brendan_ch wrote:
is this still the best method for retouching?

still?

I don't recall it was ever proclaimed as the "best method", it has uses though.
I think your retouching time is best spent learning and practicing dodge and burn.

Black Z Eddie wrote:
I'm one of the lazy ones that use it by slightly blurring and healing on  the low pass frequencies.   

But, that I've seen, and IMO, I think Pratik Naik is probably one of the better retouchers.  He'd dodge and burn on frequency separation.  I'm sure there's more to it, but, that's tooooo much work for me. 

I think I'm color/tone difference blind because I don't see how they are able to smooth out the skin tones just by D&B.

(micro) D&B is only for evening the luminance values, not the color.

brendan_ch wrote:
I'm looking for the best practice to learn early on.

D&B. Both micro and macro (aka carving).

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
It never was - it's a quick-n-dirty technique that gives aesthetically poor results.
One should NEVER blur or do frequency separation for retouching skin - at least if one wants professional results.

Not correct, if used correctly, it works just fine. The challenge is not the technique, is how you apply it. :-)

Black Z Eddie wrote:
I'm one of the lazy ones that use it by slightly blurring and healing on  the low pass frequencies.   

But, that I've seen, and IMO, I think Pratik Naik is probably one of the better retouchers.  He'd dodge and burn on frequency separation.  I'm sure there's more to it, but, that's tooooo much work for me. 

I think I'm color/tone difference blind because I don't see how they are able to smooth out the skin tones just by D&B.

Blur the low layer on Fs and you are destroying every single middle frequency, therefore end up with just a blur which in professional photography, NOBODY WANTS!

Pratik, doesn't D&B on frequency separation, you are just confusing terms. D&B is one thing and FS is another one and both are used for completely different things.

FS, is meant for even out texture, creases, cleaning skin in general and so many other uses but D&B in the other hand is made for even out transitions on shadows/hightlights

With D&B you don't smooth out skin tone, you smooth out just SKIN. The tones are a completely different thing.

M A R K wrote:
D&B. Both micro and macro (aka carving).

Again, I don't know where are you getting your information but that's just simply wrong.. One thing is carving and another one very different is D&B.

Carving gives/emphasises body/facial/hair shapes

D&B cleans transitions/blotchy skin

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Again, I don't know where are you getting your information but that's just simply wrong..

Here you go chump, eat your heart out...
https://www.modelmayhem.com/forums/post/808677

The Invisible Touch wrote:
It really surprises me the answers that I see here sometimes..

Let's get things straight! :-)

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
It never was - it's a quick-n-dirty technique that gives aesthetically poor results.
One should NEVER blur or do frequency separation for retouching skin - at least if one wants professional results.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
It really surprises me the answersNot correct, if used correctly, it works just fine. The challenge is not the technique, is how you apply it. :-)

Indeed - let's get things straight - although you may have found some use within your work, to utilize frequency separation in your skin retouching process; What people mean when they talk about FS for retouching skin and what the literally hundreds of tutorials published online championing FS for skin retouching, is an approach that will give one overly smoothed unprofessional results. Period. Professionals don't promote it for this reason. For you to promote it as a valid skin retouching technique is a bad message to send to people and if there were still more than a minute handful of professional retouchers who still view the MM retouching forum once a year, you'd be inundated with responses correcting your post.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Indeed - let's get things straight - although you may have found some use within your work, to utilize frequency separation in your skin retouching process; What people mean when they talk about FS for retouching skin and what the literally hundreds of tutorials published online championing FS for skin retouching, is an approach that will give one overly smoothed unprofessional results. Period.

That's just simply not true, just because you find shitty amateur FS tutorials of people that they don't have a clue, it doesn't mean that FS is just simply bad. I have to agree that most people uses it the wrong way and if so you will end up destroying the image but if used correctly it could do wonders. But this is like anything if you put too much sugar in your coffee you will end up ruining it.

How do you explain that most retouching houses use it on their workflow?

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Professionals don't promote it for this reason.

