login info join!
Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > Don t understand Search   Reply
Retoucher
wanda pelin
Posts: 59
Adeje (Las Americas), Tenerife, Canary Islands


today saw those images in fashiongoneroge and fell in love with
when began to see with more attention, saw that they have been "painted" a bit roughly,
now, my question is
IS THAT ACCEPTABLE?  I MEAN, are MAGAZINES ACCEPTING THE COLOUR BANDING USUALLY, or this was just an exception?
don t want critisize the work, just wondering, if it was the intention of the editor
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8669194097_945f928b05_b.jpg
GlamourBiancaBalti5 por hola soy wanda, en Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8383/8669195221_0893487b93.jpg
522104_10152412217672837_1084632708_n por hola soy wanda, en Flickr
Apr 21 13 03:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Paul Snyder
Posts: 87
Columbus, Ohio, US


I wouldn't say they were painted.

Looks more like there's an issue with color banding in the shadows.
Apr 21 13 04:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MichaelClements
Posts: 1,729
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia


Looks like color separation or banding issues to me. Poor form really. I doubt it was the intention of the editor.

http://www.michaelclements.com.au/
Apr 21 13 04:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Paul Snyder wrote:
I wouldn't say they were painted.
Looks more like there's an issue with color banding in the shadows.

+1

Apr 21 13 04:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
wanda pelin
Posts: 59
Adeje (Las Americas), Tenerife, Canary Islands


so, it s  a normal practice? it s a print fault?
Apr 21 13 04:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Artist/Painter
JJMiller
Posts: 472
Buffalo, New York, US


I'm going to assume the 99.9% of other people looking at this really don't give a shit.
Apr 21 13 05:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gulag
Posts: 1,222
Duluth, Georgia, US


JJMiller wrote:
I'm going to assume the 99.9% of other people looking at this really don't give a shit.

+1.

Apr 21 13 06:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 9,276
Seattle, Washington, US


JJMiller wrote:
I'm going to assume the 99.9% of other people looking at this really don't give a shit.

99.99%

Apr 21 13 07:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Miracle_Man
Posts: 789
Cary, North Carolina, US


That can also come from adding too much contrast or too much saturation to the scene.
Apr 21 13 07:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Frankcerro
Posts: 40
Sevilla, Andalusia, Spain


I think it is when change to CMYK without the gamut warning.
Apr 22 13 10:04 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
The Invisible Touch
Posts: 707
Tarragona, Catalonia, Spain


Definitely not painted!!
Apr 22 13 12:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
richy01
Posts: 153
Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands


I can imagine the client gives a sh&*&t...
Apr 25 13 09:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Paul Snyder
Posts: 87
Columbus, Ohio, US


richy01 wrote:
I can imagine the client gives a sh&*&t...

If you have noticeable color banding, I can attest that they will, in fact, "give a sh*t"

Apr 25 13 11:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Nienna1990
Posts: 568
Tel Aviv-Yafo, Tel Aviv, Israel


Usually something like this will happen when trying to recover shadowed areas.

Why? how can a magazine approve? did no one notice?

Well, there are many possible answers for that. but it doesnt matter. In this industry you have to make short term calls, and stick to it. Do whatever you can with the time given you.
May 01 13 03:33 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
NickWatson
Posts: 59
London, England, United Kingdom


May 01 13 06:58 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
NickWatson
Posts: 59
London, England, United Kingdom


if you pulled this image from the website, dont be suprised as it will be a jpeg as the image doesnt look very hi res
May 01 13 06:58 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
wanda pelin
Posts: 59
Adeje (Las Americas), Tenerife, Canary Islands


NW-RETOUCHING wrote:
if you pulled this image from the website, dont be suprised as it will be a jpeg as the image doesnt look very hi res

oh yes, they are from the website,
i think it was just bad resizing  for the web, or something like that

May 01 13 08:12 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
NickWatson
Posts: 59
London, England, United Kingdom


i would bet then the colours were fine in the print and its just jpeg issues.
May 01 13 08:18 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Ovidiu Oltean
Posts: 177
Sibiu, Sibiu, Romania


I don't think that on print there is the problem like the preview showed, i think thats a web problem.
May 01 13 03:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Images By Joseph
Posts: 868
Naperville, Illinois, US


JJMiller wrote:
I'm going to assume the 99.9% of other people looking at this really don't give a shit.

+1

May 01 13 03:12 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers