Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > Let's Talk About Carving

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

Roland nice thread you´ve started, really interesting, and MP great work , would be great if you find the time in the future to make a tutorial

greetings

Dec 25 11 01:01 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

Hiya Francis,

I burnt in the side (image left). Is that "looking right"?

There is a large light to the image left (aimed high to low) that is from Softlighter II. If I wanted to enhance, I know I have to dodge the triangular region spanned by the cheek bone and the jaw bone.

Let me know if my attempt (below) is on the right track?


https://ronaldnztan.com/temp/TAN_20111020_260_CARVING_Practice.jpg


MP Retouch—8-BIT TIFF only with the augmented fix on the neutral, softgrey layer: http://ronaldnztan.com/temp/TAN_2011102 … actice.tif

Please free free to redact my TIFF so show my how the proper carving should be based on Francis' planes of head example.

Dec 25 11 04:41 pm Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 35726

Los Angeles, California, US

https://jfrancis.smugmug.com/photos/i-7MhvF3W/0/O/i-7MhvF3W.gif

Here's an animated gif.

The theory I'm going for is to enforce the planes between front and side of face on frame left. I also accentuated the side of the head by the temple.

What do you think? Is it working in practice? I actually don't do a lot of carving and did this fairly fast using the gray overlay method. I probably oversaturated the shadows.

Dec 25 11 05:14 pm Link

Photographer

David Hirsh

Posts: 2379

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

This set of before/after comparison photos shows the results of a small but fair amount of carving, after I finished with pixel-level d&b. I think carving is a little trickier to get right, as mentioned, because it really does involve understanding anatomy with an artistic bent. Just knowing the technical process is only part of the puzzle. Being experienced with studio lighting for over a decade has saved me a little in that aspect, as I am definitely no 'pure' artist.

https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/110410/20/4da277f347791.jpg

p.s. Merry Christmas, everyone.

Dec 25 11 05:28 pm Link

Digital Artist

Michael C Pearson

Posts: 1349

Agoura Hills, California, US

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
https://jfrancis.smugmug.com/photos/i-7MhvF3W/0/O/i-7MhvF3W.gif

Here's an animated gif.

The theory I'm going for is to enforce the planes between front and side of face on frame left. I also accentuated the side of the head by the temple.

What do you think? Is it working in practice? I actually don't do a lot of carving and did this fairly fast using the gray overlay method. I probably oversaturated the shadows.

Oh wow haha - We ended up doing something pretty similar except I went with a slightly higher cheekbone with a harsher transition towards the top (telling the viewer the contour is a bit more angular which looks good on men). I used the dual curve method.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9nkufzwOCZw/TvfQ1cO1wuI/AAAAAAAAA7E/6dSK0obOKzA/s1600/tancarvegif.gif

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9V5DjFX01zA/TvlYLViCSZI/AAAAAAAAA7k/Gh3hzYplfhA/s1600/d%2526b-mask.jpg
(all but the neck curve masks composited onto 50% grey layer)

Dec 25 11 05:45 pm Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 35726

Los Angeles, California, US

MP Retouch wrote:
Oh wow haha - We ended up doing something pretty similar except I went with a slightly higher cheekbone with a harsher transition towards the top

I like what you did a lot

Dec 25 11 05:55 pm Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

@MPRetouch: In my case, it was a slightly flawed and thank you for correcting and pointing out to me. I now "see" what it should be or at least based on this example.

Dec 25 11 06:00 pm Link

Digital Artist

Michael C Pearson

Posts: 1349

Agoura Hills, California, US

David Hirsh wrote:
This set of before/after comparison photos shows the results of a small but fair amount of carving, after I finished with pixel-level d&b. I think carving is a little trickier to get right, as mentioned, because it really does involve understanding anatomy with an artistic bent. Just knowing the technical process is only part of the puzzle. Being experienced with studio lighting for over a decade has saved me a little in that aspect, as I am definitely no 'pure' artist.

I'm not really seeing much change in form besides the places where you flattened out the form by removing shadows/highlights or d&b'd the existing shadows and highlights to make them more contrasty. Would you mind pointing out areas that you feel you changed the form of the face?

