How are they getting this effect????

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

04/02/2014 05:26:26 PM · #1

Although I've figured out a bunch of stuff on my own, this particular processing method is completely eluding me. I'm talking about a kind of "creaminess" that gives the image a very clean, polished, glossy look, without sacrificing any detail. I've tried a bunch of filters but they tend to smooth out details as well.

Here are a bunch of images to illustrate what I mean. This effect appears in all styles of photography, with all manner of subjects. The result is that details seem to pop even more. Anyone have any ideas? These are all from Pentaprism, but examples abound on every photo site.

//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/iac-by-gehry-sail-on-mabry-campbell
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/mg-9192-2-grt
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/mg-9083-2grt
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/rgf-5dii-09649neufertigc
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/gjj5346
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/dsc-0060-crop
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/bed-time-story-jppalmunen
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/mg-9094-1-grt
//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/mg-8983-grt

Message edited by author 2014-04-02 17:27:16.

LanndonKane

Nikon D800

04/02/2014 05:53:32 PM · #2

just seems like expertly controlled dynamic range and lighting to me, maybe a touch of surface blur on some?

Fujifilm XF 10-24mm f/4 R IOS

04/02/2014 08:15:20 PM · #3

This is just a sample of images I found right away, Lanndon. I've seen this "smoothness" in a wide range of images, sometimes with rather "flat" lighting. It's the texture about which I'm curious.

markwiley

Fujifilm X-Pro2

04/02/2014 08:28:07 PM · #4

I am no help, but if you crack the code on this one let us know.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

04/02/2014 08:31:25 PM · #5

Not really sure what you are referring to. In some of those it looks like detail/texture was sacrificed for smooth/creamy effect, some may have had detail/texture retouched afterwards or just had less noise/grain to begin with. Obviously if you have less grain/noise in the initial capture you can push the image more in post. I always make it a point to exposue to the right and/or bracket shots to maximize detail in the shadows/midtones and shoot with the lowest possible ISO if I'm trying to achieve that look. Shooting in b/w mode also helps, IMO.

Message edited by author 2014-04-02 20:33:19.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

04/02/2014 08:39:27 PM · #6

Or in this case a lot of preprocessing (i.e. makeup) and post processing reshaping the skin texture.

//pentaprism.ning.com/photos/dsc-0060-crop

Message edited by author 2014-04-02 20:40:20.

Nikon MF Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D PC

04/02/2014 09:31:41 PM · #7

Yes, that last one was a lot of makeup and then a ton of skin retouching. Maybe I shouldn't have included it. And I guess I'm not describing what I'm seeing well enough. I have yet to be able to process any of my images to get this effect.

chazoe

Nikon Z7 FX

04/02/2014 09:40:58 PM · #8

Could some of it be medium format?

04/02/2014 11:29:39 PM · #9

I think you're seeing a few things, but it really boils down to excellent equipment, use of lighting, and skillful retouching. (and image size!)

Obviously the excellent equipment is a critical bit, since that will give you a low-noise high-detail image to start with. (medium format is WORLDS ahead of even the best DSLRs here)

The lighting is key to many of these images, and just the right modifier can do a hell of a lot to get that 'look'.

As for retouching, it's astonishing how much you can do by creating two images - one smooth and noise free, and the other processed for details - combine the two using layer masks and you instantly have excellent detail where you want it, and smoothness where you don't need or want the detail.

So, let's take a look at those images one by one:

Image 1: No idea why you chose this, looks kinda 'glowy' and the detail seems lost to me. Although, I'm viewing this HUGE, so it probably looks much better on smaller monitor. I think it also looks like it's been tonemapped pretty hard.

Image 2: The skin here looks too plasticy for me, and the background is a total replacement. The real key to this image's success was the lighting, but even at that I find it to be somewhat soft overall as well. (and I do not like the transition to the faked background)

Image 3: Now we're cooking with fire! Great lighting is the key to this one. Hard to say for sure what was used but I'm guessing a big softbox above her left and towards the camera a bit, along with another hard light slightly offset from the soft light - possibly a reflector on the floor to the left. Processing here wasn't heavy, but one thing that was done very well was skin-tone and pushing the contrast to it's full limits. (there are true blacks and true whites)

Image 4: Again, the star here is light, but it's not artificial this time... Nothing like that great diffuser in the sky combined with a bit of careful processing. Again, carefully controlled dynamic range here, true whites in her necklace, and true blacks in the building and his suit.

