|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
Criticism For Being a Retoucher.
So this might be off topic to the forum, but I wanted to hear the opinions of other retouchers on this. My question is, how do you react to people who tell you that retouching is pointless or stupid, or that they don't like flawless looking people, etc.? And what is your opinion on the general hate for digital photography and retouching? I know I've struggled with a few individual and specific styles that I didn't particularly like, but I would never just blanket the entire craft as stupid because of it. I honestly feel like all this "body image" nonsense makes people view retouching with a biased viewpoint. All that should matter is the end result. Recently, I had some friends criticize retouching on a photo I posted, which basically means they were telling me that what I do is stupid. So, it's sort of got me up in arms and overly defensive. But dammit, I hate how this craft is singled out. Jun 05 14 01:07 pm Link Criticism is not critique. Take what you want from it. Jun 05 14 01:16 pm Link Singled out? No. Your friends aren't friends. Retouching will always have a place, if it's done well. Jun 05 14 01:17 pm Link Do what makes you happy, forget everyone else..... Jun 05 14 01:21 pm Link Good Egg Productions wrote: By singled out I mean, if I were to create from scratch, a 3D model of a human head, and it was idealized, and perfectly lit, perfect skin, hair, etc., then they'd respect it. But if you take an image of a person, and enhance the photo with photoshop, it's stupid and pointless. Jun 05 14 01:23 pm Link J Strath wrote: If you know that already, you'll know that they'll pull those on you from time to time. Just be secured in what you want and do. Plus they are not your clients, don't pay attention to what they say or think at all, it's not worth your time or mental energy. Jun 05 14 01:34 pm Link I personally find it hypocritical as hell when a lot of people that I've seen spend other ways to try to be perfect. So it's weird when they point fingers at people who get paid to do that when they're perfectionists in other areas. Same thing. Different way of approaching it. Besides if someone wants to attack retouching then they have to attack the nature of the economy they live in and whether or not they're secretly comfortable with some of the other ways they're marketed to. I don't think that the body image wave is nonsense. I'm actually a part of it. I just think that there needs to be more education about what we're told to do. We don't do it to hurt people. It's like pointing fingers at the friers at McDonalds for creating obesity in children. For body image, first of all, it's not so much the retouching as it is the society that tries to condition people to believe that equating retouching with their body image is their only option. So imo it still comes down to people pointing fingers at the wrong people when it's the system itself. Besides, I have this idea that people might not be uncomfortable with retouching if they're being represented. it's just that when you get really crappy examples where retouchers and the people hiring them don't understand what decent body proportion is and it's picked up by people that are just ill informed that retouching doesn't exist to inherently make people insecure, you get what you were talking about. To me if someone wants to attack retouching I'd have to ask them if they spent their time trying to be perfect in other areas and if they're comfortable with toppling capitalism and not being in a more privileged position than some people are in other countries. Think retouching sucks? Cool. Tell me if you're susceptible to finding people in magazines or in ads attractive or if you're convinced to buy products because the models look amazing. How about a product you really wanted to buy because you thought it looked shiny? Still think it sucks? Cool. Tell me how you would sell something to someone in an advertisement format. (Even though that's one area of retouching all together I'm just using it as a running example). We help the system run and there's nothing wrong with that. If people want to come for us then they need to ask themselves if they're fine with the benefits of their system being taken away because there's a domino effect to it and if they're okay with putting an end to the desire for perfection all together. So in a really mindfuck way attacking retouching is like waging a war against the human psyche for some people. We're just what happens when a need for perfection takes form in this day and age. Maybe you can tell your friends that and see what happens. "But Aaron if you're trying to attack what I do, aren't you still being a perfectionist by going to the gym every day?" or "Not like I criticize you for what you do. I work every day like you. Why am I so different from a person trying to make a living down the street?" If they still give you problems and you can't just agree to disagree then I think that they're probably just shit people in general. Jun 06 14 02:27 pm Link I would say that those who criticize it, either don't know how to do it, and/or don't understand the reason(s) it needs to be done. -Don Jun 06 14 02:40 pm Link I don't even like the look you're talking about, but as long as there are customers out there who DO like it, what does my opinion or that of your shitty friends matter? Go for it. Do the work, collect the dough, and enjoy yourself. After all, plenty of people don't like what I do. That's not stopping me. Why should it stop you? Jun 06 14 02:58 pm Link J Strath wrote: F***'em. You do what your clients want, and in turn people buy those products. If they want it to change have them spend their money on other products/advertising. Don't buy high end cosmetics or designer brands, but they sure will be in the minority Jun 06 14 03:02 pm Link You and I come from different sides of the fence - you're a digital retoucher and I'm a film/darkroom photographer. However, we both do the same job. I do all my own "retouching" in my darkroom printing. There is hardly a single image that I work with that I