Be really careful when neutralizing shadows and highlights around the lips as flattening that area makes it seem like there's tension in the mouth or looks just plain weird. Also try to avoid removing the slight wrinkle/highlight underneath the eye that shows the spherical form of the eyeball underneath the skin. Occasionally it's good to remove it, but it reduces the expression and depth of the model's face. In this case it looks better with it as she's already lacking in the expression department.

I did a quick d&b on the original to show you what I mean about you losing the form of the lip - your edit on the top, mine on bottom.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TRZtZz67RvM/TvfbjfatxUI/AAAAAAAAA7Q/PCFE-MPJJS8/s1600/lips.jpg

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
I like what you did a lot

I actually can't decide if I like yours or mine better. Yours looks less processed and seems to bring back the natural depth of the planes of his face while mine is a little more heavy handed and changes the model's bone structure a bit. Probably a mix of the two would look best.

Dec 25 11 06:32 pm Link

Retoucher

Ovidiu Oltean

Posts: 179

Sibiu, Sibiu, Romania

MP retouch is the maestro.

Dec 26 11 02:56 am Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

I was working on a practicing image and would like to share it

i marked the parts red in the left picture where i think it  needs some improvements

im not so happy with the current state of the eyebrowes and the parts arround the chin and mouth, maybe someone could guide me a little bit

suggestions and tipps are welcome

https://s14.directupload.net/images/111226/rtahqxva.jpg

btw great thread so far :-)

Dec 26 11 05:42 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

Any new comers that sees this post, don't fret! Don't worry if things we're doing don't make any sense. Just look at the before and after and pay attention to regions that are dodged and burnt.

Ask yourself: Why?

Try justifying your enquiry with the "Planes of Head" illustration provided by Mr. Francis Joseph.

Dec 26 11 09:50 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

If you're posting (embedding) images, the LARGEST width that you could embed without stretching the forum is 640 pixels.

Please size and or crop accordingly.

Dec 26 11 10:38 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

Guten Tag Grazian! "Fröliche Weihnachten!" :-)

Can you please repost the before and after in the vertically cascaded with 640px as the maximum width?

I want to attempt at helping apply the "Planes of Head" example and markup on your image.

Dec 26 11 10:45 am Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote:
Guten Tag Grazian! "Fröliche Weihnachten!" :-)

Can you please repost the before and after in the vertically cascaded with 640px as the maximum width?

I want to attempt at helping apply the "Planes of Head" example and markup on your image.

Thx a lot ronald, and best xmas wishes to you too :-)
I will repost the pic when i am at home

Dec 26 11 02:44 pm Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 35726

Los Angeles, California, US

The Fat Face / Thin Face Illusion

http://www.moillusions.com/2010/12/the- … usion.html

Interesting how much orientation affects our perception of form. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that we expect light to come from above.

Dec 26 11 05:38 pm Link

Retoucher

Rpixretouching

Posts: 355

Perris, California, US

Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote:
Guten Tag Grazian! "Fröliche Weihnachten!" :-)

fröhliches Weihnachten für Sie auch und selbstverständlich ein netter Tag:)
und bedankt sich, diesen Faden anzufangen.

Dec 26 11 07:45 pm Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

Bitte schön. I am surprised I was able to loosely translate without utilizing Google Translate. (I took some deutsch courses at uni). I had to look up "anzufangen." I guess I could say, "ich schreibe deutsch ein bisschen." Very limited.


digiretouch365 wrote:

fröhliches Weihnachten für Sie auch und selbstverständlich ein netter Tag:)
und bedankt sich, diesen Faden anzufangen.

Dec 26 11 08:04 pm Link

Photographer

365 Digitals Exposed

Posts: 807

Perris, California, US

LOL schreibe ich, dass niemand aber google mein guter Freund IST .

Lest go back to carving Cause I'm loving it. I love to read  and learn from you guys, this help me a lot even with my oil painting hobby.

oops  my tog user name.

