothing. http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/ba-1.jpg
So does anyone know what program or add on he is using?


----------



## Overread

Have you tried messenging him?



> Ok... As you can see I'm currently shooting Pin-Up. I have developed a style that I am happy with at last and if you are interested in shooting this style of Pin-Up, please feel free to message me. I really enjoy the art of Pin-Up, it's been a passion of mine since I first started photography.


 
there is a forum attached to that site so chances are you can register and then send him a pm


----------



## perryfletcher

Overread said:


> Have you tried messenging him?
> 
> 
> 
> there is a forum attached to that site so chances are you can register and then send him a pm


I am a memeber of that site and have messaged him several times. He is not telling.


----------



## perryfletcher

on another site he says he does not have time to expain what he is doing and may make a dvd later next year.


----------



## perryfletcher

Here is a perfect side by side comparassion.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb23/Robert_Alvarado/compare.jpg
So is it the lighting, make up or editing? Like I said before I think we are all over complicating it all there has to be a simple method.


----------



## perryfletcher

what ever it is he is using is placed over the entire image. I personaly think it is all done with lucis art but I do not know how he gets the exact look. I mean how many layers at what settings.


----------



## Big Mike

Please keep in mind that it's against forum rules to directly post links to photos that we do not own (that others have taken).  You can link to them, but not post them directly.


----------



## perryfletcher

sure let me go back and link them


----------



## epatsellis

One big suggestion, get your octabox closer, that will cut down the contrast quite a bit.


erie


----------



## perryfletcher

Okay removed the images and added the links.


----------



## Bifurcator

Yeah, That's all post work. I've done that before if you have any questions. It's allot of brush work in photoshop is what it is. I learned how first from a Japanese CG magazine called "Step By Step" about 7 or 8 years back. Very basically it's the patch and healing brushes and painting in hue and color modes for the face layers and guides guides guides multiply stroked for the hair layers. Everything is done in layers with lots of repetition in subtle steps. Recently I've seen time-lapse movies of the process being applied from start to finish on YouTube. It's actually allot of fun to do!  There's a PhotoShop plug-in called "Portraiture" from Imagenomic that has a preset called "High Glam" that looks like it's doing allot of the same work and would speed things up allot I think. http://www.imagenomic.com/pt.aspx Or see the video here: http://imagenomic.cachefly.net/portraiture/ptoverview1/ptoverview1.html  Get on youtube and see if you can find those times-lapses though - very kewl stuff!

EDIT: BTW, a tablet (Wacom or other) is almost a requirement for this.


----------



## Funky

Not exactly easy to replicate =\


----------



## perryfletcher

Bifurcator said:


> Yeah, That's all post work. I've done that before if you have any questions. It's allot of brush work in photoshop is what it is. I learned how first from a Japanese CG magazine called "Step By Step" about 7 or 8 years back. Very basically it's the patch and healing brushes and painting in hue and color modes for the face layers and guides guides guides multiply stroked for the hair layers. Everything is done in layers with lots of repetition in subtle steps. Recently I've seen time-lapse movies of the process being applied from start to finish on YouTube. It's actually allot of fun to do! There's a PhotoShop plug-in called "Portraiture" from Imagenomic that has a preset called "High Glam" that looks like it's doing allot of the same work and would speed things up allot I think. http://www.imagenomic.com/pt.aspx Or see the video here: http://imagenomic.cachefly.net/portraiture/ptoverview1/ptoverview1.html Get on youtube and see if you can find those times-lapses though - very kewl stuff!
> 
> EDIT: BTW, a tablet (Wacom or other) is almost a requirement for this.


Look almost exactly like what I want to be able to do.


----------



## Bifurcator

Funky said:


> Not exactly easy to replicate =\



Yeah, it's an advanced technique. I guess if you're super fast in PS and you've already done 30 or 40 of them then it's about 1 to 2 hours of solid work. Your first time through I bet it takes longer than one 8-hour day of solid work - although maybe less with that plug-in I linked to??. It's a great learning exercise for PS users who already know the basics of image editing. It really shows off in a rather intense way some of the seldom used tools - like the guide splines I mentioned.

