Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > Frequency Separation made easy

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

The past two days there have been threads on how to describe frequency separation in a simple step by step way that would be easy to follow for everyone.

Angela Michelle Perez made a very clean and simple video that showed how to separate your image into 2 frequencies. A Low and a High frequency.

Watch Angela's video: Watch video
However her video contains a little flaw which is discussed here.

EDIT:
Angela made a new video: New video

Photons2Pixels came up with a nice solution to how to heal non-destructively on the High Pass layer.
Described here.

But his methods required for either switching between layers or not being able to clearly see what one is doing.
so I made some changes to his method. As described here.

And I created an action for this method. Which was tested by rey sison photography and can be downloaded here:Download frequency separation action.


This action will...
- separate your image in 2 frequencies. A Low and a High.
- It will then attach a clipping mask to the High Pass frequency to do the non-destructive healing on (Healing brush Sample mode set to Current Layer)
- it will add a clipped curves adjustment layer for some detail sharpening
- and it will create a Dodge and a Burn curves adjustment layer for some D&B-ing.

1. Download the Action
2. Load action in Photoshop
3. Select your layer you want to separate
4. Make sure you have Add Mask By Default turned on
http://www.lanengaretouch.com/modelmayhem/adjustments_add_mask_by_default.png
5. Run action
6. Select a blur amount for your Low/High pass
7. Set the Apply image settings as shown below

8bit settings:
http://www.lanengaretouch.com/modelmayhem/apply_image_8bit_settings.png

16bit settings:
http://www.lanengaretouch.com/modelmayhem/apply_image_16bit_settings.png

8. Have fun and enjoy!


And here is a step-by-step of what the action is supposed to do:
1. Rename the Background layer to Original
2. Duplicate the BG layer 2 times.
3. Rename Original Copy to Low
4. Rename Original Copy 2 to High
5. Select Low layer
6. Make Low a Smart Object
7. Apply a Gausian Blur to Low
8. Select High layer
9. Apply Image
10. Set blending mode of High to Linear Light
11. Select both High and Low
12. Make a group
13. Rename group to Split
14. Select the High layer
15. Duplicate High
16. Make the Duplicate a clipping mask
17. Set blending mode of Duplicate to Normal
18. Rename Duplicate to HP Heal Layer
19. Add a layer Mask to HP Heal Layer
20. Create a new Curves Adjustment layer
http://www.lanengaretouch.com/modelmayhem/sharpen_details_curve.png
21. Clip Curves Adjustment layer to HP Heal Layer
22. Set blending mode of this Curves layer to Lighten.
23. Select the layer mask of the Curves and Invert it to Black
24. Rename this layer Sharpen Details


For a better understanding of what it is and what it could be used for, read the HighPass Sucks (+ solution) thread by SRB Photo

Oct 03 10 04:38 am Link

Photographer

R A V E N D R I V E

Posts: 15867

New York, New York, US

Thanks

Oct 03 10 04:43 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

R A V E N D R I V E wrote:
Thanks

No problem
Post your results big_smile

Oct 03 10 05:39 am Link

Retoucher

Krunoslav Stifter

Posts: 3883

Santa Cruz, California, US

Nice sum up Lanenga smile

I would just like to add the video from Omar to the mix.

Retouching Tutorial: Frequency Separation
http://hiendworkshops.com/2010/08/18/re … paration-2

Oct 03 10 05:40 am Link

Photographer

Beautiful Sundays

Posts: 3840

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

I posted a step-by-step on the original page, and just saw your action plan.

Concerns:

1) Gauss on a standard layer. My question is why knock yourself out to improve upon High-Pass and then compromize it with a fixed Gauss? Your action allows no flexibility except opacity. Suggest Smart Object/Smart Filter w Surface? (thereby infinitely adjustable).

2) HF healing layer....Angela's blank layer plan is fine-EDIT--no, not optimal..better to make 2 HF layers, use one for healing (current layer only), and keep the other as a spare original...as d/w Lanenga

3) All of the curve adjustment layers seem to me to be 'filler'.....nothing wrong with filler mind you, just would trade them all in for a smart object LF layer w SB.

