philz Loc: Rockaway Township NJ

I attended yesterday a presentation by Lee Varis at unique photo in New Jersey showing frequency separation in detail using Photoshop. The process he demonstrated was incredibly complex. Which was fine for a professional portrait photographer going for an ultimate look but beyond my capability.

Afterwards, I came home and tried frequency separation using Affinity photo. It was far more simple and seem to be effective. I then applied the same retouching to a raw image version using the portrait mode in On1 Raw and compared the results.

My conclusion is that for non-professional work on people you are taking pictures of, On1 did a more than adequate job. For those that don't use it, the retouch brush is magic. It satisfied this amateur but perhaps not a professional.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Wow - didn't know Varis was a Unique. Sorry I missed that.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Yes, loads of tuts but, as always, for straight Ps tuts I recommend Aaron Nace at Phlearn.com - been following his advice for several years now. He will give you the action too.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Sure, I’ll post the original - not certain whether I saved the ‘just before conversion’ version though. I’ll check.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I think the PS method tends to look and sound more complex than it really is. If you're used to using multiple layers it should be reasonably strait forward after a couple of goes - and creating an action (or downloading a freeby) simplifies things too.
Can’t comment on the other programmes as I don’t have them but what you say makes a lot of sense - so many skin retouching methods are way beyond what the average amateur either needs or has the patience for. They come into their own for fashion mags and billboards I guess.

philz Loc: Rockaway Township NJ

I should have added that the people I have to satisfy are mostly older women (especially my wife) who do not want to see the effect of a sharp lens upon their shall we say no longer pristine faces. Retouching in On1 Raw, which has blemish removal tools as well as the retouch brush, or even Lightroom with a lowered clarity brush at 60% opacity under the eyes, results in a happy response. Without doing the retouching I am in trouble!

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

OK, here is a side-by-side of before (L) and after (R) of just the head portion for easy comparison.
Not quite the end result as I did remove the hot-spot on her nose, and adjusted the split toning.
Please feel free to comment upon the result!
Unless Linda has noticed and helped, you cannot see a thumbnail - you will need to download to compare in any case. but thanks Linda if you've provided the elusive thumbnail!

Attached file:
(Download)

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Understanding how frequency separation works as to the separation of the pixels that influence texture form the ones that influence the tone and color and the related techniques is not all that complex. Like many other aspects of photography, once you try your hand at it and practice, some of the more daunting aspects soon become routine and easier to perform.

That being said, like in many other aspects of photography, folks manage to master the basic operations of the equipment, the software and may be extremely well versed, well read and totally immersed in the technology, the science and the plethora of equipment specifications but somehow leave the artistic elements behind. Portrait retouching is one of the areas where this imbalance usually holds true. So let's examine the whys, whats, and wherefores of the subject.

Just a little philosophy. Folks like enhanced and idealized portraits of themselves for many reasons. My favorite philosophical approach came from one of my best teachers and mentors who simply stated in his advertising that "people want to be photographed as they were, as they are, and as they would like to be remembered". Most folks just like to be represented at their best. Whether it is a romantic gift for a significant other, a professional or business portrait, a theatrical or modeling portfolio image, people want to make a good impression with their image. Everyone has a certain degree of vanity - some more and some less. Some prefer more authenticity and some prefer fantasy!

Good retouching, as it is applied to fine portraiture, is an art in and of itself. In the olden days of manual negative and positive retouching, it required a great deal of dexterity, hand/eye coordination and a very specific and high level of technique. The retoucher was literally carving away at negatives and prints with etching knives, razor blades and shards of glass, applying liquid retouching mediums (to supply "tooth"), leads, dyes, and most mistakes were irreversible. Artistically., the skill sets included knowledge of facial structure, and a background in camera techniques in portraiture and lighting would be helpful if not mandatory.

Nowadays, of course, in electronic/digital computer-based editing, the manual aspects are no longer an issue but the artistic elements are just as important.

Understanding the photography aspect of facial structure, camera position, and lighting boil down to the retoucher knowing what is real and what is artificial, what to retouch or correct and what NOT to retouch or attempt to correct and most importantly, when to STOP retouching.

When many of these aforementioned elements are not considered, learned and employed, the results are usually over-retouching, plastic-like skin textures, extreme whitening of teeth and the whites of the eyes and many kinds of misrepresentation of the facial structure. As an example, it is fine to reduce dark circles, bags or some wrinkles under the eyes, however, if this is overdone, it appears that there are no eyesockets and the orbital areas of the face are unnaturally represented.

There are many aesthetics that should be addressed in shooting as opposed to post-processing. Posing, lighting and camera position can solve many problems that subjects (or clients) might find objectionable- things like sagging areas in the chin/jaw/neck areas, very deep set eyes, asymmetries in the face, extreme heaviness or thinness of the facial structure, fly away hair and even rough complexions can be better attended to in shooting (via diffused lighting, optical diffusion and/or soft focus optics). Seemingly ill-fitting clothing is usually a result of poor posture in posing or lack of attention to detail while at the camera and correcting some of these problems in retouching is extremely tedious, time-consuming and may tend to look artificial or unnatural or incompatible with the lighting- even in the hands of a skilled retoucher.