I'm was a Computer Graphics and Animation professor for many years so this kinda thing really turns me on.


----------



## Bifurcator

perryfletcher said:


> Look almost exactly like what I want to be able to do.



What? That plug-in?  It's a really good start on the process for sure!  I have it.  I like it!


----------



## perryfletcher

Bifurcator said:


> Yeah, it's an advanced technique. I guess if you're super fast in PS and you've already done 30 or 40 of them then it's about 1 to 2 hours of solid work. Your first time through I bet it takes longer than one 8-hour day of solid work - although maybe less with that plug-in I linked to??. It's a great learning exercise for PS users who already know the basics of image editing. It really shows off in a rather intense way some of the seldom used tools - like the guide splines I mentioned.
> 
> I'm was a Computer Graphics and Animation professor for many years so this kinda thing really turns me on.


Well that is exactly what I am trying to do is to get the graphic animated look from a photo and since I can not afford the program at them moment is there any way you can tell me how to do the process you are talking about, or is there a tutorial on it. I guess I have to do it the slow way. Any help you can give me is very much appreciated.


----------



## Bifurcator

Yes there are tutorials that I've seen over the years including that "Step By Step" magazine 5 page Japanese tutorial I first took translated into English. The YouTube videos I mentioned are probably the quickest way to pick up the technique - or would be for me. 

I haven't seen the hair-spline technique tutorialized except in that "Step By Step" English translation but I noticed in that pic you posted he didn't really do the hair right. He just went high-contrast which is a cheap imitation of the original (as I know it). For the hair you basically:

copy and paste the hair to a new layer, 
create multiple curved spline variants from her natural highlight streaks and/or wherever you want them to be,
flatten the detail,
increase the contrast,
multi-select the set of splines you want to work with,
stroke the splines with highly transparent brushes (like opacity 5%) in color and/or lighten mode (darken for platinum blondes maybe),
increase the brush size slightly,
repeat from step 6 until satisfied,
blend the newly created layer back over the original,
tweak adjustments and blending options.

The face part would really need me to make a video or write a very long step tutorial and those both already exist in some multiplicity. It's just a matter of finding them. I think not too hard to find tho. Give it a shot and if you draw blanks after a day or so let me know and we can combine our search efforts. I'd try YouTube first and search with "Photoshop", "Makeover" "Glamour" and "Before and after" as terms. It's basically the same technique as removing mass amounts of wrinkles and blemishes so if you find a tut that does that but doesn't end up with the classical Japanese "White-Face" look go with it - the differences should become obvious as you proceed.

I remember seeing an especially good one for that actress from the 60's variety show umm, ""Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In". What's her name? Oh yeah, Goldie Hawn... so that might make another good search term.


----------



## Bifurcator

This looks kinda close (slightly different method similar result) and there's a downloadable action too. 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4362982107637626304&ei=8hhHSKXbKYakwgO3t5XtCw&hl=en


----------



## ksm

This look's like a technique David Hill uses on his photos. If you do a ggogle search on him there is a bunch of people that are trying to figure out how does it. He claims it is all in the lighting, no PS no Lucid Art. I don't know if I believe that but you might want to look at his photos.


----------



## perryfletcher

Okay, hold the phone. I just downloaded Portraiture and it works great. I have perfect smooth skin on my photo now. All I need to be able to do is to give it that pale look on the skin and bright glowing look on the eyes, lips, and hair (I kind of like it the way he does it, call me cheap) and tattoos if any. I am getting closer.


----------



## perryfletcher

ksm said:


> This look's like a technique David Hill uses on his photos. If you do a ggogle search on him there is a bunch of people that are trying to figure out how does it. He claims it is all in the lighting, no PS no Lucid Art. I don't know if I believe that but you might want to look at his photos.


