Hmm, let me be a little more spacific:
Not that it was impossible, but lots of stuff happens during a photo session: running out of time, caused by difficult models, clients, support staff, running out of or not having the right tools to do the shoot because of poor planing.
I could go on.
In my small world of doing a newsletter every month and a color calendar once a year I have had to do some corrective retouching, like hiding a belly button on an underage child that was in a theatrical production and the producers, (even though they approved the costume) later had misgivings about having it in print FOR EVER and ALL to see.
Yes I agree that some were not to my taste and were strickly a judgement call as in the case of a woman on a bed that had two lamps in the background. Looking at the before shot the lamps really did not bother me, but the after picture without the lamps was, IMHO, better. As to skin tones etc, again it is taste and client controll.
What I really like about the site is that one rarely gets to see "before and after" shots. I mean you see the origninal shot, the retouched shot and then you get to see the finished cover that the retouched photo was used in. The internet is great for that kind of education. So I really do not fault the retoucher, infact I would consider hiring him for the reason he does fulfill the clients wishes.
Isn’t that what we all are about: Pleasing the client and getting the job done??
Anyway, have fun and make pictures.
Yours,
Tom Elliott
"Lorem Ipsum" wrote in message
"Tom Ellliott" wrote in message
[…]
Glenn is a retoucher. His job is to do what is impossible to do in the actual shoot. […]
What he does can be done during the shoot: Dip the ladies in red tinted chocolate to fix the skin, plastic wrap their thighs for the slim look, a little more wonder in the wonderbra… that sort of thing.