So...as a long-time portrait shooter I do what I call pre-retouching. I do facial analysis and decide on camera position, lighting and posing. I usually do a pre-sitting consultation to prepare the subject, find out what their expectations are and advise on clothing colors, styles, etc, and hair and makeup arrangement when required. By the time the session is over, the retouching will probably be minimal, just to remove a few blemishes.

What to retouch? I try to discourage things like "taking 20 years off" older folks etc. Some lines and wrinkles give character to the face, however, I will usually remove things that may be signs of illness, rashes, a certain blemish that will be eventually cured, and/or various dermatological conditions. In younger folks, I never met anyone that wants to see acne in their high school graduation portrait- that will be fully retouched. I have not experienced too many female subjects that really want to see their pores ina portrait. This is not an anti-feminist remark- I have photographed many male executives and entertainers that were more vane n and self-conscious that an of the ladies. This is why I do theses pre-sitting discussions to find out what is expected in the final results. I am pleased when the client views their images and simple like the results. They don't say "wow- I like the retouching"! The rioting must be invisible and not call attention to itself and still be enhancing. I love it when the client takes all the "credit" and says "I do take a good picture, don't I"! I NEVER remind them that I take the picture around here. They do appreciate the good work after all.

Frankly speaking, I was never a talented manual retoucher. I took it up at school, attended many seminars and could get away with retouching large "head sizes" on large format negatives. When we went to roll film, it became way above my pay rate- so to speak, so I always employed a full-time retoucher at the studio. I understood the technique and I ken what to do but the "hands" were never there- I'm better at plumbing and auto mechanics! Big hands!

Even no with the electronics, my retoucher does most of that work- she came from the "old school" and took all of the aesthetics into the digital age along with her.

For some of our high volume jobs, we use the Portrait-Pro software. It works nicely in that we still go the pre-retouching route and careful shooting procedures and each order only requires minimal retouching. I highly recommend this for amateur and professional portraitists if they don't want to get into major retouching skill sets. We do employ frequency separation techniques via PhotoShop for some of the jobs. My retoucher is also kept busy in our commercial work where this technique oftentimes comes in handy.

Even in the Portrait-Pro programs, YOU still have many controls so you need to remember what to retouch and what not to retouch and not to overdo it. Remember, nobody has day-glo teeth or eyeballs! Visit your local clothing shop and check out the mannequins- that's NOT the skin texture you want in your portraits. Invest in a can of hairspray- do not spray it directly on anyone's hair. Just shoot a bit on the palm of your hand and, w tedious work and you won't make the subject's hair look like a bad wig. Pay attention to detail and check out clothing issues before you shoot. Encourage good subtle makeup for folks that use makeup.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Very nice. I've used frequency separation much the same as you did, touching up blemishes and wrinkles. It's a great tool for that sort of thing.
--Bob

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

For those who have never heard of frequency separation and have an aversion to Google, here’s a brief description.

If you have a photo with too much resolution in some areas (usually something like a portrait with wrinkles), frequency separation can help. You make two layers with the original photo. Blur one layer slightly (just enough to smooth out the wrinkles). That is a low spatial frequency image. The original is the high spatial frequency image. Put the high frequency layer on top. Then you just erase the wrinkles in the top layer. That will show the blurred (low frequency) image so the blurring hides the wrinkles.

That’s a brief description to give you the idea but there are refinements to the technique that I won’t go into here since i’m typing On my phone at the moment.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Thanks indeed for your contribution. Some very good points raised, especially in regard to sorting things before firing the shutter - saves so much time.
I guess if hiring rather than shooting as a service, careful selection of the model can help a lot too. At the shoot my photo is from we had two models. I’d certainly hire the one shown but, whilst the second model was pretty, experienced and a photographer herself, her tattoos make life quite difficult when it comes to retouching.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I’ve just been trying it for tattoo removal Bob - not as straightforward as I’d hoped as the tattoo affects both layers of the fs set.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I use it slightly differently but yours is a good description of the basic technique, easily understood. I know folk sometimes find it a complex procedure but, as you explain, it doesn’t have to be.
The blurred layer can itself be improved by selectively adding further blur to areas, smoothing uneven colour and shadow transitions. The ‘top’ layer retains texture but can be used to clone out wrinkles - and hair, which registers as texture.
As I mentioned to Bob Marles, tattoos unfortunately register on both layers so take more effort!
Many thanks for your contribution to the subject, much appreciated.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Thanks for posting. The comparison is very important in illustrating the method. The difference is subtle and, importantly, the result is realistic.

To a larger and more philosophical point, too many posts here present results as a fiat accompli. I would like to see more people explain how they got to the end product with enough detail and illustrations so that others can learn. This topic certainly has a lot of educational value and I will try it. Sometimes I think people use some tools simply because they have them.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I’m as guilty as anyone of posting an end result - but I do try to persuade people to discuss and ask questions. An illustration of the difference does lend far more interest and help in understanding, I agree. I hope others find it useful. I’m sure some will decide they don’t need that degree of subtly, and I understand that.
I have been discussing the method in question with an old UHH friend, who tells me he uses it for all sorts of colour/texture changes, including clothing. That makes sense to me and I’ll be giving it a go myself.