"Do you do airbrushing luvvie?"

Dangleman

Dangleman

Messages
1,316
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
...Anyone else get asked this whenever you take a picture of a 'lady'?

I'm running of out of stock/ polite/ witty replies! Can anyone help me with some new responses. There's only so many jovial "oh you don't need it my dear" I have left in me.

I resorted to just grunting the other day, which isn't very professional now is it :)

And I love the way people still call it airbrushing....
 
"All the airbrushing in the world wouldn't be enough" ?

...

I'll get my coat.

Seriously though, what's wrong with "if that's what you'd like"?
 
You need a portfolio of stock bodies, just ask which body they would like their head put on.

:)
 
I guess I could really go for it...

"Yes I do do airbrushing madam. Breakdown is as follows:

£1 per 'chin removal'
£5 per nose hair (as that's really quite unpleasant when editing at %100)
£30 for the all in beaten with the ugly stick removal service."

Or not.
 
Yes!

Here is an example of my early work...

stalin-airbrush.jpg


I now mainly do work for the UK Government, removing embaressing ministers from group shots after they publish their memoirs.
 
No...I just tell them there's a whole top-shelf genre in the Turks and Caicos Islands catering for those who like rippled thighs and they should be glad of the work...
 
l simply say yes....but l charge by the hour.

l'm not kidding either. l've never had a bad response. Well, ask a stupid question...
 
Send them to B&Q FOR SOME CEMENT.:)
 
Just ask how you can improve on perfection, will probably sell a lot more pics with flattery!
 
I say no


Dangleman said:
...Anyone else get asked this whenever you take a picture of a 'lady'?

I'm running of out of stock/ polite/ witty replies! Can anyone help me with some new responses. There's only so many jovial "oh you don't need it my dear" I have left in me.

I resorted to just grunting the other day, which isn't very professional now is it :)

And I love the way people still call it airbrushing....
Click to expand...
 
I don't mind sorting out the odd spot or two, but when recent model turned up with REALLY bad acne scars (not visible on her portfolio) I was a bit disappointed to say the least. I mentioned that her portfolio had clearly had a lot of PS work done and she then went on and slated a recent tog who shot her on a TFCD basis and when she got the disc she realised her hadn't airbrushed her! It was on the tip of my tongue to say that if she really thought she was model material, she shouldn't rely on a photographer airbrushing every shot of her - but in the end, I went for the cowards option "let's get really creative with light and shadows (lots of them!) Decision made - always ask to see an unedited shot of a new model.

PS - Dangleman - great answer! lol
 
KSG Photography said:
I don't mind sorting out the odd spot or two, but when recent model turned up with REALLY bad acne scars (not visible on her portfolio) I was a bit disappointed to say the least. I mentioned that her portfolio had clearly had a lot of PS work done and she then went on and slated a recent tog who shot her on a TFCD basis and when she got the disc she realised her hadn't airbrushed her! It was on the tip of my tongue to say that if she really thought she was model material, she shouldn't rely on a photographer airbrushing every shot of her - but in the end, I went for the cowards option "let's get really creative with light and shadows (lots of them!) Decision made - always ask to see an unedited shot of a new model.

PS - Dangleman - great answer! lol
Click to expand...


Relative size of light source should sort that out, say a 4 metre softbox! Failing that just crop the head out and call it art. :p

I shot a model earlier this year with fairly bad skin. It caused a bit of a headache for the close-up beauty shots but at the end of the day, the final result is a showcase and testiment to your work so best to take pride.
 
Something I've been meaning to ask about this kind of shooting... is it actually possible to create a critically acclaimed shot of the fairer sex if they are not either stunning in the first place or you have used software to turn them into an Auton (Dr Who reference :D)

Is everything in the quality of the photography really down to the physical quality of the model?

That being the case, why in the section on this forum are we asked not to comment on the model, only the photography....

I don't want to turn this into a "natural beauty" argument though - thats not my point here, just simply - is it possible to create a good photo of this genre without a top class beauty?
 
desantnik said:
I don't want to turn this into a "natural beauty" argument though - thats not my point here, just simply - is it possible to create a good photo of this genre without a top class beauty?
Click to expand...

Yes. but how far is too far? :LOL:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG4uksb5e6c[/YOUTUBE]
 
susie said:
Just ask how you can improve on perfection, will probably sell a lot more pics with flattery!
Click to expand...

Is that not considered unbelievably cheesy though?

On a related note, I was at a party the other day (didn't have my camera with me) and was at one point handed a point-and-shoot and asked to take a photo of a group. One of the ladies in the group (a friend of mine) said to me quietly "I'll give you a fiver if you can make me look thin!".

Sadly, I couldn't think of a witty response on the spur of the moment...
 
Dangleman said:
...Anyone else get asked this whenever you take a picture of a 'lady'?

