Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Image Makeover
- Thread starter Parinaa
- Start date
agentmoeller
Guru
- Messages
- 1,376
- Likes
- 1,026
She's much better looking in your version.
Agent
Agent
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
Hi Parinaa -
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus.
Before I comment on your "before-after" pair, I have some questions.
My 1st question is that in your "after" (your right or "make-over") image, there is a small piece of what appears to be light colored lint (it's at the center of the circle I drew). It's not present in your "before" image (your left, or "original").
It seems extremely unusual that one would add such an imperfection when one is retouching such an image. Such imperfections are always removed, not added.
I know this seems like a very small matter, but since you seemingly did such a great job on everything else, I'm curious why you added this. Are you sure that you didn't accidentally reverse the labels on the two images?
Tom
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus.
Before I comment on your "before-after" pair, I have some questions.
My 1st question is that in your "after" (your right or "make-over") image, there is a small piece of what appears to be light colored lint (it's at the center of the circle I drew). It's not present in your "before" image (your left, or "original").
It seems extremely unusual that one would add such an imperfection when one is retouching such an image. Such imperfections are always removed, not added.
I know this seems like a very small matter, but since you seemingly did such a great job on everything else, I'm curious why you added this. Are you sure that you didn't accidentally reverse the labels on the two images?
Tom
Attachments
- Messages
- 22,756
- Likes
- 13,268
Tom, it could be an accidental brush click. I've done this before myself.
I took the OP's original image and separated the two. I did an image search on both and only found results on the orange haired version.
The headband is another clue. It would have been almost impossible to mask so it became brown with the hair.
I still have suspensions here, I think the freaky orange haired version was touched up (eye's, lips), so there's an original somewhere.
I took the OP's original image and separated the two. I did an image search on both and only found results on the orange haired version.
The headband is another clue. It would have been almost impossible to mask so it became brown with the hair.
I still have suspensions here, I think the freaky orange haired version was touched up (eye's, lips), so there's an original somewhere.
Hi Tom Mann
I didn't even go near the area of the scarf, I really do not where the white dot comes from :O like IamSam mentionned, it is without much doubt an accidental brush click. but thank you for taking your time and making such an detailed analysis of my work, I appreciate that.
agentmoeller: Thank you very much
IamSam: I'm from Iran, and here it's common that girls look so artificial, with these extremely big lips and unnatural contact lenses
They pay a lot of money for surgery in order to look like that. so I doubt that any part of the "original" image was edited
I didn't even go near the area of the scarf, I really do not where the white dot comes from :O like IamSam mentionned, it is without much doubt an accidental brush click. but thank you for taking your time and making such an detailed analysis of my work, I appreciate that.
agentmoeller: Thank you very much
IamSam: I'm from Iran, and here it's common that girls look so artificial, with these extremely big lips and unnatural contact lenses
They pay a lot of money for surgery in order to look like that. so I doubt that any part of the "original" image was edited
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
Hi Parinnaa -
Thanks for stopping back in this forum. I just have one more question: What procedure did you use to get such excellent skin tones. Given what you apparently started with, you would have had a very difficult time getting all of the subtle variations in hue and saturation with luminosity, and with position on the face.
Thanks,
Tom
PS - Since you are so good at this, would u consider doing a tutorial on the subject, or at least posting your PSD file. This is primarily an educational forum and we all like to learn and have posted these sorts of things ourselves.
PPS - I'll be happy to supply a similar starting image.
Thanks for stopping back in this forum. I just have one more question: What procedure did you use to get such excellent skin tones. Given what you apparently started with, you would have had a very difficult time getting all of the subtle variations in hue and saturation with luminosity, and with position on the face.
Thanks,
Tom
PS - Since you are so good at this, would u consider doing a tutorial on the subject, or at least posting your PSD file. This is primarily an educational forum and we all like to learn and have posted these sorts of things ourselves.
PPS - I'll be happy to supply a similar starting image.
Last edited:
chrisdesign
Guru
- Messages
- 4,145
- Likes
- 6,072
Sam and Tom Mann have both the same suspicion as I have now. It could be that the original image is the one with brown hair, and the "make over" is the orange image. Maybe Parinaa simply wanted to test our "Photoshop Knowledge" in the forum.
I got to say, it kind of breaks my heart that you don't want to believe me that I did the make-over myself but on the other side, I have to say it also cheers me up a lot, that my make-over is seemingly so great, that nearly everyone mistakes it as the original
IamSam even mentionned that he made a image-search and he could only find the original picture, not my makeover...
Tom Mann: I'm not sure whether I understood you correctly, yes the one in the makeover does have another skintone, all I used was "Auto Color" and then I used "Fade" on "Auto Color". was this your question?
