Nope, no promise of anything and especially no promise of not using PS.
I was already restraining myself by not doing any skin touchup.
No, taking the specs off doesn't work at all unless the person only uses
reading glasses and doesn't normally have them on. If you have to ask
them to remove them then that person is not a candidate. The shot
without glasses will not look normal to anyone who knows them.
Replacing eyes is not something that I do lightly since it can be a lot
of work. Typically, having someone tilt the glasses down by raising the
earpieces a bit will do the trick. But experience tells me that doesn't
work for Peg and her glasses. Although I have replaced her eyes they
are her own lovely eyes. They're simply removed from another exposure
without her glasses. I usually do a couple of exposures without glasses
just in case I can't defeat the reflections.
Sorry, Lightroom apparently doesn't cut the mustard here.
Discussing this here reminds me of the first time I ever had to do this.
The subjects were an (adults only) extended Indian family of about 40
people. Since most were middle-age or older about half of them wore
glasses. Of those perhaps 3/4 had horrible reflections from their
glasses such that the eyes were simply not visible. Unfortunately, I
wasn't yet smart enough to take some shots without their glasses.
However, since they were Indian, all had brown eyes and (extra good luck
I suppose) their skin coloring was remarkably homogenous. By picking
perhaps 1/2 dozen people who weren't wearing glasses I was able to
transplant their eyes to a glasses wearer who was a good size and skin
color match. I don't recall the size of the final print but perhaps
16x20. 40 people distributed across a print of that size still leaves
each person's glasses and eye's rather small. So all the transplants
were actually rather easy to do, tiny errors simply wouldn't be visible.
None of them were ever the wiser about wearing their neighbors eyes. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 7/8/2014 10:46 AM, Philippe wrote:
Le 8 juil. 2014 à 15:25, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
Sorry, I don't understand "...yet, no PS promised?"
I had forgotten a comma. Please read "no PS, promised?" ;-)
Is that some reference to having replaced Peg's eyes behind her glasses?
I don't do that - replacing eyes - I wouldn't if I was Peg's either :-)
Lovely eyes in any case :-)
ps: How does one do that in Lightroom?
oh yes, Lightroom!
I politely ask the person to take the specs off ;-)
Do I qualify?
Amities
Philippe
Chuck Norcutt
On 7/8/2014 2:53 AM, Philippe wrote:
Please do - yet, no PS promised?
;-)
Cool shots indeed, and certainly keepers on various levels.
Amities
Philippe
Le 7 juil. 2014 à 20:09, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
Time for a re-do perhaps...
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|