Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > Criticism For Being a Retoucher.

Photographer

Camerosity

Posts: 5805

Saint Louis, Missouri, US

Just smile and shake your head.

You can't reason with ignorant people or know-it-alls (which are often the same thing). Trying to do so will only cause you frustration.

Jun 20 14 12:14 am Link

Retoucher

Orenj Haro

Posts: 115

London, England, United Kingdom

I do feel judged, like people just assume I'm one of those people that are pro skinny, anti full figured and photoshop everyone like a doll.

I absolutely can't stand it how a professional photoshoot then adjusted with some brightness and high contrast and fixing minor, minor details is already labeled as ''PHOTOSHOP!!'' and ''FAKE''. Everyone acts like they are totally onto something only they can see. Piss off

Jun 20 14 07:18 pm Link

Photographer

DaeNaturals

Posts: 135

Sacramento, California, US

I am also a retoucher and this is my response to them:

Every work of art of a portrait ever created in history, is a retouch by man.
Whether it is a paint brush, pen, knife or fingers.

Every time someone puts on any form of makeup or hair color, it is a retouch by man.
Whether it is foundation, lipstick, eyeliner or coloring.

Every portrait photo ever taken or created, is a retouch by man.
Whether it is exposed on film or a digital chip, used a lens or a hole, used lights or the sun.

Digital retouching/photoshopping is just another medium to create a 2 dimensional image of someone the way we'd like to see. Real or not. Badly done or not.
Like every other medium has done, to some degree.

Of course, this is very dependent on the context.
If this is for the sake of science, news, or documentation, then accuracy to reality is paramount, but it is still a representation and a substitute for reality.

In the case of the "purist" mentality, regarding photography: I say, if you really want to be a purist, you don't need to use any tools; look and absorb with your eyes only.

If you want to create an image, use every tool and skill at your disposal to create the image you want.
We are not creating it and calling it reality.
We are creating it, as art.

Jun 20 14 08:19 pm Link

Retoucher

Natalia_Taffarel

Posts: 7665

Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

DaeNaturals wrote:
I am also a retoucher and this is my response to them:

Every work of art of a portrait ever created in history, is a retouch by man.
Whether it is a paint brush, pen, knife or fingers.

Every time someone puts on any form of makeup or hair color, it is a retouch by man.
Whether it is foundation, lipstick, eyeliner or coloring.

Every portrait photo ever taken or created, is a retouch by man.
Whether it is exposed on film or a digital chip, used a lens or a hole, used lights or the sun.

Digital retouching/photoshopping is just another medium to create a 2 dimensional image of someone the way we'd like to see. Real or not. Badly done or not.
Like every other medium has done, to some degree.

Of course, this is very dependent on the context.
If this is for the sake of science, news, or documentation, then accuracy to reality is paramount, but it is still a representation and a substitute for reality.

In the case of the "purist" mentality, regarding photography: I say, if you really want to be a purist, you don't need to use any tools; look and absorb with your eyes only.

If you want to create an image, use every tool and skill at your disposal to create the image you want.
We are not creating it and calling it reality.
We are creating it, as art.

I might quote you in the future

Jun 21 14 12:06 am Link

Photographer

Michael McGowan

Posts: 3829

Tucson, Arizona, US

There's an odd dichotomy with the "perfection" of digital images.

I remember when the head of a museum looked at some 20x30s I'd had printed and immediately offered me a show. Why? "Because it's like looking through a window."

Later on, he commented more fully and it seems that what he loved was that the artifice was invisible to him. He didn't see grain or noise or anything to interrupt his appreciation of the image. Unlike paintings, it wasn't a matter of the brush strokes.

That's what some people hate about digital images. Sometimes they're so perfect, so pristine, that they just seem unreal. Yet, people distort their own images all the time on Instagram and such.

Why is there such a double standard? I'm not sure, but I surely see it all the time.

Jun 21 14 12:32 am Link

Photographer

Nico Simon Princely

Posts: 1972

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Realize they are just ignorant and uninformed and that the opinion of an ignorant person does not count.

If you want to explain to them why retouching is good and helps both photographers and models then do so.

Jun 21 14 01:03 am Link

Photographer

Fred Greissing

Posts: 6427

Los Angeles, California, US

J Strath wrote:
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?

This subject came up at a lunch with some friends. One of the friends is a very pretty makeup artist and retoucher. Her response to your analogy was

"try walking to the club and dancing photoshopped, a push up bra is fun and real"

wink

Jun 23 14 03:13 pm Link

Photographer

Bill Tracy Photography

Posts: 2322

Montague, New Jersey, US

I'm definitely not a fan of overdone plastic looking skin, but when retouching is done right, it doesn't look like plastic.

I recently criticised a photographer for retouching his own photos to the point where it just looked ridiculously fake, and he came back saying it was the MUA and he hardly used any photoshop at all.  He was obviously lying, but what can I say at that point.  I just dropped the subject.  If he had used a decent retoucher the image would not have been ruined the way it was by him.