don't dodge, burn, bleach, tone, or use some other image altering method to do what I think will improve my work. While I frequently ask others who I feel will give me a valid opinion, I don't necessarily do what they suggest/say. My work is my work and if someone doesn't like it, that's OK. However, if someone says that my work isn't any good because it's not a "real" image, I pretty much ignore people like that. You already mentioned Ansel Adams - we all know that he did major amounts of retouching of his photographs before they were complete. Viturally all the other masters were the same. If it was OK for them, it's OK for me. I do know a couple of photogaphers who pretty much don't retouch anything in their photographs. However, when I look at their work, I almost always see things that I think they could to improve the final image. My thoughts about them is that they aren't getting as much out of their craft as they could. Jun 06 14 03:26 pm Link Don Garrett wrote: Precisely. Cameras are so good these days, that sometimes I think half the battle is just removing things you'd never even see with the human eye. The goal of retouching is to enhance the overall image, not to simply make people more attractive, that's usually just an inevitable side effect. Jun 06 14 05:18 pm Link Neurotic wrote: Agreed! I like to think of it with girls, "Do you own a push up bra? Then you're a hypocrite." Jun 06 14 05:19 pm Link Dan Dozer wrote: I also agree. Retouching covers such a vast amount of styles and applications. For someone to discredit the entire craft over one, vague, and subjective type is insane to me. I liked to pose the point of if this were a painting or some other illustrated image, no one would care, but because there was use of a real human model, it's treated like a crime against nature. The bias and ignorance that goes into that thought process makes my brain melt. Jun 06 14 05:22 pm Link Like many things this is a very subjective topic. It all depends on what one wishes to produce. I have seen very good digital images that have been carefully retouched, and It's hard to tell they are even digital images or that they have been retouched. To me that is high quality work. When things are extensively computer manipulated they no longer represent a photograph, they have become a graphic image. If the graphic image is what one is trying to achieve then all is well. This works with things like poster art and pin-up pictures. It's the rage for movie advertisments where everyone looks perfect, but they also look very fake. But if a "photographic" image is the goal it has been spoiled. That is not to say true photographic images do not get retouched, they do, but not so that the manipulation is apparent. A blemish, a pimple can be subdued, but not every pore of the skin smudged so smooth that it looks like blended pastel sticks. Not crazy bright teeth and whites of the eyes. I shoot film and often get offer messages from retouchers which I always ignore. I have picked my subject, measured and adjusted my lighting, set the exposure, processed my film and made my print. I don't want it changed. Jun 06 14 06:20 pm Link J Strath wrote: Are they in the industry? If not fu*k em... Jun 06 14 08:23 pm Link J Strath wrote: I say that they have a point. Retouching has become .... well ... all about retouching and not about the woman. Jun 06 14 11:20 pm Link J Strath wrote: That is because an Ansel Adams is a PRINT. Jun 06 14 11:25 pm Link Giuseppe Luzio wrote: This is right where the problem lies.... retouching has become so self self centered that it's all about the "industry"... Jun 06 14 11:29 pm Link J Strath wrote: That is total nonsense. A push up bra does not make a woman look like plastic and make here eyes soulless. A push up bra is fun and games just as a silk scarf flying in the wind. Jun 06 14 11:45 pm Link Fred Greissing, I'm going to just reply to all your responses in one. I agree some retouched images are just too much. I mean I just made a post a few weeks ago complaining about over retouched nails. (I think they look illustrated in a way thats kinda tacky) However, that's subjective. Is it a "problem?" No, I just can't agree with that. For example, retouching isn't the cause for body image issues. I just can't get behind that. People are responsible for how they handle reality. If they want to idolize ads, and ignore the people around them, that's the problem of the person, not the ad. I do agree that a truly good retouched photo, doesn't look photoshopped. But even that seems situational to me. Because I like a super smooth, shinny, edit just as much as a natural one. But I don't consider one better than the other because you have to consider things like intent. I still stick by my push up bra comparison whole heartedly. If we're going to get huffy over unrealistic ideas of beauty or any type of unfaithful imagery, then why can't that be said about all kinds of body alteration? I like bringing that up because it begs the question, where should the line be drawn? It get's people to think about why they feel the way they do. Jun 07 14 12:55 am Link I think your missing the point of my posts. The humanity of an image. IMO there is more beauty when a more natural appearance is captured in an image than when a face is transformed to a characterless image of flawlessness and dull eyes with over saturated and contrast dark irises. I think you also miss the humanity of a woman having a bit of fun with a push-up bra or a dress with a deep decolte. What do you think of the fact that a top photographer like Peter Lindbergh who shoots for Vogue and Bazar and has been doing so for over 30 years dislikes this over retouched and over done up image of women. Anyway I think that a further discussion would require discussing images, but that becomes a no no here on Model Mayhem... Jun 07 14 02:03 am Link Fred Greissing wrote: I really like that part! Fred Greissing wrote: Yep!.... Fred Greissing wrote: +1....will be a new proverb i guess Fred Greissing wrote: they enhance, and maybe recolour, but it remains feasible without retouching, paradoxically Fred Greissing wrote: Wonderfully