FLEXmanta wrote:
Selective colouring. It is THAT easy. The valuable part is to choose the colors that look good.

By selective colouring I mean making decisions like: That sky would be this color. And then skin should resonate by being this other color. The way you make those things go the color you want them to is up to you.

It can be as simple as making adjustments like curves layers with the proper masks or you could even bring the image to photoshop with colors halfway done during the raw process.

Many here will give you complex explanations on how this is done. Some will be plausible ways, but I can assure that 99% of the times, this is done in the most archaic way: Curves adjustments and good judgement.

The text I wrote in bold letters is the answer to most "how was this done" posts.


In the industry, at least in EU, we like to use the word "edit" to the image selection process. For what you are asking about, we're not afraid to use the word retouching.

So you're answer to "How do I get this look?" is to say it was done with good judgement and curves adjustments?

Help the OP out if you know how it was done, by providing the steps necessary...not some obtuse response that doesn't remotely answer it.

FLEXmanta wrote:
Selective colouring. It is THAT easy. The valuable part is to choose the colors that look good.

By selective colouring I mean making decisions like: That sky would be this color. And then skin should resonate by being this other color. The way you make those things go the color you want them to is up to you.

It can be as simple as making adjustments like curves layers with the proper masks or you could even bring the image to photoshop with colors halfway done during the raw process.

Many here will give you complex explanations on how this is done. Some will be plausible ways, but I can assure that 99% of the times, this is done in the most archaic way: Curves adjustments and good judgement.

The text I wrote in bold letters is the answer to most "how was this done" posts.


In the industry, at least in EU, we like to use the word "edit" to the image selection process. For what you are asking about, we're not afraid to use the word retouching.

What selective coloring? How do you make the sky that color? What curves adjustments? What "proper" masks? What was done during the RAW process?

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
So you're answer to "How do I get this look?" is to say it was done with good judgement and curves adjustments?

Help the OP out if you know how it was done, by providing the steps necessary...not some obtuse response that doesn't remotely answer it.

Omar is actually right. It is that simple but it's not that  easy. Curves adjustments + good judgment.

Me, him or anyone can't give you step-by-step because output will always be relative to the input. Applying the exact same color toning to another image can be a disastrous and would not work. If you don't have a proper judgment about what colors go together in what context, something a forum post like this can't explain than you would most likely make a mistake even if we explained exact step-by-step on how to do it here. You need to know the why before you learn the how, and for the most part "how do I get this look" threads are made by people who don't understand the difference between a principle and a technique.

There are plenty of tutorials on how to use curves and what is the underlaying principle behind it. You learn that. You learn principles of masking and the techniques to apply them and than you need to posses a good judgment for the right color treatment in what context. Since context is everything. If you were to apply the same color relationships to another kind of image with a different type model, you would be wrong since it would not be appropriate even though the same colors are used. Not only do you need to know what colors match and or compliment each other you also need to know in what particular context.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Help the OP out if you know how it was done, by providing the steps necessary...not some obtuse response that doesn't remotely answer it.

Sorry to say that we can explain it to someone, but we can't make them understand it.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
What selective coloring? How do you make the sky that color? What curves adjustments? What "proper" masks? What was done during the RAW process?

Find a photo with a blue sky

add a selective color layer

go to Blue, and pull cyan and yellow to the right and magenta to the left.

See if it works for you.

dayo awe photography wrote:
Just want to know what tool was used to achieve the green sky, skin tone and the colour grading of the overall image and i take it from there.

Selective color for the sky and skin, curves for the overall grading. For others who might need a few more hints: Place sample points in these four places ...



1 and 2 (darkest shadows and brightest highlights) will tell you there's been some cross-processing in curves. At 1, for instance, the values are 29.12.40, so pull up the shadow end of the respective curves to get those values. Similarly for the highlights, but you'll be pulling down the highlight ends.

At 3, the sky values are 74.138.138. Open a selective color adjustment layer and in the blues panel, adjust the red, green (magenta), and blue (yellow) sliders to hit those target. If you can't get all the way to them in the blues, then go to the cyans panel and adjust the same sliders.

For the skin tones at 4, use the same selective color layer but make adjustments in the reds -- and possibly the yellows, but more likely just the reds.

Try it with this image, which is pretty similar to the target image (note where I placed sample points):



You should be able to make it come pretty close to your target image just by nudging the RGB values in those four places:

dayo awe photography wrote:
Thanks peano, tried on the sample image and it worked. I know where to take it from now ....u rock man

And what did you get when you did this:

The Space Cowboy wrote:
Find a photo with a blue sky

add a selective color layer

go to Blue, and pull cyan and yellow to the right and magenta to the left.

See if it works for you.

dayo awe photography wrote:
your right,maybe i didnt word the question quite well. Just want to know what tool was used to achieve the green sky, skin tone and the colour grading of the overall image and i take it from there. Thanks guys

See, that's the thing. It doesn't matter what tool they used to make that sky greenish. There are at least 10 ways to turn one color into another. If that is the type of insctructions you are looking for, then that means that you need to start basic, and then move on to using images like this one to develop a color style.

Peano did answer your question in a correct way. Ultimately you should be able to achieve the same results by eyeballing the colors. Sometimes the color reading in two different images will result in 2 completely different looks, as it happens with Peano's example. So, you will have to work by perception or feeling, if you like, to get a certain look.

The use of curves, the understanding of RGB and the control of light is an absolute must for anyone wanting to do this level of work.

