On retouching

I wanted to find out, how beneficial retouching is to my photography. So far I haven’t paid a lot of attention to post-processing, but recently read an article in the New Yorker about Retoucher Pascal Dangin of Box Studios who claimed that many photographer like Annie Leibovitz would hardly ever print a photo without him.

I took this photo:

100% loupe.

Disclaimer: This picture looks worse than it actually is, because it is really the original RAW-file, with no processing whatsoever and even with the wrong colorspace for web-viewing. I know about the weird facial expression and composition imperfection, but I picked this picture because it’s reasonably lit (two studio strobes, with a lighting-ratio of 3:1), was sharp and had a clean background.

What I wanted to do is:
- retouch the image myself
- retouch the image using Photoshop-plugins (I used to use Portraiture and Portrait Professional)
- use a professional retoucher

In terms of professionals I wanted to use Tucia, an offshore retouch company. However, when I got their results I decided to ask a “real” professional and got in contact with Box Studios and Fred NY.

What I wanted to find out was:

- how good is my own work compared with the professionals?
- will it all look fake or will it improve the pictures?
- will it help me with my stock photography?
- how does a $20 retouche compare to a $2000 retouche?
- would offshoring work?
- how does a plugin compare to manual work?

My own attempt:

100% loupe.

I am using photoshop for about 2 years, but I never did retouching before. I read a couple of articles of how to do it, and watched Nick’s tutorial (link). My previous photoshop experience is limited to setting the black/white-points, curve adjustments and various filters and plugins.

Especially after watching Nick’s DVDs I must say I was reasonably happy with the result. It took me like 1-2h and was actually fun. It’s all basic stuff, like brightening the eyes and teeth, smoothen the skin, hide imperfections, etc … Certainly this was “basic” retouching only.

In comparison with the other results I have to admit, that unfortunately the colors are not right. This would need to be corrected in my version.

But how does it compare?

First I’ve uploaded it to Tucia. I’ve send them a straight from camera JPG and provided them with the above RAW file. My instruction to them was “do the best you can, it’s all yours to decide what to do and what to leave as is” and was then, after they asked, more specific requesting for “fashion/glamor”-style.

One thing I would like to note about Tucia is, that they have a great web-frontend and it all looks very professional. They are fast and you always know exactly in which status your project with them is. They also offer unlimited revisions in case you are not happy. And they are cheap. Retouching costs between 1-4 credits, each credit can be purchased at prices between $2.99 and $8. I went for the 4 credit deluxe retouche: “Deluxe Service (4 credits), Image Size Limit: Less than 50 Million Pixels, Max Turnaround: 48 Hours, Designers: Senior Level (top 5%), Examples: illustration; cartooning; high end commercial projects; other sophisticated need”. Sounds like a winner …

The results? Oh dear … Let’s assume that it was my fault. I could have provided them with a reference picture of what I would like them to do or I could just have been more specific in my work order. To me it looked a bit like a cheap photo booth:

100% loupe.

This is the second revision after my comments:

100% loupe.

Bottom line: It’s just not my style. I appreciate their work, but I don’t like it and even the second version did not make a big difference, so I’ve accepted the second try as final and paid. I guess if you are a wedding photographer and have 500 pictures where you need a pimple on the bride’s nose removed it might be reasonable, but for me it didn’t work. (Actually this would probably be too expensive, because if you use a professional DSLR their cheapest offer costs 2 credits).

To be fair I did another 2-credit test with them, asking for “Amy Dresser”-style retouching of my 2-year old son. It was better than my own attempts, but still nothing I would put on a wall. But as said, for 2 credits ($16 max) it was good enough and I accepted this work immediatly.

Another thing I was worried about with Tucia is that they claim to have 7000 retouchers. To me this sounds a bit high, but even with 70 I would be concerned about concistency. Given the two examples above I already think that I was more lucky with the toddler-retoucher than with the “expert”.

Side-note: Tucia is using YouSendIt, which I have never heard before and who provides a great service to send large files. I signed up and definetly like YouSendIt for sending files around!