I love to explain how I did the make over,
*)on her lips and her nose I used liquify
*)changed the eye and haircolor and eyebrow with different layer option (Color/Softlight/....) (I have to say I do not follow any specific rule when working with layer options I just play with them and change them till I achieve the result I want)
only with these basic things in Photoshop I did this makeover, I know the difference is huge between the two photos but here you can see how much haircolor and eyecolor can change the appearance....
That was my only second makeover, I really did not think that I am so great at this that no one will believe me that I did this
but on the other side, I have to say it also cheers me up a lot, that my make-over is seemingly so great, that nearly everyone mistakes it as the original IamSam even mentionned that he made a image-search and he could only find the original picture, not my makeover...
Tom Mann: I'm not sure whether I understood you correctly, yes the one in the makeover does have another skintone, all I used was "Auto Color" and then I used "Fade" on "Auto Color". was this your question?
I love to explain how I did the make over,
*)on her lips and her nose I used liquify
*)changed the eye and haircolor and eyebrow with different layer option (Color/Softlight/....) (I have to say I do not follow any specific rule when working with layer options I just play with them and change them till I achieve the result I want)
only with these basic things in Photoshop I did this makeover, I know the difference is huge between the two photos but here you can see how much haircolor and eyecolor can change the appearance....
That was my only second makeover, I really did not think that I am so great at this that no one will believe me that I did this
Tom Mann,
I read your PPS after I sent my last post, you cand send me a similiar starting pic, I am always looking for good photos to work on ( I gotta say though now it's my exam-time, so I won't be able to do that until tomorrow...)
but I can also post you another one I already made...(here I haven't worked very precisely,
I read your PPS after I sent my last post, you cand send me a similiar starting pic, I am always looking for good photos to work on ( I gotta say though now it's my exam-time, so I won't be able to do that until tomorrow...)
but I can also post you another one I already made...(here I haven't worked very precisely,
Attachments
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
re: "...I have to say it also cheers me up a lot, that my make-over is seemingly so great, that nearly everyone mistakes it as the original..."
That is exactly the way you should take it! There are a million different ways to modify a high quality, perfectly lit, perfectly color balanced, perfectly exposed realistic photo to look eye-catching, and have exaggerated, or even completely bizarre colors and tones. There are a huge number of native PS tools, plugins and actions that anyone can use to do this that require nothing more than the press of a single button.
However, it is VASTLY more difficult to come up with a set of steps to reverse such a process, especially if you don't have a copy of the starting image to refer to. In fact, in many cases, a reverse process simply can not exist unless a very talented artist essentially reconstructs missing data by completely manual methods -- almost like colorizing an old black and white photo.
As a simple example, suppose someone takes a picture of colored lights and then processes it so that it becomes a sepia toned print, ie, the hue of all the lights is now the same -- one hue in the red-orange part of the spectrum. The processing has reduced a wide range of hues to one. No algorithm can spread out the hues again. An artist can guess what colors they might have been and paint those colors in, but they'll never know for sure if they got it right.
From what you have said, it sound like you are very, very good at recognizing realistic colors and tones, and you simply do whatever it takes to bring the highly processed version of the image back to a natural look.
So, as an example, attached is an image that came out of my camera a couple of years ago as a normal, reasonably well lit, exposed and color balanced photo of a woman. To make it look somewhat like the image you posted, I processed my image using Portrait Professional (with many of the adjustments set unusually high) followed by an overall cross processing effect. I would love to see how close you can come to the original (which I'll post later) and learn how you do it. I know that I would have an extremely difficult time returning this image to a normal appearance.
Cheers,
Tom M
That is exactly the way you should take it! There are a million different ways to modify a high quality, perfectly lit, perfectly color balanced, perfectly exposed realistic photo to look eye-catching, and have exaggerated, or even completely bizarre colors and tones. There are a huge number of native PS tools, plugins and actions that anyone can use to do this that require nothing more than the press of a single button.
However, it is VASTLY more difficult to come up with a set of steps to reverse such a process, especially if you don't have a copy of the starting image to refer to. In fact, in many cases, a reverse process simply can not exist unless a very talented artist essentially reconstructs missing data by completely manual methods -- almost like colorizing an old black and white photo.
As a simple example, suppose someone takes a picture of colored lights and then processes it so that it becomes a sepia toned print, ie, the hue of all the lights is now the same -- one hue in the red-orange part of the spectrum. The processing has reduced a wide range of hues to one. No algorithm can spread out the hues again. An artist can guess what colors they might have been and paint those colors in, but they'll never know for sure if they got it right.
From what you have said, it sound like you are very, very good at recognizing realistic colors and tones, and you simply do whatever it takes to bring the highly processed version of the image back to a natural look.
So, as an example, attached is an image that came out of my camera a couple of years ago as a normal, reasonably well lit, exposed and color balanced photo of a woman. To make it look somewhat like the image you posted, I processed my image using Portrait Professional (with many of the adjustments set unusually high) followed by an overall cross processing effect. I would love to see how close you can come to the original (which I'll post later) and learn how you do it. I know that I would have an extremely difficult time returning this image to a normal appearance.