Dec 26 11 09:39 pm Link

Digital Artist

Michael C Pearson

Posts: 1349

Agoura Hills, California, US

(PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE THIS ENTIRE POST)

Grazian wrote:
I was working on a practicing image and would like to share it

i marked the parts red in the left picture where i think it  needs some improvements

im not so happy with the current state of the eyebrowes and the parts arround the chin and mouth, maybe someone could guide me a little bit

suggestions and tipps are welcome

https://s14.directupload.net/images/111226/rtahqxva.jpg

That happens to be a very awkward angle when it comes to highlights and shadows, especially because the lighting is very broad. It's not that frequent that we see people from this angle (unless you're very short) which makes visualizing the planes much more difficult. You may need to dig up reference images to help if you're not sure of the contours.

The things you marked are actually the way the shadows and highlights accurately look from that angle. Even though the proportions may be accurate, you may think something looks off because of the lack of depth perception flattening out the planes into abstract shapes of shadow and highlight that you aren't familiar with seeing. Does this mean we leave it alone? Hell no! The image should look "right," regardless of whether or not this is actually true.

I was able to make this particular image look a little more "right" by burning the planes that we generally see shadowed a bit as well as burning the wide corners of the jaw while not-burning the outer sides of the forehead like I'd normally do for someone with a wide forehead. Doing these things will help to shape the highlights and shadows into something that looks more familiar to the viewer. As for the neck shadow you marked, rather than changing the shape of it I just dodged the edge to make it less noticeable.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nne7dyocT70/TvlYKkqsB_I/AAAAAAAAA7c/EYiaEE-vZVE/s1600/rtahqxva.gif

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sabxwGMTWpg/Tvlcc_wirnI/AAAAAAAAA74/uXQzgq__dP4/s1600/sadf.jpg
(the curve masks composited onto a 50% grey layer)

Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote:
Any new comers that sees this post, don't fret! Don't worry if things we're doing don't make any sense. Just look at the before and after and pay attention to regions that are dodged and burnt.

Ask yourself: Why?

Try justifying your enquiry with the "Planes of Head" illustration provided by Mr. Francis Joseph.

Oh my god, best advice in the thread so far. This is how I learned a great deal of what I know. I know I'm starting to sound like an Amy Dresser fanboy, but I found it especially useful to practice on the images in her portfolio using the following method:

• go to Amy Dresser's portfolio and find a before/after that you feel shows wonderful carving, but don't look too hard at the "after"
• "print screen" the original, then paste into Photoshop, then "print screen" the retouched and paste it into Photoshop, making sure the layers are lined up
• you may be thinking that the image is far too small to work on - don't worry about it. You're just looking at the shapes of the shadows and highlights. You don't need fine detail.
• now toggle off the retouch, and carve away at the original. DO NOT PEEK. It will be so hard to resist checking your progress against hers, but you MUST resist or you wont learn as much
• finally when you are completely done (meaning you don't think you could do it any better), that's the time to see what you two did differently
• now put your analytical thinking hat on, notice the differences in shadows and highlights, and follow Ronald Tan's advice and ask WHY. Really study the differences, why did she dodge there? How does it change the form or texture of the face?
• save the image, DO NOT POST IT ONLINE OR SHOW IT TO PEOPLE - IT'S ONLY FOR PRACTICE, and then later when you feel like you've grown as a carving artist try it again to see how the results have changed.

This isn't just for carving training, but for any non-fine detail related retouching that you'd like to learn from another retoucher. The images you'll work on will be very small which will force you to focus on the big picture, don't worry about stray hairs or perfect texture, just get the overall shadows and highlights, color toning, contrast, or whatever else you'd like to learn. Here's a psd of one of Amy Dressers heavily carved retouches that's ready to go for this exercise. Remember, this is just for your eyes.

As a side note, it was learning from the image in Amy Dresser's "portrait" gallery of the older man holding the (fox?) head that allowed me to do the old man teal retouch I posted earlier. I think if you look closely you'll be able to see the influence, although Dresser's is still leagues better than mine. So crisp!

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
The Fat Face / Thin Face Illusion

http://www.moillusions.com/2010/12/the- … usion.html

Interesting how much orientation affects our perception of form. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that we expect light to come from above.

Very interesting, I haven't seen that before. Your observation about it probably dealing with how we expect to see light seems accurate (I don't think I would have thought of that!).