I'm running of out of stock/ polite/ witty replies! Can anyone help me with some new responses. There's only so many jovial "oh you don't need it my dear" I have left in me.

I resorted to just grunting the other day, which isn't very professional now is it :)

And I love the way people still call it airbrushing....
Click to expand...

a very thick fog filter will do the trick
 
The funny thing is, I get a lot people making jokey comments asking if I do retouching, but actually, the "improvements" I make are very small and I don't point them out to clients, and they never ask (or seem to suspect) if any tweaks have been made.

A prime example is tight-fitting wedding dresses. Every bride this side of a size zero can be photographed in an unflattering position, and a simple 'liquify' removes the unfortunate (I'm struggling for words here) overhang that a tight corset can produce.

I probably make such a changes on less than half a dozen shots out a collection of 350 wedding pics and it's always a minor tweak, and un-detectable. Unless of course a guest was shooting over my shoulder at the time and the bride sees their shot - but on-one's mentioned that to me!

The most serious (or 'involved') retouching I've ever done was to a very pretty bride that had a molar missing and on certain pics (major laughter) there was a visible gap. It was a friend of my wife's and after much deliberation my wife and I agreed she should raise this with the bride, on the basis that I could resolve the issue should the bride wish. She very gratefully said yes, please do. A delicate situation, but without intervention the bride would without doubt have hated some very good pictures!

The bride was over the moon with the pictures so a good result all round.
 
Dangleman said:
...Anyone else get asked this whenever you take a picture of a 'lady'?

I'm running of out of stock/ polite/ witty replies! Can anyone help me with some new responses. There's only so many jovial "oh you don't need it my dear" I have left in me.

I resorted to just grunting the other day, which isn't very professional now is it :)

And I love the way people still call it airbrushing....
Click to expand...

I've just remembered another situation I was in once. I had a bride say "I don't photograph well".

Looking back on it that was my cue to say "oh don't be silly, you'll look beautiful".

But I said nothing.

She had a point.

:exit:

As it happens, I got some really nice pics of her, so it was all good (y)
 
DDP said:
I've just remembered another situation I was in once. I had a bride say "I don't photograph well".

Looking back on it that was my cue to say "oh don't be silly, you'll look beautiful".

But I said nothing.

She had a point.

:exit:

As it happens, I got some really nice pics of her, so it was all good (y)
Click to expand...

Always making this kind of mistake with the Mrs. When we're going out somewhere she'll say to me 'You look really nice' or something similiar. To which I reply 'Thanks'......

After 12 years I should realise that those sorts of statements are intended to be reciprocal! lol
 
I would just say YES and charge them for the time, there is still an airbrush tool in PS
 
Isn't the whole point of having a portrait or wedding shot taken, to make the subject look good? In which case it is the photographer's duty to use every technique available to secure the best possible result. Lighting, angle, lens, expression, make-up, retouching - all the same thing.

Retouching should be part of the budget. How far you take it is a matter of personal judgement and that might vary from a little to a lot, depending on all sorts of things, not just how ugly/fat the subject might be. Everybody benefits from at least some retouching.

Anybody who objects to retouching on some daft moral principle is simply not delivering good customer service. Give them what they want, to the best of your ability, using every technique at your disposal.

desantnik said:
Something I've been meaning to ask about this kind of shooting... is it actually possible to create a critically acclaimed shot of the fairer sex if they are not either stunning in the first place or you have used software to turn them into an Auton (Dr Who reference :D)

Is everything in the quality of the photography really down to the physical quality of the model?

That being the case, why in the section on this forum are we asked not to comment on the model, only the photography....
Click to expand...

Prudence probably, with a hint of misplaced political correctness.

I don't want to turn this into a "natural beauty" argument though - thats not my point here, just simply - is it possible to create a good photo of this genre without a top class beauty?
Click to expand...

In a word, no. The subject is everything. Seems unavoidably obvious to me :shrug:
 
Thanks Hoppy... confirms my thoughts on this one nicely.

So in the abscence of that, beauty/modelling shoots for paying customers are much akin to "event photography" - no awards for the artiste, just a souveneir for the person with the cash.
 
desantnik said:
Thanks Hoppy... confirms my thoughts on this one nicely.

So in the abscence of that, beauty/modelling shoots for paying customers are much akin to "event photography" - no awards for the artiste, just a souveneir for the person with the cash.
Click to expand...

Yes, professional photography is about earning money isn't it? You do that by fulfilling the brief which in this case is surely 'make me look nice'.

Any photographer that doesn't use retouching to the full is missing a major trick. This is something that most pros can do, and most amateurs cannot. You'd be daft not to, but 'to the full' doesn't mean throw absolutely everything at an image - it means do as much as you can to fulfill the brief, but I accept it's sometimes a delicate area.

When we comment on a great portrait or wedding set and say, wow, great, brilliant work etc, what we usually mean is fabulous subject, wonderful location, well photographed.

IMHO :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top