The Professionals

I was in touch with Box Studios, which probably is THE retouching house in New York. Well … I thought that with a staff of 80+ they always have some retouchers which are bored and might even have some Juniors who could have a look and give it a try. But I couldn’t afford it. Maybe I’ll try later with a different picture which is worth that money, but for this shot it was just too much $$$$ (note the number of $’s).

Next I went to Fred NY and got a very friendly feedback from the owner. His pricing was pretty much the same like Box, but he agreed on a special given that it was personal work for my portfolio and no commercial big-budget shot. I’ve looked at his portfolio and he did covers for Vogue and advertising for big brand names.

Here’s Matt’s (from Fred NY) version after ~5h of work on this image:

100% loupe before.
100% loupe after.

What really impressed me was:

- in every detail you see how well it was crafted, unfortunately the small web images don’t show but even at 100% (200% ,300%, …) it’s just incredibly well done
- he took care of things I have not noticed and improved them
- he even managed to correct the facial expression
- the colors are just right (in comparison mine were wrong, but I only noted this in direct comparison)
- a lot of detail in the skin remained

Plugins

After Matt’s version the plugins look like a joke, so I’m not posting them now but might add them later.

Update 20100220: As requested, here are the plugin versions. The comparison is not entirely fair, because I didn’t tweak the results of the plugins much. It is basically running with defaults:

This is the crop I used as a source:

100% loupe.

This is the portraiture result:

100% loupe.

This is the portrait professional result:

100% loupe.

Conclusion

I do not think offshoring works. One needs to find a retoucher who’s personal style fits to the photographer and the job to be done. Compared with a low-end retouching studio like Tucia it’s probably better to just do it yourself, unless you have many pictures to be retouched in a short timeframe. As for the professionals I definitely do see the point, but it comes with a heavy price-tag, which most likely will be a no-go for many (of my) jobs. For me I’ve decided to stick with Fred NY for my important work and do the small bit’s and pieces myself. Maybe I learn something in the process :)

In regards to the questions above:

- how good is my own work compared with the professionals?

With a very limited view on exposure, crop, skin, eyes, teeth, etc I think it’s ok and improves the image. If I spend the time it (to me) looks better than those cheap online retouching offers. Unfortunately my work is far away from a professional retouching house, even if I would spend the extra hours.

- will it all look fake or will it improve the pictures?

it’s an improvement

- will it help me with my stock photography?

yes

- how does a $20 retouche compare to a $2000 retouche?

Like a Bentley and a Hyundai.

- would offshoring work?

Not for me.

- how does a plugin compare to manual work?

Portraiture does an ok job on the skin, but looks a bit plastic. Portrait Professional does not compare at all. With all features enabled it is funny, but doesn’t work for me.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Blogplay
This entry was posted in In the studio and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • TC
    All of my retouching work is done by me as the photographer. I've often wondered the same thing about my work, self taught vs. "the professional retouch artist" let's face it, many "pros" have taught themselves over the years, an education can be good if you have the time, and money, and get a lucky break to work with a good company.
  • Just as the photographer is best behind the camera, good retouch should be done by people with years of experience doing retouch full time.
    I am surprised to hear you talk about spending 2 hours on this image, and a retouch house spending nearly 5 hours! I know it's not popular to "advertise" to people in blogs like this, but it sounds like you need a solution. I serve clients from New York all the way out to Las Vegas. I work out of my home in Kansas City and have a second high end professional who I share overload work with. I believe that the most important part of what I do is make the photographers life easier while taking their work to a new level. My longest standing client is in New York, and he can speak to the relationship that we have which has produced some work we are both really proud of. Contact me if you want to talk, Im sure I can help. I can provide sample that represent whatever you need done, in the mean time you can see samples on my NAPP portfolio at: http://www.photoshopuser.com/members/portfolios...

