Home
 
 
17 May 2009 @ 11:46 am
I swore I'd never fall again, but this don't even feel like falling  
Photoshop: And Everyone is Beautiful

Or in this case, younger!

A ton of outtakes from Gillian's Esquire shoot were posted to [info]gillian_daily last night, and since I had been studying all day - so much that the familiar shoulder pains reemerged -, I thought I could afford to spend a little time in Photoshop. Because those just screamed to be played with.

After comparing the outtakes to the actual pictures published in the magazine, it tickled me to test my skills in editorial design, in other words beautifying a raw photo.

I carefully chose a picture that met the required potential (in the opinion of my humble amateur eyes), and this is the base photo as well as the result for your viewing pleasure. I recommend opening the full-sized versions in two separate tabs for better comparison.




What I did

I'm in no way an expert, so my editing is solely based on intuition. But since there are always people who know even less about it than I do, let me explain:


  • At first I tackled her skin and smoothed it out using the smudge tool and filters. Initially I wanted to leave her freckles untouched, but it was way past midnight, so I eventually lost my patience with them. I did pay attention to most of her moles though, because they just give it a more natural look. Working on the skin took the longest of all steps.

  • When I was satisfied with the skin-job, I needed to test its look in a different light and colouring, so I increased the contrast and used curves as well. I had to go back between this and the first step a couple of times until I had erased all disturbances.

  • I moved on to her eyes and enhanced their beautiful blue colour. It's crucial to find the golden middle when it comes to colour enhancing- otherwise it can quickly look too artificial.

  • I decided to bring out her make-up more as well, gave the eyes a stronger golden shimmer to harmonize with her hair, and the lips a soft pink/brown. I also darkened her eyebrows, which had faded out a lot during the light changes.

  • Finally the colouring: decided for a slightly greenish yellow style and worked out the details of hair, skin etc. separately.



Ta-da, that's it.


Disclaimer

This is not to say I don't find Gillian beautiful without any photoshopping, which - if you know me at all - would be the untruest thing to say about me ever. Her naturalness is one of the aspects I value and adore most about her character. It was a pure challenge for me, and it was a damn lot of fun working on her again.

And before you say it looks ~photoshopped~, uhm, yes it does, because that's what it is and what all the magazine's photos look like.


Now, what do you think? Should I consider a change of profession? ;)
 
 
35 | +
 
( 35 — Post a new comment )
Lemon out.: XF - gillian / esquire shot[info]book232 on May 17th, 2009 10:44 am (UTC)
I love it, I think it looks great, very professional. I always love looking at before/after photos of celebs, to see what they changed. Great job! :)

And GUH those pics still kill me. "Before" or "after", doesn't matter.
Vieh: Scully - cool hair[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:31 pm (UTC)
YES; I love doing that too! It's so interesting. :P

I know, she's just so gorgeous.
L: 'gillian'[info]ladydreadlock on May 17th, 2009 11:03 am (UTC)
TONS?! damn. I think I got cut from that community.

Good job. I like both versions, of course :)
Vieh: Amy - colourful[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:31 pm (UTC)
I think it has this stupid rule of having to stay active?

Thanks. And of course. ;)
No One Mourns the Wicked: Gillian[info]outintherain on May 17th, 2009 01:26 pm (UTC)
Good job!

It's very rare that I put my photo-editing hat on (most people don't know that I have one :p) but if you honestly want to know what I think:

- It's *really* good, and I know that there's no way I'm that good, but there are one or two things, that perhaps you couldn't help because of the photo itself, but anyway...

- Her face is just that bit too pale... it looks fine if you look at the photo close up and as a face alone, but when you look at it as a whole; the contrast is too sharp... it's really hard to get it right when you've been looking at an image and working on it for so long, but it's just a hair's breadth too pale... it probably happened when you were working with the contrast and colour balance, but her skin just contrasts that little bit too much with her surroundings, and you can see that the line of her nose has been lost so that takes depth and definition from her face...

- The lips also, I don't think this is your fault (they look like they were either dry or - more likely - had quite a shiny balm/lipstick on when the photo was taken) but there's quite an unflattering contrast between the majority of the lip, and the part of the bottom lip that is moist... again, I think this may follow on from the face being too pale, as the lips are not quite dark enough in contrast... (I have never talked so much about Gillian's mouth :p)

- Also, for a magazine the blood vessels in the whites of the eyes would probably have been lightened...

You probably think I'm horrible now; but you did a really incredible job and yes, you could definitely consider a change of profession, but that's always been true :)

Edited at 2009-05-17 01:43 pm (UTC)
Vieh: G - another heart cracked in two[info]so_vieh on May 17th, 2009 05:09 pm (UTC)
No, I don't think you're horrible, on the contrary, thanks so much for pointing those things out! Sometimes you really do lose track when you work on something that closely.

You were absolutely right about her face/skin. It was way overexposed. And I noticed that about her nose too, actually. I changed the lighting, and also removed most of the blood vessels...I didn't do anything to her lips though.

I'm not sure why that is, but the colouring when I work in Photoshop is totally different from what I see in Firefox or in my Image Viewer. That's kind of frustrating- it always looks so much better in PS.

And I didn't know about your photo-editing hat either. :P

Anyway, thanks so much for your honest opinion!

And here's the old version in case you wanna compare.



Edited at 2009-05-17 05:11 pm (UTC)
No One Mourns the Wicked[info]outintherain on May 17th, 2009 06:10 pm (UTC)
Ooh, yay for not hating me! I was scared that I was sounding bitchy...

It looks great! The lips thing could just be a personal opinion; I also notice that it only seems to bother me on the smaller version; it seems much better on close-up.

I KNOW! I hate making this gorgeous image in PS and then looking at the dull jpeg it produces... sad!panda...

The worst is going from PS to print... I've done design jobs before & wanted to weep at the printed product... the colours are a thousand miles away from what you see on screen....

Hehe, I guess I've been sitting on it for a long time; haven't had a working version of PS for over a year and a half...

You keep up the awesome! XD
nodazzle: david and gillian 2[info]nodazzle on May 17th, 2009 08:20 pm (UTC)
I'm not sure why that is, but the colouring when I work in Photoshop is totally different from what I see in Firefox or in my Image Viewer. That's kind of frustrating- it always looks so much better in PS.

This happened to me once... I had imported some colour settings that f'd everything up. Check your colour settings and reset them to default. Go to edit/colour settings... this is what mine looks like:

I made this screen shot just for you. click it now.

ETA: my pngs and jpegs look essentially the same in PS as in Firefox or IE with these settings... :)

Edited at 2009-05-17 08:21 pm (UTC)
Vieh: G - OH FUCK![info]so_vieh on May 17th, 2009 08:22 pm (UTC)
But I just installed it about a week ago, how could this have happened? Are you sure it's not just the image format?
nodazzle[info]nodazzle on May 17th, 2009 08:25 pm (UTC)
Hmmm... right I forgot about your computer's epic fail. I think it's still a colour settings issue... if there was no problem before your computer got dead, then that's the likeliest culprit. I assume you've tried saving at all quality levels? In PNG?

What do your present colour settings say?

And what version of PS are you using? Is it the same that you were using before?
Vieh: stock - Last Unicorn[info]so_vieh on May 17th, 2009 08:33 pm (UTC)
Actually I think I've always had this problem, even before the reinstallation. *shrug* It's just not always as important. Yeah, the .png looks more like the .psd in the Image Viewer, BUT even the .psd looks different there from the same file in Photoshop.

They are slightly different, because it was Europe, not US. I changed them to yours...but it doesn't look much different. lol

CS3. :) And yes.

nodazzle[info]nodazzle on May 17th, 2009 08:39 pm (UTC)
Sounds exactly like the problem that I had that led to these unfortunate icons. :)

You could try messing with diff colour settings. I wish I could tell you which magical settings to use but I'm pretty sure that's where the problem is. :( I have CS2 though... so maybe they're THAT different?

I'll stop helping now. :)
Vieh: stock - Kitty[info]so_vieh on May 17th, 2009 08:41 pm (UTC)
I've seen worse! lol

I have no idea. I could try, yes.

Thanks, I appreciate it (the helping, not the stopping). lol
sometimes you picture me: [gillian anderson] omg no way[info]lissie_pissie on May 17th, 2009 04:12 pm (UTC)
Oh my god what a fun idea! Looks fab!
Vieh: Mulder - Herrenvolk[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:32 pm (UTC)
Thanks, sweetie! You should try it on Lisa, if you ever get your hands on an unphotoshopped photo. It was really fun.
Fox Estacado: foxestacado: 59[info]foxestacado on May 17th, 2009 05:31 pm (UTC)
Beautiful!

The smudge job is the trickiest one of all. Lately I've been using the patch tool instead. It gives skin a more natural look.
f e r r i: gillian; masquerade[info]alex_kingston on May 18th, 2009 05:46 am (UTC)
Oh yes agreed. The patch tool really does do wonders. Sometimes the blur tool combined is good too but must be really done carefully for that natural look.
Fox Estacado: foxestacado: 45[info]foxestacado on May 18th, 2009 05:51 am (UTC)
Yeah, I used to do clone tool + blur tool + smudge tool on 2% or something to get a natural look for skin. Then I started using patch tool, and I still use a combination, such as clone tool, but the patch tool makes things so much easier now.
f e r r i: house/cuddy; kiss hearts[info]alex_kingston on May 18th, 2009 06:01 am (UTC)
Oooh have never really tried using the clone tool. Gonna try that soon :P
Especially with a really huge picture I think it's harder to make things look more natural so the patch took really does work wonders even on zits!
Fox Estacado: foxestacado: 42[info]foxestacado on May 18th, 2009 06:08 am (UTC)
I actually do it all over the face. Not just spots, but I use a combination of clone and patch to smooth the entire face. Personally, I don't like the baby skin smoothness of perfect skin, but it's well-liked by editors and publications. So...*shrugs*
f e r r i: gillian; frak me[info]alex_kingston on May 18th, 2009 06:39 am (UTC)
Oooh I see. I really need to try this out.
I don't like baby skin smoothness either. Sometimes just seems rather unnatural but yeah thats what they're looking for as deemed by what society feels is pretty so..yeah *shrugs*
Vieh: Titanic - Rose b/w[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:33 pm (UTC)
Okay, guys, bear with me, I have a German version of PS. Which ones are the patch and clone tools?

Yeah, I don't like it too much either, but I wanted to achieve this editorial style here, so it worked fine with the smudge tool. :)
Fox Estacado: foxestacado: 29[info]foxestacado on May 18th, 2009 09:58 pm (UTC)
Clone looks like a stamp, and patch looks like a band-aid. Sorry, don't have PS here otherwise I would get you a screencap :D
nodazzle: scully 6[info]nodazzle on May 17th, 2009 08:15 pm (UTC)
this is really incredible. you did a great job!! i is jealous of your mad skills. :)
Vieh: stock - cat & butterfly[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:36 pm (UTC)
Oh, come on, as if you couldn't do at least the same thing, if not better! :)
nodazzle: mulder and scully 3[info]nodazzle on May 18th, 2009 10:36 pm (UTC)
I dunno... I don't have the patience to do the smoothing etc. :) Plus this colouring is very natural... even the lips and I can NEVER get lips right. :D

just take the damn compliment. :D

Edited at 2009-05-18 10:36 pm (UTC)
lozzles[info]araispoetry on May 17th, 2009 08:28 pm (UTC)
Very well-done :-)
Vieh: stock - UK butterfly[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:36 pm (UTC)
Thanks! :)
Kate[info]muldersflame on May 18th, 2009 01:46 am (UTC)

Now, what do you think? Should I consider a change of profession? ;)

Y E S!!! ^.^ This is amazing. *stares*
Vieh: Keira[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:37 pm (UTC)
LOL I miss you, BB.
f e r r i: gillian; masquerade[info]alex_kingston on May 18th, 2009 05:45 am (UTC)
WOW! Gorgeous darling!
Ok seriously, change of profession indeedy :P
Vieh: House M.D. - PISS![info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:37 pm (UTC)
Thanks, dear! :)
And lol, I have considered it lots of time...but after all these years...not really. It WOULD be cool though.
f e r r i: dances with wolves; stands with a fist[info]alex_kingston on May 18th, 2009 09:39 pm (UTC)
Welcome :)
Hah I get what you mean. I consider sometimes just dumping everything and going into art school and just draw for life but yeah after all these years, not really either.
Vieh: MS - Squeeze[info]so_vieh on May 18th, 2009 09:44 pm (UTC)
I still have the illusion of persuing it as a more serious hobby some day. :)
f e r r i: eternal sunshine; tangerine[info]alex_kingston on May 19th, 2009 06:37 pm (UTC)
Yes definitely go for it! You've got some mad skills as it is :)