Dec 26 11 10:06 pm Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

[Deleted]

Dec 26 11 10:55 pm Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

Thank you very much MP,

great tips and advice, i have some free time now and will practice the carving technic ,

as i see you have darkened more in orderer to blend the averall form better, looks clearer and more cleaned up now , now when i look at my 50% grey layers 1st atempt i have made the oposite ive lightened more

i need to focus more on the natural head modell thats posted in this thread, and apart  from that i need to better define my D&B from my carving.

I think my mistake is that i want to keep a neutral carv level ( like a middle grey ) and im thinking to much of a D&B way/approch in my carvings....

One thing MP i would like to ask you, when you do your carvings which brush settings do you prefer for the work like opacity and flow i think i need to get a bigger tablet im only using this super small version

So far it helped me a lot by only reading this thread :-) thx guys  !!

and your german is really good , sehr gut ;-)

Ronald if you still are interested in a bigger unedited version ill post it here for practicing purposes

https://s1.directupload.net/images/111227/2ehtc4it.jpg

Dec 27 11 01:12 am Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

MP Retouch wrote:
method:

• go to Amy Dresser's portfolio and find a before/after that you feel shows wonderful carving, but don't look too hard at the "after"

great work and great for practicing thx

by the way,  the photo with the girl on the bed and the doll on the ground is awesome

Dec 27 11 01:50 am Link

Digital Artist

Michael C Pearson

Posts: 1349

Agoura Hills, California, US

Grazian wrote:
as i see you have darkened more in orderer to blend the averall form better, looks clearer and more cleaned up now , now when i look at my 50% grey layers 1st atempt i have made the oposite ive lightened more

Much better! You're a quick learner. A mistake I see lots of dodge and burn newbies making is that they tend to dodge way more than burn.

Grazian wrote:
One thing MP i would like to ask you, when you do your carvings which brush settings do you prefer for the work like opacity and flow i think i need to get a bigger tablet im only using this super small version

I've fine-tuned these settings over the years and they are very specific but work amazingly well if you get it right.

• I use a large Intuos4 for the 2080 (something like that) levels of pressure sensitivity, but the large size is more for digital painting so you can draw with your arm rather than your wrist. A smaller tablet size is fine for retouching.
• I use a program called Tablet Pressure Curve tool which lets you have much more control over the pressure curve than the Wacom configuration tool allows (it allows you to reduce the amount of pressure needed to get to 100%). Here's a picture of the curve that works for me (Wacom's configurator doesn't let you work with the end points). It also has solved the Intuos 4's problem with quickly wearing nibs.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j7jrxUCI_3I/TvmVZeWz-gI/AAAAAAAAA8Q/nBWILO7JoyQ/s1600/pressure.jpg
• I tweaked the settings until I got to a point where I can go from 0%-100% with comfort, meaning I don't have to press super hard. To test to see if your settings are good, on a white document get a black brush with only pressure set to sensitivity and opacity/flow set to 100%, make a small circular selection and fill it with black (for reference), then next to the black circle see if you can go to that same pure black in a single stroke without pressing too hard. If you can't, then you need the tool. I think it's PC only.
• I use a 100% soft brush with both opacity and flow set to pen pressure and spacing set to 5%
• In the option bar I use 50% opacity, 2% flow

With those settings I can lightly let my stylus drag over the tablet to apply a low opacity stroke (I barely have to apply any pressure at all) and without digging into the tablet's surface I can achieve 50% opacity if I need to (dedicating all 2080 pressure sensitivity levels to that 50% opacity stroke which allows an incredible degree of precision in how much opacity you want to paint with), then if I need more I just lift and apply the second 50% opacity stroke (and even a third as two 50% opacity strokes don't actually add up to a full 100% opacity stroke in Photoshop for some reason). It's very comfortable to dodge and burn like this and since I've gotten it all perfect it's improved the speed of my retouching by quite a bit.

Grazian wrote:
by the way,  the photo with the girl on the bed and the doll on the ground is awesome

I know! Isn't it beautiful?

Dec 27 11 01:53 am Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

thank you again MP ,

nice insight and advice,

im currently using a small bamboo , apart from that i need to improve my pen technique never felt real comfortable with it , always took the mouse instead, maybe i need a bigger tablet , ill try the settings with my bamboo and start practicing with it more

you are definetely right its more the darken thing that makes the carving shine :-)

Dec 27 11 04:16 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

Hi Grazian,

No need to post large versions of your image. I just wanted to see the image large, that's all.