Cheers,
Tom M
Attachments
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
Good question. As a middle aged woman, I am pretty sure the subject has her hair done in such a way as to vary its appearance from one group of strands to another to make the coloring appear more natural. I believe hairdressers call this process, "streaking".
I didn't do anything in post processing like copy in or draw in other strands of hair or change the color of selected areas in her hair.
Tom
PS - I'm really interested to see what u come up with, but take all the time u need. Your exams must be given top priority.
I didn't do anything in post processing like copy in or draw in other strands of hair or change the color of selected areas in her hair.
Tom
PS - I'm really interested to see what u come up with, but take all the time u need. Your exams must be given top priority.
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
Oh, and BTW, I think the reason that the hair in the lower right hand corner of the photos is darker and has a slightly different color is simply because it was out of the main lights and then, when I ran the shot through the cross processing preset for the purpose of this demo, it gives a slightly different color to the shadow areas than the highlights. Just ignore that area as well as the junk in the upper RH corner -- don't even worry about them.
T
T
Ok, here it is.... I really do not know whether I'm even close to the original
I just have to say, that I really had a hard time with her eyes, it took me ages to get a realistic eyecolor. I'm looking forward to see the original and I'd also appreciate if anyone could give me feedback on my "make-over"
I really do not know whether I'm even close to the originalI just have to say, that I really had a hard time with her eyes, it took me ages to get a realistic eyecolor. I'm looking forward to see the original and I'd also appreciate if anyone could give me feedback on my "make-over"
Attachments
I didn't see your reply before.
so I can say that the colors I chose for her eyes and hair are pretty close to the original....
But it was really difficult to change her haircolor/choose a new haircolor, because of the highlights she has in her hair (it's not dyed of only one color)
I didn't think that you could have also changed the color of her jacket (manually), that's why I didn't think of changing that.
I think that the skin tone in my make over is also a realistic tone for a woman's skin, although it's not her actual skin color.
so I can say that the colors I chose for her eyes and hair are pretty close to the original....
But it was really difficult to change her haircolor/choose a new haircolor, because of the highlights she has in her hair (it's not dyed of only one color)
I didn't think that you could have also changed the color of her jacket (manually), that's why I didn't think of changing that.
I think that the skin tone in my make over is also a realistic tone for a woman's skin, although it's not her actual skin color.
Last edited:
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,223
- Likes
- 4,343
"... I didn't think that you could have also changed the color of her jacket (manually), that's why I didn't think of changing that. ...."
I changed it to red to exactly parallel the change in the color from brown to orange fur in the pair of photos you posted. It was meant to demonstrate that there are certain things a re-toucher simply can't know.
"... I think that the skin tone in my make over is also a realistic tone for a woman's skin ..."
Sorry, but never once in my entire life have I ever seen a person of northern European stock with skin that color unless they applied fake tanning spray that leaves them with a yellow-orange color, or have a severe liver problem. In fact, I don't think I've seen anyone from any part of the world with skin the color you produced.
Finally, probably the most important thing that you didn't get right was the lack of restoration of correct shadowing, depth and texture to the skin, as did occur in the image pair you began this thread with. If you analyze the variation in hue and saturation from point to point on your tweaked version of my image, it is much less than in the original. In contrast, if you perform the same analysis on your image pair, your "after" image has the same or even more variation in hue and saturation than your starting image.
Tom M
PS - FYI, we have had numerous examples on this forum of people re-coloring old black and white photos which had vastly better skin color (and appropriate variation in that color) than your attempt to re-touch the photo I supplied. This is in stark contrast to the image pair you first posted in which the supposed retouching result was absolutely perfect.
I changed it to red to exactly parallel the change in the color from brown to orange fur in the pair of photos you posted. It was meant to demonstrate that there are certain things a re-toucher simply can't know.
"... I think that the skin tone in my make over is also a realistic tone for a woman's skin ..."
Sorry, but never once in my entire life have I ever seen a person of northern European stock with skin that color unless they applied fake tanning spray that leaves them with a yellow-orange color, or have a severe liver problem. In fact, I don't think I've seen anyone from any part of the world with skin the color you produced.
Finally, probably the most important thing that you didn't get right was the lack of restoration of correct shadowing, depth and texture to the skin, as did occur in the image pair you began this thread with. If you analyze the variation in hue and saturation from point to point on your tweaked version of my image, it is much less than in the original. In contrast, if you perform the same analysis on your image pair, your "after" image has the same or even more variation in hue and saturation than your starting image.
Tom M
PS - FYI, we have had numerous examples on this forum of people re-coloring old black and white photos which had vastly better skin color (and appropriate variation in that color) than your attempt to re-touch the photo I supplied. This is in stark contrast to the image pair you first posted in which the supposed retouching result was absolutely perfect.
Last edited: