To Heal or Not to Heal – Blemish Removal
Have you ever erased someone’s moles only to get a “oh…um….ok” response? I have.
We might think we’re doing someone a favour by removing imperfections from their features but when does is go too far? What are the rules about removing blemishes?
The first thing I would consider is whether I know the person personally or not. Sometimes I ask if they’d like me to remove a mole. Sometimes they say yes, sometimes not. If I know that something bothers them, I sometimes remove it and then show them to see what they think. I might even email a proof over and let them see a before/after.
Of course, I always remove pimples, lipstick from the teeth, etc. No one has EVER asked me to keep their zits intact I think it’s a given that those are to be removed since they’re not permanent.
If I don’t know them, I don’t usually remove permanent features like birthmarks, moles, sun spots or skin tags. When I first started in my business, there was a teacher at a school I did and she had a cluster of many moles on one side of her face. She wasn’t too impressed that I removed them. Sure, she looked better, but it probably made her feel a bit dumb as if people weren’t going to notice that they’d been shopped. Now, I leave mole removal to the dermatologist!
Although I don’t remove permanent features, I do sometimes add a bit of digital makeup to soften their appearance or paint a low opacity brush over the top if it’s so prominent that it detracts from the subject.
What are your rules about healing?
58 Responses to “To Heal or Not to Heal – Blemish Removal” - Add Yours
March 16th, 2010 at 12:36 am
I generally follow those same rules. When I first started I was working on an image for a magazine. Photoshop had just come out (well, it was like 2.5). She asked if I could remove a birth mark from an award winner. I told her I could but I didn’t think it was a good idea. She tried to persuade me to do it but I just told her I wouldn’t. I was pretty young and it was uncomfortable but I stood my ground. She had another designer do it and the award winner was very upset when she saw it. The lesson, don’t edit permanent features on someone’s face unless they ask you. Some people are proud of their unique features.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:41 am
Wow, I’ve never taken into consideration that semi-permanent imperfections (like moles) would be something that a client would want to keep in their photo.
Previously, I just removed everything, but I might take a more delicate approach in the future after reading what happened to you in the past.
VERY good question.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:43 am
I don’t do it. In fact, I wouldn’t even remove pimples. They are there, and I’m not a makeup artist (digital or otherwise).
I want to represent what is there, not some kind of fiction that doesn’t exist.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:51 am
I normally leave permanent skin features alone, that includes most wrinkles when I’m shooting the elderly. One lady was 100, she earned those wrinkles! Younger women (mid 40’s – 50’s appreciate a little touch up of wrinkles and dark spots.
On younger people, 12 – college aged, I remove pimples and discretely ask them if there is something they would like me to correct. Sometimes it’s a prominent mole that they want to have removed, braces and a big one is blotchy red skin. I do my best but on fair skin kids it’s not always that easy.
One little toddler I was shooting random shots of has a large hematoma (born with it) on the side of her head and it’s part of her although it will probably shrink or be removed as she grows. I tried to shoot her in positions where it was least visible and was pretty successful.
Above all I respect their feelings. It’s their body, I’m just creating a memory for them. So far, no complaints! :)
March 16th, 2010 at 1:09 am
I do it similiar. I remove anything not permanent but keep persistent features. I smooth wrinkles a little bit, dark circles under the eyes, such things, but no birthmarks or scars.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:50 am
Art need not mirror reality; art is its own reality. An image does not have to be a photocopy of who someone is (excluding drivers licenses, journalism and forensics). Are sculptures? Paintings? Seriously…are films replicas of that? Are there really blue Na’Vi walking around or was a whole world created, one of beauty, one that is art and completey from the imagination? The arbitrary rules applied to photography versus other art forms are perplexing to say the least.