I have already done that and I do not believe it  I just about have his look and yes lighting matters but believe it or not there is a differences in his work and Alvarados process I think. But thank you for the suggestion


----------



## Bifurcator

perryfletcher said:


> Okay, hold the phone. I just downloaded Portraiture and it works great. I have perfect smooth skin on my photo now. All I need to be able to do is to give it that pale look on the skin and bright glowing look on the eyes, lips, and hair (I kind of like it the way he does it, call me cheap) and tattoos if any. I am getting closer.




If you're satisfied with that as a near finished result then awesome! Except for the hair I _usually_ am. Portraiture will supposedly do the "white face" thing too with the Tone Mask controls in conjunction with the Enhancement sliders. I haven't gotten that far myself yet. I've done the glowing eyes with it tho.  That's the tone masker too. Watch that tutorial video I linked to - it has both in there.


----------



## perryfletcher

okay here is what I have done so far.





Here is what I did. I took my original and duplicated it then I ran lucis art on sculpture with 50% opacity and a setting of 0 then I duplicated that layer and ran Portraiture with smoothness heave and set to tones. I then blurred the picture more with the smudge tool. It is still not what I am looking for though. A mater of fact it is not even close. It just has an airbrushlook kind of.


----------



## Alpha

Screw Lucis.

Look, do the following:
1) Find model(s)
2) Find makeup artist and hair stylist
3) Learn to use strobes well

His post-processing is pretty minimal except for the skin touchup and some general adjustments.


I would highly recommend PM'ing him on ModelMayhem.


----------



## perryfletcher

Alpha said:


> Screw Lucis.
> 
> Look, do the following:
> 1) Find model(s)
> 2) Find makeup artist and hair stylist
> 3) Learn to use strobes well
> 
> His post-processing is pretty minimal except for the skin touchup and some general adjustments.
> 
> 
> I would highly recommend PM'ing him on ModelMayhem.


I do not know if you can not read well or just do not understand. I have linked pictures of his before and after shots. I have seen a whole set of shots before his processing is done. It is not the lighting have seen it and it is nothing fancy, Just some cardboard taped to lights in place of barn doors. Well of course you have to have lighting but it is not the contributing cause to the outcome of his pictures Like Dave Hill claims to do. In roberts case the models do not matter most are just friends. I do not wish to bad talk his models specifically but good lord Robert does a great job of making them look beautiful. Now on to the make up artist and hair stylist. The make up is very minimal and he has shot several models without the fancy hairstyles and guess what he gets the same result. And now to the Lucis art. I have used it for a while now and can recognize its charistis. The teeth lips and hair of his models just about all have the lucis art charistic. I can replicate what he does with lucis art so yes he uses it.

If you can find the place where he stores his images on the Internet for sharing you can see the whole photoshop process, lighting setup, and models before processing. I am telling you. I have seen his preprocessing work and it is all done by computer and not by fancy lighting setup, professional models, MUA, and hairstylist.

Oh and by the way if you will also read above you will se that he does not tell anyone how he does his work. I have e-mailed him several times and he is an extreamly nice man but he is not sharing.


----------



## Alpha

Don't get pissy just because you're frustrated. 

1) I never said his models were phenomenal. I simply said that he had models.

2) Even if he doesn't use much makeup on his models, that doesn't mean you shouldn't. It only makes the retouching easier. In fact, if he doesn't, he's spending a lot of unnecessary time in post. 

3) Learn how to retouch. I said he touched up the skin and did some general adjustments. I haven't changed my tune after looking through his port. 

4) So what if the lighting isn't "fancy?" Do you know how to do it?

5) You have Lucis tunnel vision because you haven't done any real processing on your own. There isn't a single thing about those photos that rings of Lucis. You're sorely mistaken.

If you stop acting like a twit then perhaps someone who _does_ know how to replicate that look will teach you how to do it. Or you can continue with your home brew Lucis crap, denying the advice of anyone but your idol himself, and spend the rest of your days wondering why the shots aren't turning out like you want.