I think what will make thread thread fun is if anyone wants to improve or learn something about carving, make an attempt: show your before and after. When Mike's not too busy, he could give you tips or tell you if you're on the right track.

I could also give advice, but Mike's carving SUPERSEDES mine! :-) I am humbled and hey(!) I am learning and re-training my eyes.

Thank you for participating and I truly hope you (and everyone) can get something out of this thread.

Dec 27 11 10:41 am Link

Photographer

Grazian

Posts: 104

Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony, Germany

I can not talk for the others, but for me , this thread helped me a lot, One Thing ive learned is
Small steps and changes adding together in carving fOrming are always better
And try to change the obvious faults by getting to it with the opposite technique , i hope this makes sense, my english isnt that good

Try to use your pen and disconnect from the mouse

Practice dB and carving

:-) greetings and if i dont Hear from anyone Here,

a happy New Year for all

Dec 28 11 12:21 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

I am glad you find it helpful, Grazian. :-)


Grazian wrote:
I can not talk for the others, but for me , this thread helped me a lot, One Thing ive learned is
Small steps and changes adding together in carving fOrming are always better
And try to change the obvious faults by getting to it with the opposite technique , i hope this makes sense, my english isnt that good

Try to use your pen and disconnect from the mouse

Practice dB and carving

:-) greetings and if i dont Hear from anyone Here,

a happy New Year for all

Dec 28 11 08:41 am Link

Photographer

Art of the Portrait

Posts: 20

Preston, England, United Kingdom

Fantastic thread folks, very helpful smile

Dec 28 11 05:31 pm Link

Photographer

- H T -

Posts: 1043

New York, New York, US

Ya..this thread is pretty damn useful.  Gave me some perspectives actually.

How would you carve this?  I'm going to give it a shot myself using learnings from here.

https://htpixels.com/images/claudia.jpg

Dec 28 11 09:05 pm Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

I sort of "see" it, but I also want to help you "see."

In your reply, mark up your image, e.g. circle the regions where you think you should dodge and burn.

Let's compare notes later. Shall we?

Image width should not extend 640 px, otherwise the stretch would deform the forum.



- H T - wrote:
Ya..this thread is pretty damn useful.  Gave me some perspectives actually.

How would you carve this?  I'm going to give it a shot myself using learnings from here.

Dec 28 11 09:30 pm Link

Photographer

- H T -

Posts: 1043

New York, New York, US

Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote:
I sort of "see" it, but I also want to help you "see."

In your reply, mark up your image, e.g. circle the regions where you think you should dodge and burn.

Let's compare notes later. Shall we?

Image width should not extend 640 px, otherwise the stretch would deform the forum.

https://htpixels.com/images/claudia2.jpg

Well I cheated using a black overlay and traced what was already there.  The problem I encountered was carving it enough to show enough improvement in before and after.  When I just used a single D&B layer, the changes seemed too subtle.  However, if I tried to duplicate in order to enhance the change, it looked too "unnatural"

At any rate...here's the edited version.


https://htpixels.com/images/claudia.jpg
https://htpixels.com/images/claudia3.jpg

Dec 28 11 10:19 pm Link

Retoucher

SterlingHein

Posts: 165

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote:
Let's compare notes later. Shall we?

Mind if I jump in, too?  I am never certain on how I should treat portraits that aren't lit in a traditional clam shell setup and shot head-on. (often these side view shots).

Among other things, in this image I'm not sure how to simplify the shadows / highlights around the front cheekbone.  There's a vertical highlight intersecting the cheek hollow's shadow and I don't know if I should get rid of it, leave it, or accentuate it.

