Max-Focus Photography wrote:
-Must add baby oil or some kind of an oil-solution to the skin.


-Dodge and Burn  (A highlights layer, and then a shadows layer)

Thanks for the tip.

Max-Focus Photography wrote:
-Must add baby oil or some kind of an oil-solution to the skin.


-Dodge and Burn  (A highlights layer, and then a shadows layer)

glycerin/water 50:50

j_forbes wrote:
something like putting a gloss affect over the entire picture,

Glossy comes from the paper you use, or the monitor you're looking at; not the image itself.

D Magi Visual Concepts wrote:

Glossy comes from the paper you use, or the monitor you're looking at; not the image itself.

i dont thnk the op is referring to that kind of gloss, moer shiny very reflective like  skin which is done by all the techniques previously stated

D Magi Visual Concepts wrote:

Glossy comes from the paper you use, or the monitor you're looking at; not the image itself.

thank you, that answered my question.

Paul Byun wrote:

just a personal opinion here. Blurring skin really gets on my nerves.

Personal opinions aren't allowed in any forum other than the critique section.

Kristen Tyler Photo wrote:
Question about adding shine to a face...is babyoil okay to put on a face? or do you just leave it off the face and dodge/burn?? can't imagine that would mix well with makeup.

I was just about to ask that same question.
I would think that baby oil would smear the makeup.

Wonder if the Ponds Cold Cream does the same thing?

Edit: I see that Ponds Cold Cream can actually be used to remove makeup.

Beauty by Divine wrote:
I was just about to ask that same question.
I would think that baby oil would smear the makeup.

Wonder if the Ponds Cold Cream does the same thing?

Edit: I see that Ponds Cold Cream can actually be used to remove makeup.

[WHEN USING PONDS] I wouldn't apply it to the face (if makeup is involved)... However, no makeup?  All you need to do is apply a little bit, because Ponds is an actual old school makeup remover.

Paul Byun wrote:
here's a super fast way to acheive this look.

Duplicate a layer.

GO to filter- distortion- diffuse glow

make the high light glow on the duplicated layer.. Don't do it too much.  enough to pop out. Then layer it using "lighten".

After that go to

adjustments- highlights/shadows

Play with that till you get a look you like.

Then,

Use a dodge and burn brushes.

Also, playing with curve can bring out some details.

The most important part is to keep track of the histogram.
The "ideal" histogram you want is a mountain shaped one. When you achieve that, then you know you did a good job retouching.

What if it's a very fair skined model with blond hair, white clothes on a white background...what would the histogram look like then.

c_h_r_i_s wrote:

Paul Byun wrote:
The most important part is to keep track of the histogram.
The "ideal" histogram you want is a mountain shaped one. When you achieve that, then you know you did a good job retouching.

What if it's a very fair skined model with blond hair, white clothes on a white background...what would the histogram look like then.

(From the Digital Arts and Retouching FAQ entry What Should My Histogram Look Like? )

/hijack

Kristen Tyler Photo wrote:
Hmm so how do we apply shine to a face while shooting?

Are we talking female?  Prior to applying makeup, moisturize her skin, as seen from this example:

Fotogene wrote:
Spray Pam it goes on more evenly than hand applied baby oil.

ronald n. tan wrote:
PAM is really oily and it looks "tacky". At first I used it just because I heard it is great for guys (male models).

It can cause breakouts because it gets absorbed into the skin and NOT healthy!

These days, I used a weakened version--that is made for hair sheening. It works better and the effects are subtle (realistic).

ronald n. tan
www.ronaldntan.com

Yeah, Im going to have to agree on the PAM... It doesn't work well.

Dallas J. Logan wrote:
Before:



So please don't think you are going to walk away with silky, glossy sheen.  It is used to give you a base to work with in post.

Thank you for the before and after pics. That definitely helps us get an idea of what we will be getting prior to post-processing.

miss ernie wrote:

Thank you for the before and after pics. That definitely helps us get an idea of what we will be getting prior to post-processing.

I've received LOTs of emails from irate people wondering why when they used PONDs their images did not come out like mine... I asked them about their lighting and I asked them about their post production.  You didn't ask me how I did my process, you asked me what did I use on the skin to get that sheen and that was the question I answered.  Everything else is dodging and burning.

Dallas J. Logan wrote:

I've received LOTs of emails from irate people wondering why when they used PONDs their images did not come out like mine... I asked them about their lighting and I asked them about their post production.  You didn't ask me how I did my process, you asked me what did I use on the skin to get that sheen and that was the question I answered.  Everything else is dodging and burning.

Can I ask about how long did it take you to process that photo?

Frog516 wrote:
Can I ask about how long did it take you to process that photo?

Approximately 2 - 3 hours.  (I had to re edit that last amount of time)