Image 5: The same as image 4 - the star here is the light, notice that the sky is cloudy and overcast - that's crucial to this kind of shot, and has allowed the deepest shadow to remain fairly well lit. I'm guessing this was a RAW which was pushed pretty hard to get that dynamic range right. Processing here was probably a little heavy handed on the denoise for my taste.

Image 6: Yeah, this has it all. Lighting is good, seems like a single beauty dish high and in front of her, with a white reflector below her. (look in the eyes) Processing emphasized detail on the face while smoothing out the hair that acts as a frame. Again, great dynamic range - full blacks and full whites.

Image 7: I think this is just a good concept - but I find the execution sloppy. Too soft and denoised, a cable obviously leading into the book, madly over-blue eyes, too might light on her face, etc. Again though, the key here is a full dynamic range. That's one thing that every image you've posted has.

Image 8: A great example of what we're talking about. Clearly artificially lit, I'm thinking this probably consisted of a couple of lights, one for the BG, one big modified one behind her, one on her face, gridded probably, and maybe another on her dress (but I think the dress was just dodged up a bit).. In any case, the control and manipulation of light was key here. Processing was good too, as is the tonality range (full black and nearly full white again, although this one is a little dark).

Image 9: Lighting again. Looks like diffused window light to the left, and a modified light to her right/front. Again, great range of tonality, and nice processing, although I find the whole thing too soft and lacking in fine details.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 01:59:50.

04/03/2014 12:40:59 AM · #10

Originally posted by Cory:

As for retouching, it's astonishing how much you can do by creating two images - one smooth and noise free, and the other processed for details - combine the two using layer masks and you instantly have excellent detail where you want it, and smoothness where you don't need or want the detail.

I've been thinking that this is the key to what I'm seeing. With the detailed layer behind the smoothed one, and then the smooth layer masked away until the effect is achieved.

There is also a bit of graphic/illustration involved, about which I know nothing.

Thank you so much for all your observations. I've also thought that it might be the difference between 35mm and medium format.

04/03/2014 01:56:54 AM · #11

Originally posted by tanguera:

Originally posted by Cory:
As for retouching, it's astonishing how much you can do by creating two images - one smooth and noise free, and the other processed for details - combine the two using layer masks and you instantly have excellent detail where you want it, and smoothness where you don't need or want the detail.

I've been thinking that this is the key to what I'm seeing. With the detailed layer behind the smoothed one, and then the smooth layer masked away until the effect is achieved.

There is also a bit of graphic/illustration involved, about which I know nothing.

Thank you so much for all your observations. I've also thought that it might be the difference between 35mm and medium format.

FWIW, I think most/all of those images were shot on APS or APS-C sensors, I didn't see any indications of MF, but that's a darn hard call to make.

ETA: And of course you're very welcome. Fun to do a fast examination of them for ya.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 01:57:36.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

04/03/2014 02:04:07 AM · #12

So, here's a good one to examine.

Image

They've faked a MF look here - they have applied gaussian blur to the surrounding hair, while keeping the lines of her face sharp. (the giveaway is at the top-right, notice that the feather sticking into the focal plane is irregularly blurred, with it being out of focus on top, while in focus near the bottom, but the hair at the same distance is fully sharp)

How to do this? First light it well, so that your base image is solid.

Next, use topaz remask or hand-mask the face off, so that the BG can be softened without affecting the details you want to keep.

Finally, blur the snot out of the stuff that you want to take focus away from which is behind the plane of critical focus.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 02:04:28.

Silent-Shooter

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

04/03/2014 06:24:29 AM · #13

Originally posted by Cory:

...As for retouching, it's astonishing how much you can do by creating two images - one smooth and noise free, and the other processed for details - combine the two using layer masks and you instantly have excellent detail where you want it, and smoothness where you don't need or want the detail...

Johanna and Cory - if you are interested in a more controlled way of doing this as used by high end retouchers, look up frequency separation. I came across it on Model Mayhem and have downloaded the actions for both 8bit and 16bit images. It is a great tool for retouching portraits once you get used to it.

