Photographer
Ecklipse
Posts: 92
Los Angeles, California, US
Hello, I tried Perfect Portrait demo and I kinda liked the results, I'm not very skillful on Photoshop, I used to retouch my pics there though, but now I'm seriously thinking about buying Perfect Portrait because it's so easy to use... do you recommend me to buy Perfect Portrait and forget about Photoshop forever or should I actually sit down in front of my computer and learn how to use Photoshop?
Thanks
Photographer
Mountain Image
Posts: 1184
Morgantown, West Virginia, US
Ecklipse wrote:
Hello, I tried Perfect Portrait demo and I kinda liked the results, I'm not very skillful on Photoshop, I used to retouch my pics there though, but now I'm seriously thinking about buying Perfect Portrait because it's so easy to use... do you recommend me to buy Perfect Portrait and forget about Photoshop forever or should I actually sit down in front of my computer and learn how to use Photoshop?
Thanks I bought PP a few weeks ago and I really like the results for the most part. I have found a few images it didn't do well on, but in general I have better luck retouching with it than PS.
Photographer
Ecklipse
Posts: 92
Los Angeles, California, US
Mountain Image wrote:
I bought PP a few weeks ago and I really like the results for the most part. I have found a few images it didn't do well on, but in general I have better luck retouching with it than PS. You're right, some pictures don't do well, but I had a great result with most of the pics I retouched with the demo. I think I'm buying it, I just can't believe it's so easy to get great results with so little experience.
Thanks for your recommendation
Photographer
Versiontwo Photography
Posts: 2
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
It's a heck of a lot quicker if your a studio photographer shooting boutique images of 3 or 4 subjects a day that's for sure! I think that is the main attraction to it. How fast it is vs spending hours retouching.
Photographer
Raven Photography
Posts: 2547
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Don't forget about Photoshop whatever you do given how much control Photoshop gives you. D&B,Split Frequency,all the adjustment layers,layer masks. It's definitely worth studying and practicing to the point where your proficient at it. But it takes hours of practice and a heck of a lot of time. But again it's way worth it 
Digital Artist
Koray
Posts: 6720
Ankara, Ankara, Turkey
Ecklipse wrote:
I just can't believe it's so easy to get great results with so little experience. you are not actually getting great results, your little experience makes you think so.
sure go ahead and buy it but you'll be on the wrong track...
Photographer
In Balance Photography
Posts: 3378
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Ecklipse wrote:
Hello, I tried Perfect Portrait demo and I kinda liked the results, I'm not very skillful on Photoshop, I used to retouch my pics there though, but now I'm seriously thinking about buying Perfect Portrait because it's so easy to use... do you recommend me to buy Perfect Portrait and forget about Photoshop forever or should I actually sit down in front of my computer and learn how to use Photoshop?
Thanks It can't hurt to know how to do things in Photoshop if you have the time and motivation to learn.
A lot depends on whether or not the end results are acceptable to the client. While I have not used the tool, I suspect that the overall end result is not as good as one would get from a professional retoucher using PS, but a pro retoucher might be overkill for the job.
You could always post samples of what you are producing with it in critique, and then folks would have a chance to point out any areas watch out for.
Photographer
Harold Rose
Posts: 2925
Calhoun, Georgia, US
Ecklipse wrote:
Hello, I tried Perfect Portrait demo and I kinda liked the results, I'm not very skillful on Photoshop, I used to retouch my pics there though, but now I'm seriously thinking about buying Perfect Portrait because it's so easy to use... do you recommend me to buy Perfect Portrait and forget about Photoshop forever or should I actually sit down in front of my computer and learn how to use Photoshop?
Thanks Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much....
Photographer
Woven Thought
Posts: 329
Petersburg, Virginia, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... You'll have to tell me the trick to remove zits in camera. 
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
Ecklipse wrote:
You're right, some pictures don't do well, but I had a great result with most of the pics I retouched with the demo. I think I'm buying it, I just can't believe it's so easy to get great results with so little experience.
Thanks for your recommendation PP alters the facial structure too much IMO, I'd rather be in control. if you do want something like PP then I would recommend Imaginomic Portraiture 2. it is not as good as using Photoshop with frequency separation as mentioned above but it is light years better than PP and is much more controllable.
Photographer
RSM-images
Posts: 4226
Jacksonville, Florida, US
.
What level of attention to detail do your clients require...?
.
Photographer
Randy Henderson Images
Posts: 781
Springfield, Missouri, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... Can I borrow that wide brush? I could get my house painted in two strokes.