I wish I could post the photo here, but I know that would be wrong and against the rules.

Aug 29 14 02:29 pm Link

Photographer

DG at studio47

Posts: 2365

East Ridge, Tennessee, US

virtually every image we see in media--and video--is retouched or altered in some way.people need to get over it. if 'clients' want their images untouched, they need to find a GWC or keep doing those bar bathroom selfies! I don't send any RAW images out.

Aug 29 14 02:39 pm Link

Retoucher

Lightweavers

Posts: 28

Macclesfield, England, United Kingdom

As many have already said retouching at its core is not a new art, and its not just about making people look good, how many zombies have we seen in the past 10 years?

Your friends are like some of my friends they see what you do as something new focused on making people perfect but its not, it's about enhancing or destroying anything, be it beauty or gore or sometimes creating something entirely new or impossible.

Don't detract from your dreams or vision, educate your friends if you can and ignore those that you can't. 

On the body image issue, retouching has been accused of many things even metal illness in some but its not the retouchers who pay to create these things, they are just skilled tools.  Is a soldier a murderer a weapon(tool) of war ?

Aug 29 14 02:50 pm Link

Retoucher

201retarded

Posts: 74

Hoboken, New Jersey, US

Well, it is a tough business in a sense you will be always criticized, good and bad. But as long as your doing what you love and are able to potentially make a living out of it I say keep going.  Styles in retouching change and it's important to keep up with them too. In these days the retouched unretouched look is in and the really polished has been delegated to fewer jobs, so learning to adapt is important.

Aug 30 14 06:13 am Link

Photographer

Herman van Gestel

Posts: 2266

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

as long as you're not caught or if it's not discovered, then you'll be ok wink.

else it's just a bad job...

Herman
www.hermanvangestel.com

Aug 30 14 06:22 am Link

Photographer

BillyPhotography

Posts: 467

Chicago, Illinois, US

If anyone criticizes you just ask them if they watch TV or like movies.  Almost all broadcasts and films are heavily retouched.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_NreiUYdbw

Aug 30 14 07:51 am Link

Retoucher

BluePhoenixPhotoArts

Posts: 12

Grand Rapids, Michigan, US

To every action there is an equal and opposite opinion. This is to say that with everything you do there will be those who think it's brilliant, and those who think it sucks. When it comes to retouching/editing of photos, it seems to me that it comes down to expectations. If I'm watching a movie, I know there are things that are not real. In some cases, none of it is real. If I know that, it's ok. Half the books in any book store are fiction, and a lot of people like reading fiction because they enjoy the escape from reality to fantasy. As long as I know it is fiction, I don't expect everything to be real. As an art form, photography and digital art mostly strives toward the ideals of our culture, something which art, going back to the Greeks and beyond, has always done. Unless we are doing portraits, there should be no need for everything photographers create to be real to life. Photography, for the most part, used to be more accurate to reality because it was much more difficult to alter images. Now people are having issues because what looks real often is not. It requires a change in mindset. Women need to realize that the images in magazines are not real, so they don't have to feel like they have to look like them. Men too have to realize the same thing and not expect women to look like magazine models. We just have to see digital art for what it is and treat it accordingly.

Sep 03 14 04:02 pm Link

Photographer

Loki Studio

Posts: 3523

Royal Oak, Michigan, US

No artist should ever expect others to think like them or have the same taste.  Focus your craft and your business to support the other photographers and clients who value your work.

Sep 03 14 04:16 pm Link

Photographer

Fred Greissing

Posts: 6427

Los Angeles, California, US

BillyVegas wrote:
If anyone criticizes you just ask them if they watch TV or like movies.  Almost all broadcasts and films are heavily retouched.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_NreiUYdbw

But the actors in the before and after shots are unchanged. Two very different things.

Virtual sets save production costs, enviromental impact and improve safety.

That does not compare to making women look like plastic.

Sep 03 14 04:53 pm Link

Model

Kirst

Posts: 550

Derry, New Hampshire, US

why should a model be allowed to wear makeup if a retoucher isn't allowed to do their thing?

Sep 03 14 04:59 pm Link

Photographer

I M N Photography

Posts: 2350

Boston, Massachusetts, US

People either criticize something very specific, or they make generalizations, because they don't know what the hell they are talking about.

What is important, is that you know when to recognize valid opinions vs. hating.

As is often the case, generalizations are dumb, and using them against a group of people, or an artform makes you look ignorant.

Sep 03 14 05:13 pm Link

Photographer

DAVISICON

Posts: 644

San Antonio, Texas, US

there would be no beautiful ageless or handsome celebrities without retouchers, your job is important to many out there, you provide an important service to those whom need it,  tell the others that criticize to f#$% off, lol
ask Mariah!


https://www.bosschicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/mariahcarey-retouchedphotos-leaked.gif

Sep 03 14 05:34 pm Link