Other than that pretty cool....impressed that you took the time smile

Oct 03 10 05:53 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Beautiful Sundays wrote:
I posted a step-by-step on the original page, and just saw your action plan.

Concerns:

1) Gauss on a standard layer. My question is why knock yourself out to improve upon High-Pass and then compromize it with a fixed Gauss? Your action allows no flexibility except opacity. Suggest Smart Object/Smart Filter w Surface? (thereby infinitely adjustable).

This is by no means THE way to do it. Just an easy to follow step-by-step separation workflow.

But the gausian blur is done on a smart object layer.
Maybe you're still running the first action I uploaded today.

If you'd like a surface blur there, you can easily change the action.

Didn't want to scare people by baking in a surface blur that will take 5 minutes to finish big_smile

Beautiful Sundays wrote:
2) HF healing layer....Angela's blank layer plan is fine...she simply forgot to delete the 'eyeball' selectively (current and below samples VISIBLE layers as you know...no eyeball, no sampling)

True, no eyeball, no sampling.
Also, no eyeball, no accurate visible reference.

Because the only layer you want to be sampling from is the HP layer.

This method was to give the same result as the blank layer while maintaining an accurate visible reference of the shot.

Beautiful Sundays wrote:
3) All of the curve adjustment layers seem to me to be 'filler'.....nothing wrong with filler mind you, just would trade them all in for a smart object LF layer w SB.

I can get a better result by doing some good old D&B-ing than by using blurs for everything.

Beautiful Sundays wrote:
Other than that pretty cool....impressed that you took the time smile

Thought I wouldn't?

Oct 03 10 06:06 am Link

Photographer

Beautiful Sundays

Posts: 3840

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Lanenga wrote:

This is by no means THE way to do it. Just a easy to follow step-by-step separation workflow.

But the gausian blur is done on a smart object layer.
Maybe you're still running the first action I uploaded today.

If you'd like a surface blur there, you can easily change the action.

Didn't want to scare people by baking in a surface blur that will take 5 minutes to finish big_smile


True, no eyeball, no sampling.
Also, no eyeball, no accurate visible reference.

This method was to give the same result as the blank layer while maintaining an accurate visible reference of the shot.


I can get a better result by doing some good old D&B then by using blurs for everything.


Thought I wouldn't?

1) Smart object now? Much better:) If it were me (it's not) I might mention that Gauss is faster but cruder, and that SB is an alternative...does take a bit longer but so what..  smile   

2) Re visibility...actually is ok on HF alone OR with an original underneath (edit..Richard Vernon suggests using the HF alone @ 100/100)...the concern w the vid was that Ang was sampling the LF layer...yikes...

EDIT--BETTER METHOD ABOVE

3) DB/curves layers are part of every portrait workflow. My point was that they aren't necessarily a part of the FS action plan. If you are posting an FS plan, then they are 'filler'; if you are trying to post a 'complete' skin-portrait action set then maybe...but not exactly complete...see what I mean?

4) Impressed that you took the time? A little...you were basically telling OP yesterday that his repost was redundant, yet you took the time and energy to make a cool action set (although you did indeed create a new thread for yourself).

I'm glad you did...I will tweak it to my tastes (as mentioned), and use it often (with yr permission of course).

Oct 03 10 06:16 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Oct 03 10 06:26 am Link

Photographer

Beautiful Sundays

Posts: 3840

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

"It's not just taking, you'll have to give something too."

I assume you refer to yourself....yes indeed posting this action set was a nice 'give'.

I 'gave' by posting a written plan on the original thread.

Angela 'gave' by creating a video which helped launched this whole thing.

OP 'gave' by tempting Angela into making the video.

All-in-all the world seems a better place smile

Oct 03 10 06:36 am Link

Photographer

Beautiful Sundays

Posts: 3840

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

"I am glad you're willing to teach me some great retouching workflow insights."

Anytime smile If you'd like me to review your next action and edit out the extraneous 'filler', I'd be delighted.  tongue

Remember, I like your action set. I just thought that by posting it you'd enjoy some feedback. After our discussion re yr action set (and the adjustments I've made to suit my taste), I believe it to be superb.