Photographer
Ecklipse
Posts: 92
Los Angeles, California, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... Hello, I actually agree and I disagree at the same time with you... you're 100% right about what a really good skilled professional photographer can do, unfortunately not all of us have the same skills or talent, that's why some of us need external tools such as PS or PP, is not really matter of laziness. But you're right, a good picture comes from a good photographer
Photographer
Marc Gysin
Posts: 32
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Photographer
imcFOTO
Posts: 581
Bothell, Washington, US
Woven Thought wrote:
You'll have to tell me the trick to remove zits in camera. Me too! :-)
Photographer
Odin Photo
Posts: 1462
Salt Lake City, Utah, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... Don't be so absolute Harold. Photoshop definitely has it's purposes. Apparently, looking at your port's bottom row, you know of at least one personally I am sure there are a lot of other applications that are valid tools that are not used out of laziness, but rather pragmatism, in addition to artistry.
I use many tools to create my art. I do try to get it as close as possible in camera, because I enjoy it and it saves me time. But I think even people coming from a film background can appreciate the extra artistry available with more and better tools.
Lower level photographers will use it to "fix" images. Higher level photographers will use it to enhance images. Everyone is at a different level, but tools are tools and should be used to your advantage.
Of course, relying too heavily on a tool, or putting all your eggs in one basket is not to your overall advantage, and will only stunt your growth in any field. Similarly, choosing not to use other tools or methods available in any field of practice will stunt your growth as well.
Photographer
ontherocks
Posts: 23575
Salem, Oregon, US
i use both portrait professional and portraiture.
portrait professional is easy to overdo but with restraint sometimes it works out pretty well and is faster than manual methods. i used it on a newborn image i delivered today.
i do much of my work in aperture (it has some retouching capability) and then only go into photoshop if necessary for special images.
i have the utmost respect for what the professional retouchers can accomplish but if i only have a few minutes then the plug-ins can be helpful. i've also worked on making my light softer and less glary so there's less work to be done.
Photographer
Raven Photography
Posts: 2547
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... You clearly haven't seen the exceptional professional photographers on this site Harold and their exceptional work. Let alone the countless professional Photoshopped published images used to sell beauty products.
Photographer
YandS Photography
Posts: 359
Jakarta, Jakarta, Indonesia
I find that onone phototools work better for me.
More control and you stack several effect
Retoucher
Paul Snyder
Posts: 89
Columbus, Ohio, US
Although I have much disdain for software like that, I see the advantages of it for amateurs and people who don't know very much about the industry.
However, it's all going to depend on what your target output will be. If you're doing batch jobs of family portraits or something, odds are you'll be okay with what you see.
But if you're doing anything after that, I wouldn't recommend it. Yes, it can be tempting to go for that software, but you're not getting professional results at all. It's not even close. You can use it to accent your main retouching work (I'll sometimes use color actions found in these types of software), but that's about it.
And as for a comment above stating great photographers don't use a lot of either. That used to be true a few years ago. But look in a Vogue, or Elle, or W, or Glamour etc. Almost every photograph you see in them will be retouched. The LEGENDS use retouching on a very consistent basis these days. Granted, they don't necessarily HAVE to have retouching to be great photographers, but they NEED it if they're going to achieve certain looks, atmospheres, and effects that otherwise can't always be created in camera and on set.
Photographer
Dannielle Levan
Posts: 12865
New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Koray wrote:
you are not actually getting great results, your little experience makes you think so.
sure go ahead and buy it but you'll be on the wrong track... This. It's fine if you want 'Sears portrait' style glamour though...but for professional work, hell no!
Retoucher
Natalia_Taffarel
Posts: 7665
Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
RSM-images wrote:
.
What level of attention to detail do your clients require...?
. Dress for the job that you want, not for the job that you have. Otherwise you’re trapped in a vicious cycle like this:
1. I only produce lower quality work because that’s all my clients can afford. Besides they can’t tell the difference anyway
2. My portfolio is now filled with only lower quality images
3. I can only attract clients that have limited budgets that don’t care about better quality.
4. Return to number 1.
In this cycle, the client who has enough criteria and good taste to get the higher budgets (or to pay for high quality work), will never contact you or reply to your emails. Reason being, your portfolio does not show any high quality work.
That's part of an article I wrote for retouchers but I think it could be useful for the starting photographer too.
http://fstoppers.com/news-career-advice … -retoucher
For the OP - Depends on your expectations. If you want to keep it as a hobby then go ahead, use PP is fun and fast.
Retoucher
pixel dimension ilusion
Posts: 1550
Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
dont u never gone learn , because u dont know ps
u think pp is great pfff is an waist of time, buy better cpl
retouch videos from the ones who know hi industry retouching
Retoucher
Kristiana-Retouch
Posts: 289
Rīga, Rīga, Latvia
Koray wrote:
you are not actually getting great results, your little experience makes you think so.
sure go ahead and buy it but you'll be on the wrong track... Perfectly said. It's true.