Some years ago, I would also ask the same things you are asking right now. Now I find myself in the situation of retouching images like this particular one every day, and I know better than I did back then.

The immediate reply to almost everything colour related question can and should be "curves". Now, the question should ALWAYS BE: Where can I learn the use of curves to control RGB rather than how did they do it in this one image right here.

AKMac wrote:
It looks like unskilful compositing to me.

\

Agreed.

dayo awe photography wrote:
I come across this pics on the net and would really love everyones suggestion on how it was achieved, especially the retouching. Notably, the sky and skin tone and the overally colour grading. Click on the link to view. Thanks guys

http://fashiongonerogue.com/alessandra- … ver-story/

sometimes I just look at the sky and shout, really!

you come into my backyard, try and do something close to my style, and this is the crap you produce for 10x's what i make for a shoot.

Really sky! really!

FLEXmanta wrote:
Peano did answer your question in a correct way. Ultimately you should be able to achieve the same results by eyeballing the colors. Sometimes the color reading in two different images will result in 2 completely different looks, as it happens with Peano's example. So, you will have to work by perception or feeling, if you like, to get a certain look.

The use of curves, the understanding of RGB and the control of light is an absolute must for anyone wanting to do this level of work.

Some years ago, I would also ask the same things you are asking right now. Now I find myself in the situation of retouching images like this particular one every day, and I know better than I did back then.

The immediate reply to almost everything color related question can and should be "curves". Now, the question should ALWAYS BE: Where can I learn the use of curves to control RGB rather than how did they do it in this one image right here.[/quo

+1
love

AKMac wrote:
It looks like unskilful compositing to me.

I doubt the job was based on compositing. I believe there are strong colorizations with very defined masks. Sometimes we work like that.

I agree that it's probably not the best of qualities, but you have to give some credit to the retoucher. Deadlines are often agains you, and you have to deliver. For instance, I am retouching 30 images right now, and have to deliver in 5 days (which in high-end is just CRAAZY). I can't screw up, cause the magazine is just as important as this one and the model very very famous. So, this is what happens: you concentrate on the main look and on delivering all images and overlook other things like detailed color deviations and masking, that you would pay far more attention if the deadline wasn't so tight.

Also, there's the changes. Sometimes, in terms of retouching quality, the best version of these images is the first one that the retoucher delivers. The image was considered finished by someone with good judgement. Then chaos kicks in when the editor and the photographer start asking for changes. Each change arrives closer and closer to the deadline. You are hours from delivering and still  can't believe that it has been decided that all skies should be desaturated once more at the last minute. As a retoucher you know that desaturating a sky isn't that simple, as skin has to follow along. So you work and work and work, and then you just couldn't care less. You do as "they" say, deliver and brace for other retouchers critique Then 2 months later you look at the images again to realize that the images work, and nobody cares about selections or detailed stuff anymore, only retouchers.

AKMac wrote:
I agree that the use of composites would be surprising, but they certainly look like them - and bad ones too. Whether they are badly masked composites or just badly masked, they still look amateurish, which is surely inexcusable at this level, despite tight deadlines etc.

+1

4th file from above with fur is the example of fake and amateur composite work.
Halo edges on fur, legs and hair without professional color decontamination with extracting plus strong colorization and the results are like this;)
There are no excuses here with deadlines or anything else, because for top professional high end retouchers this is funny job when they work with half body shots.
Real tigers in retouching can make at least 10-20 files per day like this with full high end manipulations.
And , without any dead pixel.
Dead pixels are for amateur retouchers.

ST Retouch wrote:
+1

4th file from above with fur is the example of fake and amateur composite work.
Halo edges on fur, legs and hair without professional color decontamination with extracting plus strong colorization and the results are like this;)
There are no excuses here with deadlines or anything else, because for top professional high end retouchers this is funny job when they work with half body shots.
Real tigers in retouching can make at least 10-20 files per day like this with full high end manipulations.
And , without any dead pixel.
Dead pixels are for amateur retouchers.

Wait a minute. Did someone just call Thiago Auge an amateur retoucher?

Again. Who knows what they made the retoucher do. That particular one does look like it's composited. Who cares! As a retoucher, sometimes you just have to do what they say. Specially when "they" means Vogue.

What's with the unsolicited critique? Rules stop me from criticizing you, yet you can criticize a real professional who isn't here to defend himself?

Once again you show your lack of knowledge about real life fashion editorial retouching. It doesn't really get more high end than Vogue, whether it's Vogue US, Paris, Brazil or even Ukraine. Vogue is vogue. It's all Condé Nast. 10-20 images per day is just inconceivable in high end editorial when images are done by just one retoucher. Please show an example of your work experience that shows the value of the statement you just made. One single comercial fashion editorial example. That's all I'm asking for to value your statement.

What do dead pixels have to do with all this? Is that really the criteria you think is used to assess the quality of a retoucher? Dead pixels??

And, by the way, the hard edge colourization thing is an intentional effect. Some take it to more extreme levels and in fashion world... we LIKE it.

FLEXmanta wrote:
Wait a minute. Did someone just call Thiago Auge an amateur retoucher?

Lol... really? you're going to argue with armchair retouchers?

I'm not seeing the "bad composite" look - I'm noticing a strong contrast based in basic color theory taken to an extreme to create depth and a classic pin up painterly look

But what do I know? Even better what does the editor in Vogue knows?

FLEXmanta wrote:
What's with the unsolicited critique? Rules stop me from criticizing you, yet you can criticize a real professional who isn't here to defend himself?

This is a good point, can anyone explain this paradox?