Portrait Professional (Page 2): They all look constipated....

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Totally.

They all look constipated....

canon Lee

jerryc41 wrote:

I had to take head shots of actors in a local play - with more come. I'm wondering if Portrait Professional would be worth getting. I used it many years ago, and I wasn't thrilled it it. It tended to change the shape of the face too much, and the adjustments were too extreme. Is the latest version any better?

These are "actors," and they expect to look really, really good.

Hi Jerry... Keep it simple and use a calibrated monitor and photoshop or LR to just tweak . It is so easy to get carried away with too many changes. If your shots are in the exposure ball park then all you need is to just tweak the image. Head shots take time to set up the lighting to get that acceptable image you are seeking... Adjust the lighting, use props as in sun glasses, hats, change of outfits, .....

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

LoneRangeFinder wrote:

They all look constipated....

And also, as if a mortician had done the make up.

Dennis

Lukabulla

I have used PP for a while now ... It's ok but Very ' Obvious ' that the image has been altered .
There are many options on PP .. EG Glamorous/ normal / etc ..

I recently updated to the newest Version , but somehow I prefer the previous version ( which has now been over written by new one)

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

jerryc41 wrote:

I had to take head shots of actors in a local play - with more come. I'm wondering if Portrait Professional would be worth getting. I used it many years ago, and I wasn't thrilled it it. It tended to change the shape of the face too much, and the adjustments were too extreme. Is the latest version any better?

These are "actors," and they expect to look really, really good.

Jerry,
I've had Portrait Professional for quite awhile and I love it for what it is. You just have to be very careful and not fall into the trap of "maybe I can just add this". I've told the story before of taking a photo of my wife's 75 year old female friend. It was a decent portrait but just needed "a few" touches to make it good. I uploaded it into portrait pro and kept doing "just a little more" following the built-in aids. The portrait took away all of her wrinkles, added more flattering lighting, slimmed her, cut the jowls some and made her look like she was in her 40's. Her husband LOVED the photo.... she (of course) didn't like it as it wasn't "realistic". I redid the photo (yes using Portrait Pro again) and just did light touches and adjusted lighting etc. It was a very good portrait and SHE loved it. Her hubby still had the old one framed and on his dresser. My point is that Portrait Pro is very good and can be "too good". It's easy to get carried away with that "just one more fix" syndrome. Having said that, I do love it but have had to restrain the urge to get carried away. Now, I keep looking at (but haven't downloaded or purchased) their "Scenic Pro" software.

spraguead Loc: Boston, MA

Having commissioned lots of photography, and hired many actors and models, I prefer head shots that aren't overly smoothed out with Portrait Professional or one of the Lightroom/Photoshop plug ins. With that said, I'd say ore than half the head shots I look at use these methods quite heavily. So those paying for them must like the effect.

berchman Loc: South Central PA

Gene51 wrote:

Here is an excellent facial retouch, done correctly. It is an excellent illustration of how to use FreqSep to address shine, uneven skin color, etc.
https://petapixel.com/2013/10/13/photoshop-tutorial-retouching-shiny-skin/

I think one would need a Ph.D in Photoshop to follow this.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

berchman wrote:

I think one would need a Ph.D in Photoshop to follow this.

photostephen

I once used Portrait Pro on a photo of my wife. She looked at the photo (which made drastic changes, such as wrinkle removal, age spots gone etc).

She gave me her "angry look" and said -- "OK, this is good, I like looking younger, not go back and do this to all the 100's of photos you have of me."

I could not stop laughing for the rest of the day.

MCHUGH Loc: Jacksonville, Texas

I have use portrait pro for a number of years and really like it. As many have already said be careful not to over do. The image you get at first can be tone down or up as needed. I find it save me a lot of time with the first layer of retouching but I always go back and do little teaks afterwards. I also use their portrait pro body software and really like what it can do but just like the portrait pro don't over do it and tone back when needed. With it as with all software you have to be careful not to make the person look fake.

StevenG Loc: Long Island, NY

jerryc41 wrote:

I had to take head shots of actors in a local play - with more come. I'm wondering if Portrait Professional would be worth getting. I used it many years ago, and I wasn't thrilled it it. It tended to change the shape of the face too much, and the adjustments were too extreme. Is the latest version any better?

These are "actors," and they expect to look really, really good.

I have used Portrait Pro for years, and currently have the latest version. I love the program, and if used sparingly I find it very effective. As mentioned by others, I also turn off all controls, and start from scratch. I never use the face sculpt option to change the shape of the face. However, I find it very useful in certain circumstances. For example to widen an eye if the two are not open equally. I also find it very useful to sharpen eyes and brighten the iris. It is also helpful to moisten lips. I also find the hair smoothing controls a nice feature. You will find the features you enjoy. While all of this can probably be done with PS, I think the ease and speed with which these edits can be achieved is a definite positive.
Steve

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

Gene51 wrote:

The only value to a person performing retouching f... (show quote)

The retouching tutorial video was very good. It brought together many of the topics/techniques I have seen individually in other tutorials.
Thank you for the link and no PhD was required to understand it.

Who is that Fox News woman (who looks slightly like Hillary Clinton) in the image above your post?

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

I agree with this poster. Always revert to the original image and then control the changes you make. I find it's an excellent program if you don't allow it to "get carried away".

rfreudenheim wrote:

I use it often with portraits and head shots. I always revert to the original image after the file import as I don’t like to make severe changes. I tend to only make slight adjustments. A little goes a long way. I find that the touch up brush is very helpful, but there again, you need to use it with a light hand.

Linda Ewing Loc: Lincolnshire,UK

Over the years I have purchased several of the Portrait Professional plug ins, I agree the original one was very heavy handed especially on an older person's face, for younger people it was great. I liked it as it helped me in my PS adjustments. I am one of these people who thinks that if I buy all these things it will make me better at what I am trying to do!!!

Recently I have purchased the Landscape version and another latest one (sorry can't remember which one at this moment) but I am disappointed to say the least, I am finding it difficult to use as it has got complicated and I feel I have wasted my money this time, it was so much simpler before. I would save your money and do a few YouTubes on the piece you want to work on.

jerryc41 wrote:

Thanks.

daddybear Loc: Brunswick, NY

Kmgw9v wrote:

In my experience, even with extreme restraint, the use of Portrait Pro results in overdone images.

same here. Have to use a gentle touch.