Some links I have to save you some time (but there is a whole interwebsathingie out there with more info):
Model Mayhem Frequency Separation Forum post
Another Model Mayhem Frequency Separation Forum post

I have followed a few You tube videos which is helpful but it is difficult to see what is happening on the screen with the small mouse pointers but they are still useful.

I find it far better than just making 2 layers and smoothing one then doing a mask. Do the processing on the full size image and not on the 800 pix resized image. Sadly it does lose some of it's fine tuning benefits on the DPC 800 pix limit but its still a wonderful skill set to have in your armoury.

04/03/2014 07:22:09 AM · #14

Silent-Shooter - I think I'm going to learn that technique, thanks for sharing it, but the first thing that struck me is that while it's absolutely great for women, that treatment isn't going to work so well for men.

Here's a before and after of an old picture I just re-edited, and I thought it would make a really nice example of the technique I was talking about.

Before:

After:

(I uploaded those full size - so click the 'view full size' link if you really want to see the difference on a full size file)

Funny enough, this one was pure natural light, and a real impromptu street photo. Sometimes you just get lucky. ;)

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 07:23:23.

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

04/03/2014 07:43:59 AM · #15

Very nice Cory.

on the thread as a whole, basically we are looking a effectively selecting to isolate the subjects and blur backgrounds finished and very sold way to sharpen the edges without creating artifacts doing it the quick way many of us fall back on.

images can shine when processed correctly.

side note, finally thread i can sink my teeth into. we need more discussion like this.

harkonen

Olympus OM D E-M10

Olympus 12-50mm MZuiko Digital ED F:3.5-6.3 EZ

04/03/2014 08:23:16 AM · #16

Agree with

Mike, Awesome thread! I learned a lot within last 30 minutes! The layers, gaussian blur and highpass really can make a difference on the appearance.

Learned to do this in GIMP, there's a separate highpass filter plugin available, which I believe doesn't come with the GIMP (at least didn't come in mine).

//registry.gimp.org/node/7385

Thanks everyone! :)

sempermarine

Apple iPhone 5s

04/03/2014 08:45:40 AM · #17

Great thread. Learning is occurring. This is the type of technique I've been trying to master for a long time with little success. Though I am satisfied with several of my shots. I think

tanguera is describing something much different than the results I am trying to achieve. The techniques and experimenting are getting me closer to what my vision.

paynekj

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

04/03/2014 09:11:03 AM · #18

Originally posted by harkonen:

Learned to do this in GIMP, there's a separate highpass filter plugin available, which I believe doesn't come with the GIMP (at least didn't come in mine).

You might also like to have a look at the Wavelet decompose plugin for GIMP for adjusting the various frequency components of an image.

Rolf did an episode of Meet The GIMP about using it: //meetthegimp.org/episode-161-playing-with-wavelets/

Kevin

harkonen

Olympus OM D E-M10

Olympus 12-50mm MZuiko Digital ED F:3.5-6.3 EZ

04/03/2014 11:01:13 AM · #19

Originally posted by paynekj:

Alright, that looks promising also, thanks!

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

04/03/2014 11:45:46 AM · #20

Stephen, I've been using Frequency Separation for a while now. It IS a wonderful technique, which I used on this image.

Cory, yes, that is along the lines, but I still see something else. I truly can't seem to verbalize it!!!

Thank to everyone for the alternative input!

Silent-Shooter

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

04/04/2014 09:48:57 AM · #21

Originally posted by Cory:

Pleasure Cory. Even if my post helped one person (sorry it wasn't you Johanna) then it was worth it.
I agree it isn't always going to suit male subjects unles syou want a polished look. When it doesn't - you may want to give the Dragan effect a go to give it a more gritty grungy (pronounced: MANLY) feel.

Whilst we are on the topic of helping people and useful techniques - has anyone had a go at carving using dodging and burning? Model Mayhem link [edit to correct parsing].
I battle a bit with it but I must be honest and say I haven't really studied the facial countours and planes in much detail before.
Who has had some success?

Message edited by author 2014-04-04 09:50:16.

Mike