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12117
Tampa, Florida, US
Oh God, this now means we're going to see the banner ads with those terrifying 'before & after' shots on the home page.
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1515
Santa Cruz, California, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... That is not true. PP is very good for something's and it saves a lot of time. Could it be used on magazine submissions? In combination with other programs like photoshop and LR it could. As a stand alone it's main selling point is quick results at low cost.
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1515
Santa Cruz, California, US
Ecklipse wrote:
Hello, I tried Perfect Portrait demo and I kinda liked the results, I'm not very skillful on Photoshop, I used to retouch my pics there though, but now I'm seriously thinking about buying Perfect Portrait because it's so easy to use... do you recommend me to buy Perfect Portrait and forget about Photoshop forever or should I actually sit down in front of my computer and learn how to use Photoshop?
Thanks Don't listen to the haters on here! Lol I have perfect portrait studio, Imagenomic Portraiture,
LR and Photoshop. You can get some good quick-sometimes surprising results
in PP-In a good way:-) It does have it's limitations though however at a sale price of about 40.00 for the studio version for what it does it's really a no
brainer. I suggest using the studio version in tandem with LR or PS. When your ready for amazing results get Portraiture-No comparison.
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1515
Santa Cruz, California, US
imcFOTO wrote:
Me too! :-) It's called a good makeup artist:-)
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1515
Santa Cruz, California, US
Jeff Fiore wrote:
PP alters the facial structure too much IMO, I'd rather be in control. if you do want something like PP then I would recommend Imaginomic Portraiture 2. it is not as good as using Photoshop with frequency separation as mentioned above but it is light years better than PP and is much more controllable. Actually in PP you can control or disable any of the settings including
face restructuring.
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12117
Tampa, Florida, US
Yes, it's better than LR or PS. In much the same way a Swanson Hungryman TV Dinner is better than a home-cooked meal.
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3907
Syracuse, New York, US
Koray wrote:
you are not actually getting great results, your little experience makes you think so.
sure go ahead and buy it but you'll be on the wrong track... I watched a video tutorial of Imagenomic Portraiture. I noticed that the dropper that selects was picking up and manipulating the hair as well as the face.. to me, this doesn't seem like a very good thing.. however, the guy in the tutorial (from Imagenomic) said that softening the hair was very important in order to give the same feel to the over all image. ?Really?
I personally don't think I would purchase either... mostly because neither seem to give me enough control over what is being manipulated. Learning to retouch can be easily done by browsing the web and much of it can be done in very little time with much greater control. I charge my clients for retouching so any time spent is money earned.
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
Harold Rose wrote:
Do we want to see how lazy we are ? A good skilled professional photographer uses neither very much.... So those photographers who shoot for vogue, allure, W, and what not must be serious hacks. It amazing people like Anne, Steven, Peter and the rest get hire at all...
Regardless PP is a hack job, it's fine if you want images that look like they were retocuhed with a hot crayon. I find most photographers who spend more time retocuhing then they like have hired the wrong MUA. It's understandable as starting out most of us (males) don't know a lot about makeup
Digital Artist
Koray
Posts: 6720
Ankara, Ankara, Turkey
Moon Pix Photography wrote:
I watched a video tutorial of Imagenomic Portraiture. I noticed that the dropper that selects was picking up and manipulating the hair as well as the face.. to me, this doesn't seem like a very good thing.. however, the guy in the tutorial (from Imagenomic) said that softening the hair was very important in order to give the same feel to the over all image. ?Really?
I personally don't think I would purchase either... mostly because neither seem to give me enough control over what is being manipulated. Learning to retouch can be easily done by browsing the web and much of it can be done in very little time with much greater control. I charge my clients for retouching so any time spent is money earned. You can do similar stuff by selecting and copying tones using color range to a new layer and using the inverted highpass smart object method.
I know some not so bad retouchers use PP for fine tuning etc. but they have good taste to begin with
Photographer
Donald M Falls
Posts: 134
Little Rock, Arkansas, US
AJScalzitti wrote:
So those photographers who shoot for vogue, allure, W, and what not must be serious hacks. It amazing people like Anne, Steven, Peter and the rest get hire at all...
Regardless PP is a hack job, it's fine if you want images that look like they were retocuhed with a hot crayon. I find most photographers who spend more time retocuhing then they like have hired the wrong MUA. It's understandable as starting out most of us (males) don't know a lot about makeup Yeah, I agreed, a great Make Up Artist is very important and saves time!
|