    -Michael michael@retouchMOJO.com
  • pau
    This was indeed an interesting topic.I have been a full time professional retoucher for a couple of years.I heard a quote once about photography: "Having a camera does not make you a photographer".I guess the same applies to a retoucher: "Having Photoshop does not make you retoucher."I have done so many covers and I still remember every single one. Every photo is a new challenge and every day I learn something new.I think every photographer needs a retoucher, it helps to put some distance between yourself and your artwork.Others might just see something important that you dont.Retouchers should also respect "their" photographer's work as we all take pride in what we do.A good brief does wonders for a desired result.
  • Hi Michael, actually I was suprised too, that “the professionals” spend more time on this than I did. However, this is because of different techniques being used. Even though I didn’t blur the image, my approach did loose some detail in the skin. If one does it properly, just like Matt did, this indeed just takes more time. @All, If anybody is interested I could post the original RAW file and you could submit your versions if you like. Please let me know.

    PS: I’m not a big fan of SEO postings or sales rethoric in my blog.
  • adaptdigital
    Hey Markus,

    Looks like you spent quite a bit of time to figure out some good points. As a retoucher myself, I thought I would chime in a bit regarding your interests and needs for digital post on work:

    - You are right... retouchers are not the right answer aesthetically or financially for every gig. The better the work the more it can cost per image (though I would imagine you get discounts for multiple images, etc.). Ideally you can add them as an additional expense that piggy back off of your estimate for jobs... which can take the burden off of you, financially, and share it with the client end. When that is not available for editorial or personal work, often there are different price points that good retouchers will offer you to help make it work on the limited budget - or, depending on the specific project, could be done as portfolio trades for either of the members involved.

    -The price is always the first thing to deter a photographer from using someone as a digital artist to help fine tune their work. Outsourcing and using low end places like what you tried, (including the likes of people found on model mayhem, etc.) are never ideal.... You found that out, but the fact remains : someone has an interest in photoshop and wants to support themselves on it... but they lack the necessary finesse and experience that it takes to get the work done properly.... hind sight is what you found to be true: you should have done it yourself!

    - Something that I often see as a reason to push your imagery to a retoucher (or hire one to work with you more exclusively) often has to do with the overall picture, and is summed up in this great quote i found recently on A Photo Editor's site:
    "i also suggest not doing your own production. in my experience, there simply is not enough of a margin to be made (if at all these days) in doing production and it is a waste of a photographers time to attempt to suck 10-15% out of a budget. you are a photographer. be a photographer. if you are making 50K fees on an ad job and the production is say another 50K, it is simply not worth trying to make another 5K out of the production. as you are holding a lot of overhead which if it goes wrong and/or over budget, you and your business will be held responsible. not to mention the headache."
    granted, they are speaking about production people and not specifically retouchers.... but the same concepts apply: If you are a photographer and are trying to shoot as many jobs as you can get your hands on.... why would you sacrifice the time doing the post production work on the imagery which can cost you 5-8 hours an image - inevitably keeping you up late at night cursing photoshop? Your job is to capture and manage the process. If you can get someone to do post while you are out on another job, why would any reasonable business person choose to turn down work? Not to mention if you can push their expense to the client (or at least share it with the client) and have control over direction and corrections on the image(s) - that would be the ideal system.

    - Another concept to consider, which is founded in the above statement: People who have limited budgets have to do most of the post work for themselves to accomplish the look and feel. It requires them to actually learn photoshop enough to be proficient to get their concepts across in their image(s). If you spend too much time working behind the computer, you are losing touch with working behind the lens. Doing this will work for some time, though eventually lead to a crossroad where you will have to determine what you want to focus on and what you want to delegate to others to achieve your goals. No one is saying it is a problem to set up FPOs of what you want the direction to take for your image(s) - but difference between directing and doing can cost you time and money and should be looked into for your business' future.

    Cheers & Randomness,
    Matt Taylor
    www.adaptdigital.com
  • Thanks for testing these, very useful information. You should add the plug-in images for comparison. Of course they won't be as well done as the hand retouch but that's kind of your point, right? Maybe add some 100% crops of small skin patches to show the difference between all the different versions as well.
  • You are right; I've started adding the 100% views (zoomify), but will need to upload Matt's version again as the current uploads of his version are in the wrong colorspace; I'll also add the Plug-In Samples tonight.
  • I've uploaded the results of the two plugins: portraiture and portrait professional
  • mattfredny
    Thanks for the plug Markus. -
blog comments powered by Disqus