NO, again not true. Professionals do promote it but they offer the correct way but people don't like things that take time or are over complicated therefore they choose to go down the "Blurring the low layer" route.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
For you to promote it as a valid skin retouching technique is a bad message to send to people and if there were still more than a minute handful of professional retouchers who still view the MM retouching forum once a year, you'd be inundated with responses correcting your post.

Just because you don't control it, it doesn't mean is bad. I agree with you and I don't advice my students to learn it till they get to a point, they understand completely how retouching works and once they know all the basics.

Now, name one of those professionals that will made me eat my words?? I dear you!!

Natalia is happy to work on FS, as a matter of fact it is part of her workflow. (She uses it correctly)

Pratik Naik (same same same)

Omar Josef (same same)

you need more?? So don't give me non sense now just because you don't know what you are talking about.

Again, I agree with you. Newbies/amateurs shouldn't use it but you can't say is a bad technique because you don't know how to use it correctly.

Period!! :-)

M A R K wrote:
Here you go chump, eat your heart out...

LOL learn how to read carefully... if I were you I would read the whole thread again and see if you actually understand what it means.

One thing is D&B

Painting with light to even out variations on skin, by doing this you get a cleaner/smoother skin. You can also use it to change the lighting.

Another thing which is very, very different is CARVING/CONTOURING

Here you change transitions between shadows/highlight and adds more depth to the image.

So get your facts straight! :-P

The Invisible Touch wrote:
LOL learn how to read carefully...

Nooo.... it's you who needs to read CAREFULLY what I said. I'm guessing comprehension isn't your strong point.

And just because I enjoy the opportunity to make you look EVEN MORE of a chump, take a peek at these:

This is a quote taken from the following page:
http://nataliataffarel.tumblr.com/post/4551849530/dnb

"There are two main uses to D&B. Pixel level and Contouring/Carving. The exact same tools and techniques are used for both versions. The only differences lay in the area that you are painting on, the pressure and size of the brush, and the intention behind it."

And there's similar commentary within the page here:
http://www.dmd-digital-retouching.com/b … -tutorial/

I could go on.

No doubt your deliberately confrontational activity on the forum was intended to help drum up work but it's only made you look bombastic and foolish. And a proper chump.

M A R K wrote:
Nooo.... it's you who needs to read CAREFULLY what I said. I'm guessing comprehension isn't your strong point.

This is what you said!!

M A R K wrote:
D&B. Both micro and macro (aka carving).

Let me tell you again.. D&B both micro and macro aren't known (AKA) as carving.. actually are two very different things.

Get your facts straight before you talk mate! :-)

M A R K wrote:
Nooo.... it's you who needs to read CAREFULLY what I said. I'm guessing comprehension isn't your strong point.

And just because I enjoy the opportunity to make you look EVEN MORE of a chump, take a peek at these:

This is a quote taken from the following page:
http://nataliataffarel.tumblr.com/post/4551849530/dnb

"There are two main uses to D&B. Pixel level and Contouring/Carving. The exact same tools and techniques are used for both versions. The only differences lay in the area that you are painting on, the pressure and size of the brush, and the intention behind it."

And there's similar commentary within the page here:
http://www.dmd-digital-retouching.com/b … -tutorial/

I could go on.

No doubt your deliberately confrontational activity on the forum was intended to help drum up work but it's only made you look bombastic and foolish. And a proper chump.

Right!! :-) Let me tell you that what you just said now, is exactly what I said early but your statement has somehow changed...

Yes you do D&B and Carving with exactly the same technique, everyone knows that! But you SAID!!

M A R K wrote:
D&B. Both micro and macro (aka carving).

Which is simply not true. Just because there are two uses, it doesn't mean they are "aka" known as the same. You simply don't know any better and that truly shows on your comment and work!

You can call me chump or whatever you like, that says a lot about your childish mentality which really doesn't bother me but you need to accept the fact that you clearly got terms mixed up. The sooner you realise this, the sooner you will progress.. Otherwise go and ask Natalia as you are clearly a big fan of her.

