It is disheartening to read some of the disrespectful and nasty comments directed at a 95-year-old person. I am, however, I'm not surprised- it seems par for the course around these parts

The OP did not post any of the images in question. He may have done a good job, as per most acceptable standards, or the images are indeed poorly crafted.

His question was, in effect, waht to do about a dissatisfied client. My advice was to do a re-shoot- simple as that! I have been making portraits, professionally, for a lifetime. I know what I am doing and most of my clients are more than satified. I, however, am not perfect or infallible- I make mistakes, take the wrong lighting or camera-angle approach, or miscalculate the degree of retouching, or the client or I just had a bad day. So, I guarantee my work as to re-shoot or refunded! We're all human beings- not AI-driven robots!

The OP mentioned that he is not into retouching. He should have told the client that before undertaking the job. There are alternative methods of "softening" an image other than retouching so those should have been applied. The client specified a close-up image. A 3/4 length image may have beedn more appropriate. Skin softening is not the only problem or remedy, the are many other factors that can create an unflattering portrait.

If the portraits in question are going to be on public display and the subjects are concerned about their appearance, the photographer should be advised of this requirement and if he is ill-equipped to handle the assignment, he should suggest engaging an experienced portrait photogher.

By the way- I have, on occasion, if I am not completely satisfied with a portrait session, asked a client to come in for a re-shoot or an extended choice of images. I do not want a faulty image on display with my signature on it. I would rather let my ego guide me this way rather than against the client.

Now, about 13 years ago, I cycled through an inherited AE-1, a T90, and an F-1. I added a few FD lenses which were selling relatively cheap back then, at just the start of the mirrorless uses for these lenses, circa 2010.

But, what I was finding was I wasn't getting as good images as from my AF equipment. Film was / is too expensive for inferior results. My final move was to an EOS 1v to share my EF lenses between DSLR and this SLR, a 1-series professional body almost as sophisticated and capable as my EOS 5DIII. My next move was to sell-off the MF bodies. And, as a final step, picked up a used Sony a7II to see if I'd like the FD lenses on a MILC. The answer was an emphatic YES.

As a reminder, we have an UHH Film Section. Today, 269 subscribers, come one, come all!!

Film-wise, I bought up several large lots of 'freezer sales' from here at UHH, now with probably more film in my freezer than I shoot the rest of this lifetime, nearly all expired. New and old stocks I prefer:

New - B&W
Kodak Tri-X 400
Ilford Delta 400
Kodak TMAX 100 & 400
Fuji Neopan Acros 100

New Color
Kodak Portra 400
Kodak Ektar 100

Expired B&W
Kodak T400CN
various expired rolls of any of above

Expired Color
Fuji Press 800
Fuji Superia 400
Fuji NPH 400