----------



## perryfletcher

Alpha said:


> Don't get pissy just because you're frustrated.
> 
> 1) I never said his models were phenomenal. I simply said that he had models.
> 
> 2) Even if he doesn't use much makeup on his models, that doesn't mean you shouldn't. It only makes the retouching easier. In fact, if he doesn't, he's spending a lot of unnecessary time in post.
> 
> 3) Learn how to retouch. I said he touched up the skin and did some general adjustments. I haven't changed my tune after looking through his port.
> 
> 4) So what if the lighting isn't "fancy?" Do you know how to do it?
> 
> 5) You have Lucis tunnel vision because you haven't done any real processing on your own. There isn't a single thing about those photos that rings of Lucis. You're sorely mistaken.
> 
> If you stop acting like a twit then perhaps someone who _does_ know how to replicate that look will teach you how to do it. Or you can continue with your home brew Lucis crap, denying the advice of anyone but your idol himself, and spend the rest of your days wondering why the shots aren't turning out like you want.


I took you as being a smart A$$. Well still do, but truce.


----------



## Alpha

Truce my ass.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you jerk.

+1 to the ignore list!


----------



## perryfletcher

Alpha said:


> Truce my ass.
> 
> Don't bite the hand that feeds you jerk.
> 
> +1 to the ignore list!


Well good day to you to. You did not help anyway.


----------



## PortraitMan

That looks pretty dang good!  

A ripple rather than a splash - (Quote from my early photo instructor)


----------



## perryfletcher

PortraitMan said:


> That looks pretty dang good!
> 
> A ripple rather than a splash - (Quote from my early photo instructor)


Well thank you. Now that I set back and look at it. I personal think it is awful I smudged a wee bit to much but it is a stepping stone.


----------



## King Mango

perryfletcher said:


> If you look at his profile on http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?id=15033 and scroll down he has 2 pictures. 1 in a paint room and one of a bilbord in a city which makes me think he uses some other type of program to get these looks other than photoshop.


those are photos placed into vector art backgrounds.
As for the effect, if it took him a year of trial-and-error, I'm not even going to hazard a guess. 

But if I did have to guess I would say it looks like several steps for each photo. Hair/Skin/Clothes are all treated wtih different techniques so masking will be your first challenge. It also looks like he sometimes includes lipstick or heavy makeup in the clothes processing.
And tbh, some of it just looks like bad airbrushing like you sometimes see when there is absolutely no detail left in a models face. Which is not to insult his skills. I'm sure that's the look he's after, I'm just making the comparison to say... the recent shot of Carmen Electra on the cover of cosmo. In that case it's supposed to be serious and realistic where in his case it's perfectly acceptable because it is part of a stylized image.

As far as the clothes... It wouldn't surprise me if he used poser to render the clothes.


----------



## perryfletcher

King Mango said:


> those are photos placed into vector art backgrounds.
> As for the effect, if it took him a year of trial-and-error, I'm not even going to hazard a guess.
> 
> But if I did have to guess I would say it looks like several steps for each photo. Hair/Skin/Clothes are all treated wtih different techniques so masking will be your first challenge. It also looks like he sometimes includes lipstick or heavy makeup in the clothes processing.
> And tbh, some of it just looks like bad airbrushing like you sometimes see when there is absolutely no detail left in a models face. Which is not to insult his skills. I'm sure that's the look he's after, I'm just making the comparison to say... the recent shot of Carmen Electra on the cover of cosmo. In that case it's supposed to be serious and realistic where in his case it's perfectly acceptable because it is part of a stylized image.
> 
> As far as the clothes... It wouldn't surprise me if he used poser to render the clothes.


believe it or no that cheap airbrushing is what I am after. Gosh it is realy hard to get if you do not have a clue how to do it. I can get the skin smoothed without a flaw but it still has too many details. Some how his stuff is without detail yet it still has some definition. Bu the hardest part for me has been how in the world he gets the hair to pop out like that. It is shiney smooth and not blured all over the place.
Oh I can do the clothes to that is not a problem.


----------



## perryfletcher

Smooth skin no problem
bright eyes no proble
bright lip stick no problem.
bright clothes no problem
Geting the skin to look airbrused and getting the hair to pop out like that is where the problem lies with me.