Edit--the solution to sample layers/visibility we discussed is a HUGE improvement.

Oct 03 10 06:40 am Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

Beautiful Sundays wrote:
"It's not just taking, you'll have to give something too."

I assume you refer to yourself....yes indeed posting this action set was a nice 'give'.

I 'gave' by posting a written plan on the original thread.

Angela 'gave' by creating a video which helped launched this whole thing.

OP 'gave' by tempting Angela into making the video.

All-in-all the world seems a better place smile

I "gave" Carlos and Photons a hard time, which caused them to examine my crude techniques, which, then....never mind.

Seriously, nice work everyone.  I for one appreciate the time taken in the last 12 hrs by Lanenga, Photons, and Beautiful Sundays(what are the other days of the week like?) to further refine and simplify this process. Today is truly a "beautiful sunday."  Off to shoot a couple of fashion models.

Oct 03 10 09:39 am Link

Retoucher

ManoDeGato by MaryTere

Posts: 283

Guadalupe, San José, Costa Rica

Y para aquellos hispano hablantes, aca hay uno en español hecho por FlexManta:

http://vimeo.com/12317775

For those who speak spanish, this one was made by another MM'er, FlexManta

Oct 03 10 11:47 am Link

Photographer

A-M-P

Posts: 18211

Orlando, Florida, US

Hey I re did the video because I was informed of my mistake in there  so the new video without that is here, Instead of working on a blank layer I worked on the high frequency layer itself as to not confuse anyone by my mistake.  But yeah the previously one was deleted so you might not be able to see it on the link in your OP. The last thing I want is for people to become more confused by my mistake so I tried to show the simplest most basic way to do it in the retake.

New link if you want to switch it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMyaeZmkZD8

Oct 03 10 12:22 pm Link

Photographer

Deirdre Holmes

Posts: 1264

San Pedro, California, US

This has been an amazing couple of days reading this forum.  Actually the 'High Pass Sucks' Thread was the first I ever bookmarked.  I've bookmarked and read every HP / FS thread since.  Really Really helpful and informative.
Thank you to everyone involved.
Forum stalker...
D wink

Oct 03 10 12:52 pm Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Angela Michelle Perez wrote:
Hey I re did the video because I was informed of my mistake in there  so the new video without that is here, Instead of working on a blank layer I worked on the high frequency layer itself as to not confuse anyone by my mistake.  But yeah the previously one was deleted so you might not be able to see it on the link in your OP. The last thing I want is for people to become more confused by my mistake so I tried to show the simplest most basic way to do it in the retake.

New link if you want to switch it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMyaeZmkZD8

Added the new link!
Thanks

Oct 03 10 03:45 pm Link

Photographer

Warren Joyce

Posts: 61

Perth, Western Australia, Australia

Thankyou so much to everyone who has taken the time make videos, actions & to share their knowledge.  It's much appreciated.  smile

Oct 03 10 05:23 pm Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

To those of you that have downloaded this action:
I just realized I accidentally set the D&B Curve Adjustment layers blending mode to soft light instead of Normal.
So I fixed this in the action.

You could change it yourself or download the action again(Same link)

Oct 03 10 06:42 pm Link

Retoucher

Easy-Photoshopper

Posts: 360

Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

thank you - i finally understand whats going on tongue

Oct 04 10 02:23 am Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

Short hijack:  Carlos, after this thread, can you start a new one called, "dodge and burn sucks." Hijack over.

Still loving this technique. I taught these steps to another photographer last night. It was amazing that I could recall everything without having to refer to notes or refer back to this thread. It's all so logical once you understand why things are done.

Oct 04 10 10:32 am Link

Photographer

Neil Snape

Posts: 9473

Paris, Île-de-France, France

Nice collection of tutorials here and thanks for the actions.

I still don't get it. By using this you are making a grey layer with a mask with modulating density from a previous layer by using apply.

So you have your so called low layer and the HP layer.

So if it is true that you are using the HP layer to affect only texture, the low layer if retouched separately will be punching holes in the colour info, and vice versa for the HP.