Why don't you go to do a test to a retouching studio and when you get asked to do carving, why don't you tell them that is exactly the same as if you were doing D&B, which is what you said... bless you!!

I have zero intentions to drump up work or gain anything from here, the challenge is that I care for people to learn and you simply don't, when I started there was no help at all but people like you stop others from learning by being so "nice" and providing the wrong terms to techniques.

So do us all a favour, why don't you go and learn first before you preach.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
This is what you said!!
Let me tell you again.. D&B both micro and macro aren't known (AKA) as carving.. actually are two very different things.

Get your facts straight before you talk mate! :-)

LOL. Clearly your comprehension skills are much as I suspected.

Mate... !! Trying to appeal to my good nature won't get you off the hook I'm afraid. Nice try though.

M A R K wrote:
LOL. Clearly your comprehension skills are much as I suspected.

Mate... !! Trying to appeal to my good nature won't get you off the hook I'm afraid. Nice try though.

My comprehension skills are great, don't you worry. D&B aka carving!!  That's all you are saying, which is a lot to be honest. Bless you.

Doesn't really bother me your hook... I will keep my eye on you too just in case you keep producing statements like that again, god bless us all with your knowledge and help.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Yes you do D&B and Carving with exactly the same technique, everyone knows that!

Ah, we're getting somewhere at last!

The Invisible Touch wrote:
But you SAID!!


Which is simply not true. Just because there are two uses, it doesn't mean they are "aka" known as the same. You simply don't know any better and that truly shows on your comment and work!

Oooh, don't spoil it!! My work's infinitely better than anything you have on show in your port BTW

The Invisible Touch wrote:
You can call me chump or whatever you like, that says a lot about your childish mentality which really doesn't bother me but you need to accept the fact that you clearly got terms mixed up. The sooner you realise this, the sooner you will progress.. Otherwise go and ask Natalia as you are clearly a big fan of her.

LOL. Those are just the first two links which come up when I google 'D&B and carving'
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=dodge+and+burn+and+carving

So I think it's you who has 'a thing' about Natalia, not me chumpy...

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Why don't you go to do a test to a retouching studio and when you get asked to do carving, why don't you tell them that is exactly the same as if you were doing D&B, which is what you said... bless you!!

That thing about comprehension again - but I promise not to mention it any more! BTW - you'd be surprised at my retouching skills.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
I have zero intentions to drump up work or gain anything from here, the challenge is that I care for people to learn and you simply don't, when I started there was no help at all but people like you stop others from learning by being so "nice" and providing the wrong terms to techniques.

So do us all a favour, why don't you go and learn first before you preach.

Well until you came barging into this thread it was doing just fine. People had responded to the OP's question sanely and sensibly. All that changed when you started spouting a crock of brown stuff. I don't think it will tax many peoples' intelligence to realise who the ignorant preacher is. Chump.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
You can call me chump

Chump.

M A R K wrote:
Oooh, don't spoil it!! My work's infinitely better than anything you have on show in your port BTW

LOL. Those are just the first two links which come up when I google 'D&B and carving'
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=dodge+and+burn+and+carving

So I think it's you who has 'a thing' about Natalia, not me chumpy...

That thing about comprehension again - but I promise not to mention it any more! BTW - you'd be surprised at my retouching skills.

Well until you came barging into this thread it was doing just fine. People had responded to the OP's question sanely and sensibly. All that changed when you started spouting a crock of brown stuff. I don't think it will tax many peoples' intelligence to realise who the ignorant preacher is. Chump.

Mark, I am going to leave you as a lost cause, there is zero point arguing with someone like you, which finds himself helpful but really doesn't have a clue of the different of D&B and Carving just because its done with the same technique... you are probably one of those that think that FS does the same as D&B.

If you claim to know so much why don't you show us as clearly what i see at the moment it just simply trashy in terms of photography and retouching and lets not forget about the lack of taste but anyway, as you said your work is better than most people eh chumpy!!