----------



## perryfletcher

Here is where I am at in the process.
Skin may be alittle overdone and image is to dark and the hair does not pop out. I have not done the eyes or lips yet but its no problem.


----------



## D-50

You need to keep the blur off her ear, eyes, lips, anything with detail before you process it, do not leave it bured and then try to bring it back.  

And Alpha is really showing his MAXBloom roots here.... I dont think anyone was fooled by the name change. But as always i appreciate his straight forward nature, no holds barred, but also very biased against digital photography.


----------



## Alpha

D-50 said:


> You need to keep the blur off her ear, eyes, lips, anything with detail before you process it, do not leave it bured and then try to bring it back.
> 
> And Alpha is really showing his MAXBloom roots here.... I dont think anyone was fooled by the name change. But as always i appreciate his straight forward nature, no holds barred, but also very biased against digital photography.



I've said nothing to indicate any bias against digital photography.


----------



## King Mango

Well I decided to give it a go. I'm not a big fan of this but it's handy to have as a skill for future $$ I suppose. This is one of my shots from last month that I took on my first day of serious photography where I was trying to get good pictures. I used the soft skin effect in portrait mode on the camera settings which ruined several good shots. Anyway This PP work is focusing solely on the skin. I'm probably not going to do anything else to it unless my friend wants something.

Original:






Glamour Post:






I'm only posting mine to show that I believe that surface blur is the filter you need to be looking into and then using a layermask to paint the effect in. I did this using surface blur on a separate layer then masking the layer off and painting in the skin again. I also did a separate layer to reduce the blowouts on the right side of her face. There was a lot of bloom to cancel out.
I also played around with select color range using her lips as a sample til I got a nice distribution around her cheeks and a few small selections eslewhere. I added a layer and filled with pure deep red, then reduced the opacity, blurred (gaussian)
Added an overall warming LBA at 50 per cent


----------



## GeorgiaOwl

maybe they airbrush the model's faces. 

pppppprrrshhhhhhhhhhhhht. prrrssshhhhttt. 

you know, like a cheap Panama City, Fla T-shirt shop!


----------



## King Mango

lol. That's one way of doin it!


----------



## Bifurcator

King Mango said:


> Original:


Here's what that Portraiture plugin does by default:





And after moving one slider:





Of course if I were to then go in and finish it I could get it looking really good.  This is just loading the image, applying the plug-in, and saving the results. I guess with actions you could batch like this too.


----------



## King Mango

hey that's nice!


----------



## Bifurcator

Yeah, I like what it did to her neck and lower jowls. This plug-in is almost the famed and elusive "Make Not Suck" button.


----------



## perryfletcher

Take a look at this and see if this is not what exactly he is doing. http://adultchamberblog.com/2008/02/11/makeup-tutorial/ I think he is puting a diffrent color onto the skin though but I do not know what color it is. My image turnes out to dark but it is not high key like his are.


----------



## Bifurcator

Me? 

Yeah could be. I dunno exactly his process but I know for sure (100%?) it has _almost_ nothing or at least VERY little to do with makeup. Lighting always helps tho so if he has the facilities he would be dumb not to put it to good use. This PS glam stuff has gone so far beyond what makeup can do it's just silly - and it's dynamic so if you don't like it you can change it or sample any of hundreds of variations. This is unlike makeup where not only are you relatively stuck with the results you are also inhibited from editing digitally later.

Make-up may still be used for "photo sessions" though where you're shooting all day and choosing 10 or 12 shots from among several hundred - for each model although I would venture to guess that these days it's more a foundational base than the detailing we saw in the past. You can bet that those 10 or 12 get heavily processed after the selection process though and for sure if it's glam stuff. Make-up is also needed for motion film unless it's a dry documentary or something. Movies also get processed very heavily however. That's the business I'm in. Processing for motion picture film is usually done by scanning in the footage, creating moving masks of various types (garbage masks, lighting masks, FX masks, etc.) and then applying the affects - whether it's color correction, noise & wire removal, or glam-like enhancements like we're talking about here. This is accomplished in tools like Fusion 5, Nuke3D, Final Cut, Shake, Combustion, Adobe AfterFX,  and etc. I like all of those packages allot and probably in the order listed there. There's Flame, Inferno, Flint, Smoke and Toxic too (all from Autodesk) but I don't know them at all.

Anyway, makeup _generally_ isn't used in the same way it was 10 or more years ago by the professionals who make the top tier still and motion print and film products that we all consume and enjoy.


----------



## Bifurcator

perryfletcher said:


> I think he is puting a diffrent color onto the skin though but I do not know what color it is. My image turnes out to dark but it is not high key like his are.



BTW, if you need a color pallet or swatch configuration to work with one very good way is to work with  the natural colors already present. Blur the heck out of it and sample your swatch points from that or reduce it to a 256 indexed color image and screen grab the resulting pallet menu. Then use those to color the layer that you're mixing or using through control masks.


----------



## King Mango

Bifurcator said:


> BTW, if you need a color pallet or swatch configuration to work with one very good way is to work with  the natural colors already present. Blur the heck out of it and sample your swatch points from that or reduce it to a 256 indexed color image and screen grab the resulting pallet menu. Then use those to color the layer that you're mixing or using through control masks.


Using a reduced indexed color palette was my "secret trick" in game level design. :rockon:


----------



## perryfletcher

Bifurcator said:


> BTW, if you need a color pallet or swatch configuration to work with one very good way is to work with the natural colors already present. Blur the heck out of it and sample your swatch points from that or reduce it to a 256 indexed color image and screen grab the resulting pallet menu. Then use those to color the layer that you're mixing or using through control masks.


I have saw those swatch pallets but do not understand them. Is there any thing that will tell you if you want to go from this color to this color you should overlay this color. For example If I want to take the skin I have in a photo which now has a red tinge to it and turn it to a pale mannequin look I should use color # whatever to get it there?


----------



## Bifurcator

perryfletcher said:


> I have saw those swatch pallets but do not understand them.



It's just another method of color picking. It's useful when working with tones in a finite and fairly limited range like skin-tones.


http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/8495/Creating_Custom_Color_Swatches_and_Swatch_Sets
http://www.projectwoman.com/articles/18PhotoshopSwatches.htm
http://www.cellbio.duke.edu/faculty/klingensmith/Adobe Photoshop 7/Help/help.html
http://www.bittbox.com/photoshop/how-to-get-mondrianum-working-in-photoshop/
http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/7800/How_create_a_custom_palette_in_Adobe_Photoshop




> Is there any thing that will tell you if you want to go from this color to this color you should overlay this color. For example If I want to take the skin I have in a photo which now has a red tinge to it and turn it to a pale mannequin look I should use color # whatever to get it there?



A color calculator or a mixing simulator? Yeah, there are, but I think they aren't useful beyond teaching rudimentary additive and subtractive color concepts to someone just getting into computer editing or stage lighting. After you understand the basic idea the tools are no longer useful unless you need specific numerical input or something. Search for "color mixing", "color calculator", "applet", "tutorial", etc. 

It's more like mixing paint for painting on canvas with. You have a white canvas and want a sunset, you put yellow on the canvas, you keep adding red to the mix as you tone your way up. Err, I mean it's a feeling more than anything else. You have a face and you want it to be lighter, pick the original color and then move the lightness bar up or the cursor within the color-picker. save the swatch register and move it a bit more up, etc.  Then try it with each one till one looks right. These ranges are what I was suggesting you create by first temporally changing to 256 color register mode. I think one of the tuts I linked to covers that too. It will give you a nice naturally defined range of swatch colors to try with.

A big part of digital editing is trial and error tho. If something doesn't look right the first time don't be afraid to click File -> Revert or undo and try it again... and again... and again.  Kinda like adding little bits of red to the yellow for the sunset example. Move fast and try and remember when something works right.  That's really all anyone is doing. Don't feel bad or anything tho... you've chosen one of the most difficult tasks there is - getting skin tones right. Seasoned pros have trouble with that one and it's become quite a science all to it's own! 


http://www.virtualcinematography.org/publications/acrobat/Face-s2003.pdf
http://graphics.ucsd.edu/~henrik/papers/bssrdf/bssrdf.pdf
http://graphics.ucsd.edu/papers/layered/layered.pdf
http://developer.download.nvidia.com/presentations/2007/gdc/Advanced_Skin.pdf
etc.