To me this would be pretty close to using an Lab copy and hacking the L layer, except with this HP technique at least you don't have an green magenta yellow blue layer.


I'd like to see some hi-res samples of what can only be done with this to see where it is useful. So far onscreen res to me looks like plastic zombies. Yet a lot like that look so that is okay too.

Oct 04 10 10:57 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Neil Snape wrote:
Nice collection of tutorials here and thanks for the actions.

I still don't get it. By using this you are making a grey layer with a mask with modulating density from a previous layer by using apply.

So you have your so called low layer and the HP layer.

So if it is true that you are using the HP layer to affect only texture, the low layer if retouched separately will be punching holes in the colour info, and vice versa for the HP.

To me this would be pretty close to using an Lab copy and hacking the L layer, except with this HP technique at least you don't have an green magenta yellow blue layer.

Using just 2 frequency layers, a High and a Low, might look like the same as using LAB. But it's not since LAB completely splits Luminosity and Color which this frequency split will not.

For greater detail on the how and why I would like to point you to the HighPass Sucks (+ solution) thread by SRB Photo.

And if you don't want to read all of it, you could start Here

It's a bit of a read, but it contains the information.

This thread and action are meant as an easy step by step intro to what Frequency separation could do.

Frequency separation will also allow you to split your image in more than just 2 frequency bands.

DerW mentioned a technique here

Neil Snape wrote:
I'd like to see some hi-res samples of what can only be done with this to see where it is useful. So far onscreen res to me looks like plastic zombies. Yet a lot like that look so that is okay too.

I personally don't like to work on the Low layer.
Maybe change a little hue here and there, but for smoothing out the shot I still prefer some good old D&B-ing

But I am a big fan of the control over the HP layer.

Oct 04 10 11:53 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

rey sison photography wrote:
Short hijack:  Carlos, after this thread, can you start a new one called, "dodge and burn sucks." Hijack over.

Haha no. D&B RULE!

rey sison photography wrote:
Still loving this technique. I taught these steps to another photographer last night. It was amazing that I could recall everything without having to refer to notes or refer back to this thread. It's all so logical once you understand why things are done.

When can we see some applications?

Oct 04 10 12:01 pm Link

Retoucher

y2cute

Posts: 267

San Francisco, California, US

wow, nice tutorial Angela! make it look so easy.

Oct 04 10 12:04 pm Link

Photographer

Sean Baker Photo

Posts: 8036

Silver Spring, Maryland, US

Neil Snape wrote:
So if it is true that you are using the HP layer to affect only texture, the low layer if retouched separately will be punching holes in the colour info, and vice versa for the HP.

Your theory would be correct, were that the premises were true [not your fault, you're seemingly basing on what you watched / read - it's just bad info].  In fact, frequency separation (at least every form which I would advocate for 'normal' retouching) should always have color in both the 'High' and 'Low' frequency layers.  It's just that, whereas you can think of the 'Low' layer as being either additive from black or subtractive from white, the 'High' layer is defined by its difference from middle gray.  And if you look closely (more closely than most do), you'll see that in fact it has a number of subtle color variations within it - created by those colors' components within the spatial frequency range.  That is, the larger the 'High' frequency swath is (say, 20px vs 5), the more color will be contained in it.  In fact, if you had a small image (say, 250px on the long axis), and did your FS at 250px, you would end up finding the Low layer to be generally gray while the High layer would have all the color in it.

I've said before and will reiterate again (my apologies for not being around to do so earlier when we might have prevented some of the new confusion):  except in extremely rare cases, if you're using FS to clone / heal / patch / CAF / etc., it is not a good idea to fully separate color and luminosity (or 'texture') - it will not give a natural result at full resolution.

Oct 04 10 01:11 pm Link

Retoucher

Natalia_Taffarel

Posts: 7665

Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

SRB Photo wrote:
it will not give a natural result at full resolution.

Thank you

I go away for a weekend and 3 threads happen! wink

IMHO - overuse of blur in the LP looks awful for beauty if not done selectively and I mean REALLY selectively

Texture is not just one radius, when you blur everything but one radius it looks fake.

