|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
Why there are bad retouchers out there?
Alejandro Crespo wrote: noooo I was trying no to criticize your work, (is what I meant) , I'n not saying you're criticizing any body. but I like your honest answer, OOPs din't realize I was using my other account to answer you back. Feb 21 13 08:44 am Link Knowledge and skill is not good taste nor refined judgement "Good" retouch work is great skill and good taste. A great engineer can design a bad human interface. The combination is important. The market also affects the product. Uneducated clients, means that bad work gets accepted.... Feb 21 13 09:25 am Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: Wanging sliders as photographer machine gun shooting. Feb 21 13 09:51 am Link  Moderator Warning!Please do not critique the work of anyone in this thread. Reply to the topic. Feb 21 13 10:30 am Link Bad or good can be judged only by a professional. There are many people who`s work lack in many aspects and they feel they are gods they criticize or dislike good skilled competitive digital work and love beginner work. Its all about taste, some have good, some have bad. In retouching there are some rules, blending, focal, keeping the right size, texture, color and contrast, if you respect these than its all about concept that leads to different taste. Feb 21 13 10:47 pm Link robert b mitchell wrote: BINGO Feb 21 13 10:52 pm Link Musicians are the same way. Part of it is because the path to mastering anything involves an awkward phase where you've developed a certain amount of technical skill (playing a fast riff from a song, knowing what buttons do what in Photoshop) without yet developing a critical eye. The Dunning-Kruger effect, as already mentioned, is a huge part of that. Creative types also tend to be incredibly egotistic and insecure, so a lot of us are trying to brag so loudly that nobody takes the time to see through our insecurity. Eventually we start to believe our own lies and think we really are that good. Self-delusion is a powerful thing. Besides all of that, some people simply have a higher capacity for intelligence/creativity/perception/taste/etc than others through a mix of both genetic and environmental factors. Some people also work a lot harder and care a lot more about quality than others. Feb 21 13 11:24 pm Link descending chain wrote: +1 Feb 22 13 02:27 am Link Kevin Connery wrote: In all walks of life there are bad practitioners who are highly-skilled at convincing the unknowing that they are good. Feb 22 13 05:10 am Link rp_photo wrote: But isnt there a way to shift the skills of these practitioners to the "good" side?. Or at least show them that they're wasting their time with something thats not inside their talent range, and would find much more joy and fulfillment in a different activity ,where their current skill set would bring something useful to that sphere? or even make a great advance there?. Feb 22 13 10:09 am Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: Yes. Feb 22 13 12:48 pm Link Do you realize that retouching standards are quite subjective? If all the modern rules for retouching were tried and true, then you'd have to retouch an old person's skin so that it is soft and smooth, not sharp and crisp and full of texture. And then you'd have to make young women look old and raggedy. It really is up to the artist to decide. Feb 22 13 01:38 pm Link Eastfist wrote: o.O?. Feb 22 13 03:17 pm Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: For you. Feb 22 13 03:35 pm Link Peano wrote: I was personally responding to her post. Since she put up an extremal and out of context response to the question with a touch of sarcasm. Feb 22 13 03:37 pm Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: Now and forevermore. Feb 22 13 05:08 pm Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: Because there's a difference between having technical skill and aesthetic sensibilities. Feb 22 13 05:31 pm Link Kevin Connery wrote: +1 Feb 23 13 06:23 pm Link Part of the process of becoming better, is wanting to be better, accepting criticism as an opportunity to improve and then constantly working to get better. Some don't ask for critique's, and some ask the wrong people for critique or get mixed answers that can confuse them. Not sure taste is the best way to describe it, as a few mentioned. Its more like common sense (more accurately a learned common sense), if you are only exposed to idiots your common sense is probably pretty messed up, because you think the actions of those around you is the "norm". Some are just happy doing what they do and aren't compelled to change (or improve). Feb 25 13 09:53 pm Link Kevin Connery wrote: +1 Feb 26 13 03:34 am Link The same reason there are bad anythings in this world Feb 26 13 10:01 am Link Hello... I like kittens Feb 26 13 10:13 am Link Alexey Adamitsky wrote: And those people think that because a filter or effect is available they use it. They don't take the time to develop their eye. That takes discipline. Feb 26 13 10:13 am Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: No. Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Feb 26 13 10:19 am Link It's totally subjective, like everything else. What is "right" for Playboy might be completely wrong for Vanity Fair. Also, the folks they are retouching for may not have any reference for comparison, and assume the retoucher is doing the right thing. You might as well be asking - Why are there still Chevys around when there are Bentleys to be had? Feb 26 13 10:25 am Link Alexey Adamitsky wrote: Yep, this is completely true....I 'third' the thought. Also, some people simply have natural skills, eye, and vision for it. If you're not a natural, it's a very slow, incremental process to acquire decent retouching skills. If you're not a natural, you'll probably never be as good as someone who is a natural. It can be an ego bruiser... Mar 02 13 05:51 am Link Why are there bad photographers, bad models, bad singers, bad plumbers...? Some people are just not up to what they want to do, or they don't try hard enough, or they're deluded. Or, as others have pointed out, they may be perfectly adequate - even 'good' - but you just don't like their style. I'm not a fan of Beyonce for instance, but I do agree she can sing pretty well. I just don't like the way she does it. Just my $0.02 Ciao Stefano www.stefanobrunesci.com Mar 02 13 05:57 am Link What for one is good for other maybe bad. We are all different and it is awesome. It would be very boring if everyone in the industry would do the same level of work. Mar 02 13 06:07 am Link One mans trash is another mans treasure. Mar 02 13 06:37 am Link You should never be judgmental towards someone else's work. Learning to retouch takes time and progress.. Just because it's not up to your standards does not mean it's bad work. Mar 02 13 08:34 am Link Kevin Connery wrote: Love this bit of wisdom. A little zen for the masses. Mar 02 13 07:08 pm Link Answering the original question. Why there are bad retouchers out there? Because of sites like this. Mar 08 13 08:19 am Link My 2 cents: Quality = Time = Money Wanted to pay less for retouching? An artist needs to spend less time on your image. Spend less time on an Image? Quality will suffer. Low quality on an image retouching? They probably wanted to pass "less" for the work required. Rinse Repeat. Mar 12 13 09:47 am Link Darkseal Studios wrote: +1 Mar 12 13 10:15 am Link Kevin Connery wrote: Deserves to be quoted again. Mar 14 13 11:27 am Link the same reason there is ignorance about what good vs bad really is and how to know the difference. Mar 14 13 11:54 am Link Alejandro Crespo wrote: You don't seem to be talking about quality of retouching as much as you're offended by people who retouch in a different style than you approve of. Mar 14 13 12:04 pm Link With retouching it's because people who get on with technology and love computers and want to sit in front of Photoshop all day are invariably left-brained (analytical, ordered, logical, techniques, guides, forums, PCs, etc.) While good visual artists tend to be right-brained: intuitive, abstract, vivid thinkers, perceptual, appreciate poetry above technical writing, etc. Retouching's not about technique or experience (or it all being "subjective"), it's just about being one of these rare individuals who can balance left and right thinking (whether you take the right-left brain thing literally or symbolically) ... which you can develop - samurai used to balance warfare with flower arranging and poetry - LSD has certainly helped some ... you probably also need a degree of obsessive compulsive order With photographers it's usually some combination of: having no real appreciation or understanding of fashion, art or the human form; having no artistic vision or confidence; having no understanding of light; assuming retouchers are there to fix problems; not looking before they shoot; not knowing whether they've got a good shot or not until it's back from the retoucher With makeup artists I think narcissism and low IQ are the main problems ... Not understanding the difference between runway makeup and studio makeup ... beauty and fashion (retouchers need to grasp that one) ... not getting on set every few minutes to check the makeup ... (a retoucher should never be sent clumpy or tangled eyelashes to sort out - it's a laborious and completely unprofessional way to work) All these jobs are really for artists, yet people put far more energy into developing themselves as technicians (which the world certainly doesn't need any more of) Mar 14 13 07:30 pm Link A good retoucher should be with his/her work flow consistent and repeatable even when asked to recreate the finished art work with the same RAW image at a future date. Turn the above upside-down and that's what a poor retoucher is... non consistent, non repeatable. Mar 15 13 09:43 am Link Not for geographic reasons, but I tend to agree with the above sentiment from Chris, consistency is a vital part, but I would also add that adaptability is also key. Mar 15 13 04:55 pm Link |