As a photographer doing what you're trying to do you're lucky though. If you exposed it right you have a good base to work with from the start and only need to modify or adjust the tones and remove unwanted variation aka "detail".


----------



## SusieLee

Perry - send me an email.  I can help you out.  I do this sort of editing.
Don't worry I don't sell anything besides my photography 

I agree, it has a lot to do with Photoshop, but good lighting and makeup have a lot to do with it.  However, my makeup artist can only do so much and as great as I am with lighting, that look just doesn't come out of the camera that way.


----------



## perryfletcher

SusieLee said:


> Perry - send me an email. I can help you out. I do this sort of editing.
> Don't worry I don't sell anything besides my photography
> 
> I agree, it has a lot to do with Photoshop, but good lighting and makeup have a lot to do with it. However, my makeup artist can only do so much and as great as I am with lighting, that look just doesn't come out of the camera that way.


I sent you an e-mail and look so foward to hearing back from you.


----------



## probodyshots

Alpha said:


> Truce my ass.
> 
> Don't bite the hand that feeds you jerk.
> 
> +1 to the ignore list!




Man, would love to see some of your work.. These people are just here to try and learn..

Photo array. Far left original, Center His Post, Right my quick and dirty post.
http://probodyshots.com/finalcompare.jpg


----------



## Prophotoworkshop

The affect is a combination of the way that he lights and retouches his images.
It's the whole process. Even How he sees and creates....ie.His creative palette.
You would be able to in general create his look with photoshop and basic lighting,
such as soft boxes reflectors with grids diffusion all that stuff.
You would however need to be able to use the gear in the same way that he does.
As far as what he does with photoshop I think it's pretty basic stuff as well But he's obviously developed his own way of using those tools and Filters.
Definitely Photoshop and if not, that look is definitely achievable in Photoshop.
When I say basic I don't mean at all to simplify what he's doing to achieve his look.
Just in regards to the tools he uses. 
If you include some of your attempts at his work with your post it could help others to help you to identify what your not doing.
But I think your probably over thinking the retouching and underthinking the lighting.
but that's just my take.....Hard to say with out seeing your attempts.
In photoshop I just added a backround layer smart blured it lowered the opacity a little on that layer
and erased back the details that I wanted to look more real and sharp. try that.
It's kind of bludgeoning the process but it show's you that put a little more time into it
 and you'll get it..I used images that were lit similarly to his for the test.
Good Luck!
Photoworkshop


----------



## eminart

Dude, I didn't read through this whole thread, but I don't think there's any magic formula to get that effect.  It's just careful editing in PS using lots of layers and masks.  And start with a good photo/lighting.  

If I had to guess, I'd say it's just a well-lit photo, some selective surface blurring here, some sharpening there, and Voila!


----------



## photosbygeorge

I know this is an old thread, but has any one found out any of the PS work that goes into the creation of Alvarado's work. 

I know a lot of the base is lighting, makeup and hair, but after a great deal of experimentation with lighting and PS I can honestly say that what pushes his photos over the edge is some specific photoshop work.


----------



## Lostfiniel

I DIDN'T read through the whole thread. My knowledge of the situation is really only based on the most recent image posted of his work showing the roackabilly style girl. But, looking at that before and after. I can guess at some of the techniques.

If I wanted to achieve the same look, here's what I would do.

1) Obviously, he removed a few imperfections. The lines around her mouth for one. This would all be pretty basic so I won't say more.

2) Adjust the light levels. I'm sure he's gone in and adjust the lights. I suspect through Image>Adjustments>Levels, adjusting until he's happy.