As someone mentioned before there's ppl who will notice the difference and ppl who won't

x

Oct 04 10 01:59 pm Link

Photographer

Warren Joyce

Posts: 61

Perth, Western Australia, Australia

Lanenga wrote:
To those of you that have downloaded this action:
I just realized I accidentally set the D&B Curve Adjustment layers blending mode to soft light instead of Normal.
So I fixed this in the action.

You could change it yourself or download the action again(Same link)

Thankyou.  smile

Oct 04 10 05:11 pm Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

Lanenga wrote:

Haha no. D&B RULE!


When can we see some applications?

Ok, just for you Carlos. Had to go easy on the photoshop because this is mainly for the MUA portfolio(built in excuse). This was a challenging complexion for me. Actually, they all are. Even tried to do a little D&B. Hopefully, it's good enough for government purposes.

Before
http://i1037.photobucket.com/albums/a455/reysisonphotography/denise%20salceda/182deniseorig-182.jpg

After
http://modelmayhm-6.vo.llnwd.net/d1/photos/101005/01/4caadc8ca1095.jpg

Oct 05 10 12:36 am Link

Photographer

Neil Snape

Posts: 9473

Paris, Île-de-France, France

We're advancing.

Just to recap as there is a lot of good info in the replies to my questions.

I did say more or less that there is the density differences in the HP layer. I also realize it was created with add or subtract depending on the bit depth.

I also said in Lab you have the L layer to play in , but the a+b* channels are funky to work in. PS I worked a bit on projects with Heidelberg on Lab which has it's advantages and huge disadvantages...

I have followed through most tutorials here, but will have to again.

The most important question , which I've asked many times, is show me some examples of what you need this particular method for, where it is superior or the only method to use over the way I currently do it, and have done so from the beginning for many many spreads and ads.

It seems the method is not hard to do, perhaps the underpinnings are out of the visual domain and quite technical.

There are so many ways to do things in Photoshop to come up with good results. Sometimes there is only one way way that achieves correct results.

I'm sure that HP is very useful when it is the one thing, the best method. I just want to see where.

Natalia's sample video linked here shows, the application in hair shadows.
Is this a case where HP is the only tool, or the best tool/method?

The other video for skin ( not Natalia's) is not convincing, and although may be a fast hack, isn't for me.

Oct 05 10 12:41 am Link

Photographer

Dan OMell

Posts: 1335

Ufa, Bashkortostan, Russia

Great contribution, thank you very much

Oct 05 10 12:49 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

rey sison photography wrote:
Ok, just for you Carlos. Had to go easy on the photoshop because this is mainly for the MUA portfolio(built in excuse). This was a challenging complexion for me. Actually, they all are. Even tried to do a little D&B. Hopefully, it's good enough for government purposes.

Nice job!
You are getting there

Oct 05 10 12:55 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Neil Snape wrote:
The most important question , which I've asked many times, is show me some examples of what you need this particular method for, where it is superior or the only method to use over the way I currently do it, and have done so from the beginning for many many spreads and ads.

It seems the method is not hard to do, perhaps the underpinnings are out of the visual domain and quite technical.

There are so many ways to do things in Photoshop to come up with good results. Sometimes there is only one way way that achieves correct results.

I'm sure that HP is very useful when it is the one thing, the best method. I just want to see where.

Natalia's sample video linked here shows, the application in hair shadows.
Is this a case where HP is the only tool, or the best tool/method?

The other video for skin ( not Natalia's) is not convincing, and although may be a fast hack, isn't for me.

You don't need it for anything. (maybe in forensics as I believe that is how all this got started).

It's just another way of doing things. And if done correctly it could speed up your workflow.

We're not saying this is the way to do it and the only way to do it. We're just showing another technique/tool.

Try it, see if you like it. See if you can find use for it in your process and if not, then put it away again.

You could do entire retouches with just a brush(if you're a really good painter). It is just a matter of preference, time and control.

Oct 05 10 01:00 am Link

Photographer

Neil Snape

Posts: 9473

Paris, Île-de-France, France

Lanenga wrote:

You don't need it for anything.
It's just another way of doing things. And if done correctly it could speed up your workflow.

We're not saying this is the way to do it and the only way to do it. We're just showing another technique/tool.