My question to all the members that have a bit of common sense.. why would you listen to someone that things that carving and D&B is the same thing which backs it up with this... mmmmmhhhhhhh sorry me feels!!

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/40822702

I will leave you know to crack on with your life and will do the same with mine, lets see who gets further.. Take care Mark

The Invisible Touch wrote:

Mark, I am going to leave you as a lost cause, there is zero point arguing with someone like you, which finds himself helpful but really doesn't have a clue of the different of D&B and Carving just because its done with the same technique... you are probably one of those that think that FS does the same as D&B.

If you claim to know so much why don't you show us as clearly what i see at the moment it just simply trashy in terms of photography and retouching and lets not forget about the lack of taste but anyway, as you said your work is better than most people eh chumpy!!

My question to all the members that have a bit of common sense.. why would you listen to someone that things that carving and D&B is the same thing which backs it up with this... mmmmmhhhhhhh sorry me feels!!

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/40822702

I will leave you know to crack on with your life and will do the same with mine, lets see who gets further.. Take care Mark

Bye bye.
Chump.

M A R K wrote:
Bye bye.
Chump.

Bye bye!! :-)

The Invisible Touch wrote:

Bye bye!! :-)

I hope you're not flirting with me. Are you a girl??

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Nooo.... it's you who needs to read CAREFULLY what I said. I'm guessing comprehension isn't your strong point.
This is what you said!!
Let me tell you again.. D&B both micro and macro aren't known (AKA) as carving.. actually are two very different things.

Get your facts straight before you talk mate! :-)

I think you're struggling with reading the English sentence.
The way a native English speaker would parse his sentence is that macro is known as carving (not micro as well as micro).

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Now, name one of those professionals that will made me eat my words?? I dear you!!

Natalia is happy to work on FS, as a matter of fact it is part of her workflow. (She uses it correctly)

Interesting in your false bravado,  that you'd choose her as an example supporting your stance. Someone who is very vocal in her opposition to using frequency separation for skin retouching.

brendan_ch wrote:
I'm looking for the best practice to learn early on.

Stay away from forums.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

I think you're struggling with reading the English sentence.
The way a native English speaker would parse his sentence is that macro is known as carving (not micro as well as micro).

That's your interpretation but that's not how it actually reads.. it is really clear what he said.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Interesting in your false bravado,  that you'd choose her as an example supporting your stance. Someone who is very vocal in her opposition to using frequency separation for skin retouching.

Simply not correct!! Natalia as far as I know is not against FS, is against filtering and tampering with FS which produces plastic results.

If you don't believe me, go to her facebook group and find out for your self.. at least that was the way it was not long a go.. :-)

The Invisible Touch wrote:

Simply not correct!! Natalia as far as I know is not against FS, is against filtering and tampering with FS which produces plastic results.

If you don't believe me, go to her facebook group and find out for your self.. at least that was the way it was not long a go.. :-)

You may want to re-read the group rules or anything posted on the subject (or ask someone to help you do the same). Again, your English reading comprehension seems to be your primary stumbling block in this thread.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
...it is really clear what he said.

I agree with you ABSOLUTELY.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
I love this thread

Me too!! :-)

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
You may want to re-read the group rules or anything posted on the subject (or ask someone to help you do the same). Again, your English reading comprehension seems to be your primary stumbling block in this thread.

Thanks for the advice, appreciated!!

:-)

M A R K wrote:
I agree with you ABSOLUTELY.

You see it wasn't that hard to agree with me!! Good boy! :-)

brendan_ch wrote:
Hello everybody! I've been seeing this technique around and I've watched some youtube tutorials about it. My questions are is this still the best method for retouching? I've been seeing mixed reviews. Also: What are some great resources or advice you may have on this topic. I'm looking for the best practice to learn early on.

Thanks!

Creativelive is having a re-broadcast Aug 6th and 7th with Pratik.   

https://www.creativelive.com/courses/ar … llection_6

M A R K wrote:
Oooh, don't spoil it!! My work's infinitely better than anything you have on show in your port BTW

Really?