3) This is the step I am not as sure about. But, I suspect for the cherries and her flower, what he might have done is, on another layer, painted just pure black over just those areas. Then, set that layer to "overlay" and adjusted that layer's opacity until he reached his desired levels. My guess is based on the fact that there is a nice contrast in the details.

4) Now, there may be another method he used to get that blur affect. But, it looks hauntingly familar to me to one I've used for improving skin softness. First, duplicate the layer. What you would do is go into Filters>Noise>Median. It takes some practice to get the amount just right. Then, lower the opacity until it looks right. When you have that set, go to layer>layermasks>reveal all. Then, using a very soft brush, bring back the facial features and clothing so you don't lose the detail there. 

Just my thoughts, anyway. Hopefully these will help anyone else.


----------



## Lashind

It took me not even five minutes to figure out what he uses the first time I decided to look it up. I didn't read every reply, but I'm surprised someone didn't figure it out faster. Here you go.

http://www.imagenomic.com/pt.aspx?gclid=CMu7oPvg9ZkCFcmS3wodN2zcRA

Portraiture is a Photoshop, Lightroom and  Aperture 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 plugin that eliminates the tedious manual labor of  selective masking and pixel-by- pixel treatments to help you achieve  excellence in portrait retouching. It intelligently smoothens and  removes imperfections while preserving skin texture and other important  portrait details such as hair, eyebrows, eyelashes etc.

Portraiture features a powerful masking tool that  enables selective smoothening only in the skin tone areas of the image.  What makes Portraiture&#8217;s masking tool truly unique is its built-in  Auto-Mask feature. It helps you quickly discover most of the skin tone  range of the image automatically and, if preferred, you can manually  fine-tune it to ensure optimal results, providing unmatched precision  and productivity.

For finer control, you can specify the smoothening degree for different  detail sizes and adjust the sharpness, softness, warmth, brightness and  contrast.

Portraiture comes with pre-defined presets for one-click effects and, as  with all Imagenomic plug-ins, you can capture your own signature  workflow in a custom preset tailored to your specific requirements and  photographic portfolio.


----------



## Galiah

I believe that he is using portraiture.... Don't quote me... but it really looks like it....


----------



## skyy38

D-50 said:


> This shot is done more with lighting and makeup than post processing. I'm sure he enhanced he eyes and smoothed the skin a bit in post but I bet the unprocessed image looks pretty close to this one. Photoshop, although fantastic is no match for solid lighting, good skin, and great make up.


 
Photoshop seems to be to photographers what Pro Tools is to musicians.

An ever widening safety net that is taking the place of true photographic skills.

Learn your stuff!


----------



## Buckster

skyy38 said:


> D-50 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This shot is done more with lighting and makeup than post processing. I'm sure he enhanced he eyes and smoothed the skin a bit in post but I bet the unprocessed image looks pretty close to this one. Photoshop, although fantastic is no match for solid lighting, good skin, and great make up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photoshop seems to be to photographers what Pro Tools is to musicians.
> 
> An ever widening safety net that is taking the place of true photographic skills.
> 
> Learn your stuff!
Click to expand...

Oh brother.

First, a one-post noob reanimates a dead thread, then another noob rolls in the ever-popular Photoshop vs. Real Photography Skills false dichotomy grenade.

What can I possibly contribute in the wake of that?

Hmmm...

I like ice cream!

Yeah, that oughtta do it. :thumbup:


----------



## HVVega

Not sure what all the fuss is about. Its basic high key lighting..pushed a bit in this case and then try using PhaseOne Pro on the raw images. If that dosen't make you happy think why look for levels and curves in your Image adjustments thats a start but I have a feeling there is a picture to painting program hes using first.


----------



## joliefoto

I do not like Robert's style, and I'm pretty sure he's using Topaz Adjust, a Photo Shop pluggin:

Topaz Adjust - The Easiest Way to Make Your Photos Pop

If you guys are intersted in this kind of photo effects, look up I mean google HDR (High Dynamic Range Photo)

BTW, I'm not a big fan of spending too much time on photo shop post production.


----------



## KmH

Did you notice the thread was started in _*June of 2008*_?


----------