Try it, see if you like it. See if you can find use for it in your process and if not, then put it away again.

You could do entire retouches with just a brush(if you're a really good painter). It is just a matter of preference, time and control.

What can I say that I didn't already say?
I'd like to try it it but would like to know why and where it is useful.

I have not argued in any way what it is for. I can't , I'm ignorant as to what exactly it is for. Hence , show me , I am quick to learn.

The above posted sample is proving that the method can do something.If I say anything it will be an unsolicited critique.

Oct 05 10 01:08 am Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

Not that it matters now but I inserted the wrong after photo the first time. Just switched it now.

Neil and anyone else who has doubts. Don't use what I just posted to judge the technique. I am not a high end retoucher. Just someone new trying to learn as much as he can.

Oct 05 10 01:11 am Link

Retoucher

Lanenga

Posts: 843

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Neil Snape wrote:
What can I say that I didn't already say?
I'd like to try it it but would like to know why and where it is useful.

I would like to suggest to do some more reading on what it is.
then give it a try so you understand what it is and what it does

And when you get it and you like it, you might find a way to use it.

Neil Snape wrote:
I have not argued in any way what it is for. I can't , I'm ignorant as to what exactly it is for. Hence , show me , I am quick to learn.

If you won't try it you will never learn.

If you tried it and you get stuck you could ask new questions so we can help you further

If you tried it and you don't like it. Then you could share with us what you did, why you didn't like it and/or what you would change.

Oct 05 10 01:16 am Link

Photographer

Neil Snape

Posts: 9473

Paris, Île-de-France, France

rey sison photography wrote:
Not that it matters now but I inserted the wrong after photo the first time. Just switched it now.

Neil and anyone else who has doubts. Don't use what I just posted to judge the technique. I am not a high end retoucher. Just someone new trying to learn as much as he can.

LOL don't worry, finding techniques that work for you is the most important thing. All of my recent pictures were done to please me, not a client as they had been done in the past. 

Adding new tools and techniques is an ongoing thing for all.

High end retouching , in my terms would be those who have obligations and understandings of the destinations, and client expectations which is in most part not the concern of us on MM.

Oct 05 10 01:20 am Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

I am the only one permitted to give Lanenga/Carlos a hard time. Everyone else, just do the f'n technique. wink

Oct 05 10 01:23 am Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 33591

Los Angeles, California, US

Neil Snape wrote:
I'm sure that HP is very useful when it is the one thing, the best method. I just want to see where.

MP Retouch wrote:
I love this technique for digitally pressing clothes. During the initial separation, make sure all the detail/pattern on the clothes is on the HF layer. Clone/paint/d&b on the LF layer to remove the larger tonal values of the wrinkles, then clone on the HP layer to remove left over HF wrinkle data.

http://a7.vox.com/6a0110184cd071860f0123dde0c0df860d-pi

http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?threa … 98&page=18

Oct 05 10 01:26 am Link

Photographer

rey sison photography

Posts: 1805

Los Angeles, California, US

Neil Snape wrote:

What can I say that I didn't already say?
I'd like to try it it but would like to know why and where it is useful.

I have not argued in any way what it is for. I can't , I'm ignorant as to what exactly it is for. Hence , show me , I am quick to learn.

The above posted sample is proving that the method can do something.If I say anything it will be an unsolicited critique.

Hey Neil:

Is it possible that because of your style(which I think is terrific) this technique would serve no purpose?

respectfully,

Rey

Oct 05 10 01:28 am Link

Photographer

Neil Snape

Posts: 9473

Paris, Île-de-France, France

Lanega,

I have read this and many other posts on it.

I followed through the tutorials and have tried it.

There is all the technique described in many posts. Yet there is no detail as to what it does better or why exactly you would want to do this .

You don't want to post examples. Fine.
Maybe someone else will.

Oct 05 10 01:28 am Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 33591

Los Angeles, California, US

Neil Snape wrote:
Maybe someone else will.

That was my best shot: remove larger scale problems while leaving a fine cloth fabric pattern.

If that doesn't sell you then nothing will.

Oct 05 10 01:31 am Link