Robert LC
Posts: 944
Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Michael C Pearson wrote: You need to have an overall idea of the form you're going for. This will guide whether you dodge the dark spot or burn all the light skin around the dark spot. It's not always in the best interest of the image to just dodge a dark spot.
Completely agree, however I have to admit that I find it sometimes (jobs where the client has a tight budget/deadline) easier/faster to just 'smooth a gradient' when there's a lot of grunge, and carve later.
Generally though, I like to be as efficient possible (and Dodging something which you later are going to burn is really not) so that the carving is really a creative process for adding depth and enhance/change features and leave the 'smoothing' part to DnB.
To help seeing your changes, a nice help can be duplicating your window and set one on a zoomed out scale, while working more zoomed in on the other:
MP, I see you're using your full name now, the world better recognizes
nebulaoperator wrote: ...
following Stecyk and Lanenga animate gif conversion tips I made it but! if we want to make sure that no website will ever use them in any way how do we get gif file on here without using external service ( link )?
You can't sad but true once it's on the net nothing you can do to stop peeps really if they want to steal it. The only way to not have your work stolen on the net is just not ever post your work on the net...
Taking a slightly esoteric view of "carving" where its adding more depth to an image by adding highlights and shadows - I've been using this method: re-exposing a digital negative (once to capture highlights, once for shadows, and a "base" layer, and then re-exposing for specific parts of the image - eg, eyes, teeth, lips etc..) and using masks and various layering methods to carve out a better image.
I know its not strictly the DnB carving style but just another tool that helps get the job done.
I wonder whether anybody would be interested in using white chalk, charcoal and grey paper to develop their awareness of tonal modelling (to use the traditional term). It might surprise those who are unfamiliar with these media how fast they can produce work. Erasing, smudging and many other techniques can be used, and working at speed is easy. You could knock out twenty or thirty tonal sketches in the time it takes to do one D&B image. And getting your hands dirty is very good for you.
Dan OMell
Posts: 856
Charlotte, North Carolina, US
yes, I would be interested in the digital version of this technique, even in the old Flemish 6 steps technique if it's appropriate. or it's too far-fetched?
Peano
Posts: 3,733
Washington, District of Columbia, US
About opacity and flow ...
Regarding high opacity and low flow, versus low opacity and high flow: A point I don't think has been made
in the discussion above is about the difference in the quality of the gradient you get with each method.
Illustration:
- Pen pressure controls off (or just use a mouse)
- Color pure black
- Brush size 150 px
- Brush hardness 0%
- Repeated strokes to build up a dark center fading at the edges
Peano, I've noticed that I get lots of step-chunks if I use brushes with any spacing, so i turn spacing off, and i get a much smoother stroke. It does, however, increase the flow significantly. Am I doing something dumb?
Peano
Posts: 3,733
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Mask Photo wrote: Peano, I've noticed that I get lots of step-chunks if I use brushes with any spacing, so i turn spacing off, and i get a much smoother stroke. It does, however, increase the flow significantly. Am I doing something dumb?
I guess it depends on what job you're doing. If you're using a 100% hard brush and need to draw clean edges, you might need to drop the spacing. But with a 0% hard brush and the setting I used above, I got a smooth gradient with the brush left at the default 25% spacing.
Simon Jackson
Posts: 118
Manchester, England, United Kingdom
Found this incredibly helpful thread whilst trying to find info on carving. Not done much proper photoshop retouching in a while so needed a bit of a refresher. Anyway, here's the photo i worked on straight from the camera, followed by my retouched version:
I'm not completely happy with it, but i think i reached that point where i was going round in circles to some extent. I decided it was best to call this one done and move on to another. I might come back to it later, but I think attempting a broad range of shots with a broad range of lighting is the best idea at this stage in order to learn/practice more. Carving doesn't come naturally to me at all! I'm not a natural artist, especially not in 3 dimensions, so trying to shade accurately on faces etc involves a lot of trial and error. Thanks for the resources on planes of the face too! I copied a little jpeg from one of those sites and had it has a layer in my PS document so i could be looking at it whilst i worked. Was invaluable. As I said, I don't think I'm there with it yet, but hopefully if i keep practising on different faces in different lighting i'll get to a point where the anatomy of the face comes more naturally to me. I'm also tempted to purchase one of those heads so i can light it myself and experiment!
EDIT: new version - re-worked his face a bit. Much happier with it.
Simon Jackson
Posts: 118
Manchester, England, United Kingdom
Peano wrote: About opacity and flow ...
Regarding high opacity and low flow, versus low opacity and high flow: A point I don't think has been made in the discussion above is about the difference in the quality of the gradient you get with each method.
Illustration:
- Pen pressure controls off (or just use a mouse)
- Color pure black
- Brush size 150 px
- Brush hardness 0%
- Repeated strokes to build up a dark center fading at the edges
Draw your own conclusions.
A lot of the early stuff i read around d&b retouching (correction or carving) suggested a low opacity rather than flow. I got quite frustrated at first trying to make this work, especially for carving. I found smooth gradients impossible to achieve. I decided to to ditch that method, stick opacity all the way up and use very low flow, and that's now my preferred technique. I usually use 1% flow for correction and between 1% and 3% for carving. For me this felt a lot more natural - more how i'd expect a felt tip to work, or something like that. I suppose to some extent it depends how your brain is wired.
Feverstockphoto
Posts: 261
Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
The hand tool, spacebar shaking image to catch something i use this technquie for examining images for things like sensor spots, artifacts etc... I use the word jiggle, 'jiggling the image around' .
| 
| 
| edu