My observation is that it is fine for viewing at a distance but it can make the skin look 'plastic' and unnatural.
If I can use Tom's examples he's posted and also on the Flickr page, the first looks edited, as does the second but to a lesser extent. On Tom's Flickr page, shot #4 - the hand looks like a prosthetic!
I agree with David @Pookeyhead in another thread (can't remember which one !!) that retouching of this type unless you are going for the obvious/unnatural should be done by yourself selectively and light touch and not in a global piece of software - all IMO of course
It depends what you are aiming for. I'd never go as far as I have on those for anything other than for a fashion look, and I'm obviously stepping away from a realistic portrayal here. Clearly they look edited, as does pretty much every shot in any fashion mag or models profile...
My point is that doing it yourself means that you can go as far as you want hence my two examples I posted showing one more extreme and one toned down, however both showing skin detail, pores etc.
I'm not pretending I'm a retouching pro, just pointing out a resource where you can learn the basics without going through an automated program.
And yes the hand is weird despite my efforts, it was posed awkwardly, not sure that can be blamed on the retouch.
What do your portrait retouches look like?
What do people think of this software ,thinking of this for a few photos nothing pro ,as this is half price atmo.