[photo by OliviaNaumovPhotography here: [http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=809547]

Here's the original:

https://img835.imageshack.us/img835/4829/origz.jpg

My D&B:

https://img508.imageshack.us/img508/4127/editxu.jpg

My Markup (red burn; green dodge):

https://img684.imageshack.us/img684/9983/markup.jpg

My Work:

https://img818.imageshack.us/img818/2661/14682500.jpg

Dec 28 11 11:16 pm Link

Photographer

digital Artform

Posts: 49326

Los Angeles, California, US

SterlingHein wrote:
Among other things, in this image I'm not sure how to simplify the shadows / highlights around the front cheekbone.  There's a vertical highlight intersecting the cheek hollow's shadow and I don't know if I should get rid of it, leave it, or accentuate it.

[ photo by OliviaNaumovPhotography here: https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=809547 ]

Here's the original:

https://img835.imageshack.us/img835/4829/origz.jpg

https://jfrancis.smugmug.com/photos/i-TXTpt3F/0/O/i-TXTpt3F.jpg

That vertical highlight in the hollow of the cheek is one of the plane breaks on the face. You can see it on the simplified head above. I think it's quite nice and I would keep it, but maybe not accentuate it, since the change in angle across the break is not a large change.

Dec 29 11 12:05 am Link

Retoucher

SterlingHein

Posts: 165

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

digital Artform wrote:
That vertical highlight in the hollow of the cheek is one of the plane breaks on the face. You can see it on the simplified head above. I think it's quite nice and I would keep it, but maybe not accentuate it, since the change in angle across the break is not a large change.

Just so everyone knows which highlight we're talking about, this is it:
https://img843.imageshack.us/img843/3742/img6811edit.jpg

I see what you mean and agree with keeping the highlight but I wasn't as accurate with my question as I intended.  My concern has more to do with the cheek hollow's shadow to the right of the highlight.  Should I simplify the cheek by dodging it up to a closer tone to the highlight?  Or is that going to make that area look like one giant highlight?

Dec 29 11 12:45 am Link

Photographer

digital Artform

Posts: 49326

Los Angeles, California, US

https://www.upstate.edu/cdb/education/grossanat/imgs/sklatza.jpg

I would consider that area not 'to the right of the plane break' but rather 'under the zygomatic arch' - and I would retain it but carve it with that idea in mind. It's (at least partly) the dark area under the zygomatic arch.

Dec 29 11 12:51 am Link

Photographer

digital Artform

Posts: 49326

Los Angeles, California, US

https://jfrancis.smugmug.com/photos/i-M63DNFK/0/O/i-M63DNFK.jpg

Green dots are not bone but muscle - the zygomaticus major

https://keurn.com/rdhdevelopment/images/stories/image-galleries/head-neck-muscles/hnm-m-zygomaticus%20minor%20muscle.jpg

... and the zygomaticus minor, which happens to be pointed to in this image above.

Dec 29 11 01:09 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

HT's carving turned out better than mine. Then again, I was working with the intzy binzy copy of the forum.

http://ronaldnztan.com/temp/claudia_carve_rough.zip

This is the masking layer showing the background copy in multiply blending mode to darken the image. The whites tracing you're seeing are actually "burnt" lines.

https://ronaldnztan.com/temp/claudia_carve_rough_2.jpg

The Highlights are on the neutral grey layer:

https://ronaldnztan.com/temp/claudia_carve_rough_highlights.jpg

Dec 29 11 09:19 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

http://ronaldnztan.com/temp/orig_carved.tif

Here is the carving layer. This image was larger so I got to fine-tune my carving a little.

https://ronaldnztan.com/temp/orig_carved_1.jpg

https://i.picasion.com/pic48/7cbd03639dce2ab821e36e8281d61063.gif

Dec 29 11 09:58 am Link

Photographer

790763

Posts: 2747

San Francisco, California, US

One of my challenges is "extrapolating" or recreating definition. The photographer in me realized that the image left's shoulder should have that "depth," because the model's shoulder is coming out towards the viewer. I drew in (as best I could) the highlight and surrounding circles of darker shade to illustrate the shoulder bulge.

This thread is good for me as well! Thanks for the images to be shared.

Dec 29 11 10:05 am Link

Photographer

NothingIsRealButTheGirl

Posts: 35726

Los Angeles, California, US

I also recommend these figures:

http://www.anatomytools.com/

I have a male one from 2005

http://www.digitalartform.com/archives/ … igure.html

And I just ordered the new female one for Christmas.

Dec 29 11 12:04 pm Link