put... Fred Greissing wrote: When a photograph changes into an illustration indeed....if it's overshopped (more than 50% of the power of the image comes from Photoshop), I carefully refer them as well as images or illustrations....instead of photographs... Jun 07 14 03:14 am Link Retouching and editing is nothing new. I have been doing it for the last 40 years albeit with film and airbrush work. Jun 07 14 03:34 am Link The Mona Lisa looked like crap until it was retouched several dozen times, albeit with paint due to lack of photoshop. If people think their work is perfect the way the camera interpreted it that is their creative decision to be respected. Jun 17 14 10:34 pm Link For me Retouching is how is be done. Personally never like but not dislike the shining perfect one , also I hate the type of porcelain. I love the muted type which allow natural look. That's me. BTW you very talented one:) H Jun 17 14 11:19 pm Link However I like (my own) photos more natural, I don't see anything stupid in retouching. If retouching is stupid, so is trying to look for the right light and angle, so is trying to find the right model, so is trying to find the right make-up and clothing, and so on. We might as well just stay in bed all day and be lethargic instead of popping out our creativity. Jun 17 14 11:28 pm Link We (photographers) shoot models. There is already something 'unnatural' about that, given that our subjects are among the top percent of the population in terms of beauty, perfection, genetics, etc. But I'm ok with that, given how society appreciates and defines beauty, as a whole. I will admit that the folks I photograph for magazines don't always look like the folks reading the magazines, but again I'm ok with that if I'm portraying a lifestyle or an aspiration for the readers. Retouching can add to that, but as many of you have said it depends on the level of retouching. There is no such thing as a good retoucher, no more than there is a good photographer. It is a collaboration between photographer and retoucher that needs to exist or else the retouching can cross a line - but that line needs to be agreed upon by both. Jun 18 14 03:32 am Link I am seriously trying to get out of retouching because I can't take the criticism anymore, it is starting to affect my health. Jun 18 14 06:52 am Link As with most everything, retouching is judged by the eye of the beholder and quite subjective. IMO...the amount of retouching should be determined by ones personal tastes and/or desired goal. (Perhaps it's for a commercial client that has requested a specific look) To each their own. I just wish I had the talent to retouch like so many wonderful retouching artists out there. Do what YOU love! Jun 18 14 07:22 am Link Don't waste your energy on that - there is no way to convince somebody and make change their mind. People are stubborn. Jun 18 14 08:09 am Link Surely no one is surprised that people that work in the "industry" have no feelings for how their work effects humanity. After all if they like their work then who cares what the world thinks. That is the core of how artists have always felt and is the driving force for most. Jun 18 14 09:28 am Link J Strath wrote: F U Jun 18 14 10:27 am Link Greg Curran wrote: I must be really lucky then because I don't get shit from anyone. Jun 18 14 10:32 am Link J Strath I wouldn't bother about what other think and say, as long as you like what you do and it brings you what you want. Be yourself! There are millions of people in this world and you will never please everyone. I think the world today has gone a bit crazy about judging everyone and everything. It is so important to surround ourselves with positive people that are supportive. If someone truly loves life he will enjoy every aspect of creation just for sheer fun. I don't understand criticism of retouching industry as well, as if there's something wrong with it. Retouching is about good look. Same as makeup, nice clothes, braces and hair dying. So if someone would criticize retouching I would probably laugh and change topic. If someone would criticize the photo I would think why is he doing it, maybe there is something that could be done better. It is learning 24/7 and I think it's a healthy approach, as long as the criticism gives some valuable feedback. Anyway I think the most important is to be happy with oneself and if you like what you do, do it! Jun 18 14 11:24 am Link most of the time that i read about criticism - it’s about retouching that is way overdone, and i think that falls in two main categories: 1) criticism that is concerned with the constant bombardment of images featuring flawless celebrities (perfect skin and perfect bodies), and the effect that it can have on ordinary people - especially young girls. it’s often about degree - taking off 10 years and 15 lbs off a 40 year old celebrity is one thing. taking 20 years and 30 pounds off is very much another. 2) criticism that is more concerned about artistic taste, which comes up with images that are so over-retouched that they simply look tacky. in some of these images, the skin doesn’t look fresh and youthful, it literally ceases to look like human skin. Jun 18 14 12:14 pm Link J Strath wrote: I usually just tell them to suck it easy and if they make any points that stand out to me in particular, i promptly add it to my grand list of things to pretend to give a fuck about. To which I then I file it in my filing cabinet of irrelevancy, under the letter N for not-one-single-fuck-was-given. Jun 18 14 03:29 pm Link Consider the source first then just listen and see what you can improve. At least your getting some feedback, which shows they care. Jun 18 14 06:56 pm Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: That's because when you're good enough to get paid to do something, no one can really say shit to you. Jun 18 14 09:27 pm Link I tell them that your flaws are magnified especially under powerful lights, every 'flaw' or blemish will look one hundred times more noticeable, so it has to be corrected in post. Also I tell them that people like to look good in pictures, retouching is art. Jun 19 14 11:58 pm Link |