The simple way to know the answer to this question is to communicate with the client/subject. Much information is revealed simply by talking to the person. The amount of retouching then depends on the client’s desire. I had one who had blemishes and a burn and was thrilled that I removed them. I agree that I would not remove a birthmark, beauty mark, mole or freckles. But I have yet to meet a woman who wants pimples and other non-permanent imperfections to remain. Why would you? If pimples were beloved, Noxema would not push much product.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:55 am
If its a portraiture I like to apply selective color correction or use the stamp tool BUT NOT AT 100% opacity), specially around the eyes (dark circles) and some very prominent skin wrinkles (the ones that make the subject look bad… cause there are “good” wrinkles too lol)
I have a scar in my lip since birth and I’m obviously not too fond of it lol, so if I take a self portrait, I like to soften it a bit (not completely remove it cause, scars and birthmarks are part of a person’s personality I guess…)
March 16th, 2010 at 2:00 am
The one word of caution is before you attempt to remove any unflattering blemished etc make sure you are an expert at the post production software. Nothing screams amateur more than a botched photoshop, lightroom or aperture fix.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:23 am
I have pretty much the same rules as the author: if it’s a permanent feature of the face, leave it alone; if it’s temporary (zit, etc.), heal it out. Thank goodness for the healing tool… I have 11-month-old twin boys that *always* have scratches and bumps from their “adventures.” Those kids have probably been ’shopped more than many celebrities!
March 16th, 2010 at 2:23 am
I am excited about beautification. Hell, they do it with actresses – why not ordinary people? I think we should run a workshop on beautification.
What say you?
March 16th, 2010 at 2:26 am
I never remove anything permanent, like a mole! And for wrinkles and pimples, I may “soften” them, but never remove them completely. For me, it is about keeping the images real-looking while preserving the beauty of the photo. So if there is a temporary blemish, for instance, that takes away from the beauty of the photo, I will choose to soften it in Photoshop (PS).
Overall, I like keeping my subjects looking natural and real because the true beauty is in their expression, interaction with other subjects, or the emotion in their eyes.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:47 am
Moles, freckles, birth, beauty marks (and scars), etc. in my opinion would be readily noticeable if removed. Would never relay on my “personal” view as to whether I think they are imperfections or unflattering, which they wouldn’t be to most! Asking for client preference is key to success!
March 16th, 2010 at 3:17 am
I had a client with a fairly prominent mole on his eyebrow. My general rule is to not remove permanent (or semi-permanent) features like this… you never know how the person will take it, and I prefer to capture life kind of “as-is.”
What I did do, however, was mask it slightly by burning it in to the eyebrow a bit. This mitigated the need to ask an awkward question, ensured the client wouldn’t be upset, and put the focus back on the portrait by removing any focus from the mole.
Win, win, win.
March 16th, 2010 at 3:20 am
Also: I’m with Greg – if you’re going to remove something like this, it’s best if you’re positive you know how to do it.
And, it depends on the purpose of the shoot: if I’m shooting client portraits for them, I leave things like this in. If it’s for portfolio work or my own purposes, I’ll take it out.
March 16th, 2010 at 4:44 am
If you look at that person, do you actively notice the mole/pimple/… ? Images tend to bring out the worst of people (because you miss a lot of the personality factor); so if removing imperfections brings the image & my perception of that person closer together – then I will.
March 16th, 2010 at 4:53 am
I agree – leave the permanent features alone! People want to look good, in their photos, not fake. Removing features that may be slightly less than “perfect” but are non-the-less part of them not only makes the photos feel fake, but also may make them self conscious about their imperfections every time they look at their flawless pictures.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:04 am
I generally agree with the belief that photographs should be a record of what a person really looks like rather than something fake. HOWEVER, as one person commented above, a photographer should always do their best to minimize the features that a client may not be in love with. For example, I have never met a woman who didn’t want to look thinner than she really was. When my wedding photographer kept shooting images from below/looking up at me (making me look down at him and therefore causing a very unattractive double chin), I told him I was going to have to photoshop out the resulting double chin. He actually told me that he didn’t believe in removing a double chin because it was how I really look. (Thank you so much for being so incredibly insulting!) A double chin is not really a permanent feature like a birthmark or a mole, and a savvy photographer would photograph someone who has a double chin when looking down from ABOVE so it gets stretched out and minimized.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:22 am
As someone with a lot of moles, I don’t consider them imperfections and would be offended if a photographer erased them!
March 16th, 2010 at 6:28 am
I think it really depends on the client’s purpose. I have a regular client that (up until recently) had an old crown among his front teeth. While it wasn’t at all noticeable in person, under flash, it would absorb more light than the other teeth. I’d always post process it out–and kept him as client.
Similarly, I have no qualms about doctoring photos to make clients happy. I get paid to do portraiture; I’m not a photo journalist. I’m there to make them look the best they can appear–and it’s not just removing blemishes. Part of that may be post-processing–but it might also be accomplished by lighting, posing, etc.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:39 am
I’m with Beth – a teenage daughter with a multitude of zits and monster vanity; thank goodness for the spot healing tool. Similarly wrinkles – my dearly beloved insists I ’soften’ them but leave her moles etc alone although it is quite pleasing for her if I soften them too
March 16th, 2010 at 6:40 am
I agree, I love my moles! But pimples can definitely go!
March 16th, 2010 at 6:40 am
I’m a firm believer in correcting the imperfections that detract from their true beauty. Sun damage isn’t the person. I show people what I do so they know to tell me if they want something fixed.
I’ll minimize wrinkles and lighten sun damage because that’s what I’d want done. No one has ever complained. In fact several people have asked for portraits because I will touch up images.
March 16th, 2010 at 7:11 am
If it’s permanent, it stays…unless the client specifically says otherwise.
March 16th, 2010 at 7:14 am
I never remove the moles. In fact, I once heard a model talking smack about a photographer that did that to her, and she was upset. Her “beauty marks” were important to her. However, I also never smooth skin. I feel that removing the texture of the skin really detracts from the overall realism of the shot. I do lessen the eye-bags and other undesirable elements of the aging process.
http://lightshootedit.blogspot.com/2010/03/kicking-it-into-gear.html
Here is a good example of a full body shot in which case I fixed up her make-up but didn’t blur or soften the skin.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:47 am
I definitely remove zits, etc., but I would never remove moles. My sister had her mole removed without asking by a photographer once and was incredibly offended that the photographer viewed that as an imperfection when my sister did not. I also don’t smooth skin as I hate that overly-photoshopped, soft-focus look where nobody looks real. Blah!
March 16th, 2010 at 8:59 am
Reality sucks. Don’t believe me? Just check out the models and actors and other richies who have had plastic surgery until you can hardly recognize them. We all want to look like we do – only better. I do like that polished flawless face that you see on the cover of Vogue. What’s wrong with that?
About moles and such. I’ve heard where some have had them surgically applied to draw attention to certain parts of the face – say lips or eyes. I don’t consider moles as flaws – well not unless there are hairs growing out of them.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:04 am
What I do is show the client several different digital images or prints, each with a different level of editing and gently ask the client which look they want for their own portraits. Basically, I try to get them to do the talking rather than me having to ask, “well what about healing this or that.”
Here is an example of the max healing/editing I do to any given portrait, even for my own portfolio, I do not go for the clay mask level of editing:
http://jasoncollinphotography.com/blog/2009/7/29/day-dreaming-on-the-beach.html
March 16th, 2010 at 9:12 am
I dont remove permanent moles on a face but have done from other parts of the body if I think they detract from the image. Never sure though if it is the right thing to do. I like the suggestion of softening the appearance of those moles instead which I think I will do in the future.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:25 am
So do you ask to photoshop the fat and oldness off of people?
March 16th, 2010 at 11:37 am
I have a niece who considers her birthmark/mole above her mouth a part of her. I once saw a person drawing a characterture of her and her sisters. The artist left off the birthmark. My niece asked her to add the birthmark.
Indirectly, that taught me a lesson. I only remove blemishes when requested. Usually, my clients want them intact until they decide to enlarge them for framing.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:28 pm
I never remove something those are permanent in their face. It means I will not remove moles. But I do remove such as pimples, acne, or flash spot in their nose and cheeks.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
I agree with others who say to ask the client first (tact required!) and make sure you know what you’re doing. It’s insensitive for photographers to assume their client wants things like moles, birthmarks, etc. removed. As others said, the person could be insulted. It’s a slippery slope (pimples people seem sure about, but sun damage?), so I’d err on the side of caution and ask about everything.
I’ve done portraits for friends/family who asked if I would remove blemishes (mostly pimples), and in that case I did. Otherwise I don’t go there. Then again, I’m a bit of a purist when it comes to that kind of photo manipulation–I’ve worked as a photojournalist, so I’m all about what was really there, not a doctored, flawless version. And if you are a wedding or portrait photographer, it’s definitely your job to make sure your subject looks good–this can be done before post-processing to an extent (lighting, angle, etc.)
And sure, the face on the cover of Vogue looks flawless, but it’s NOT REALITY. Some people may desire to look this way, but it’s not realistic! Ugh, I think there’s plenty wrong with that–but that’s another conversation!
March 16th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
You know if it’s pimples or any other temporary marks on a person’s face, then I’ll usually do a quick cleanup (no plastic Barbie skin). But permanent marks need to stay. I have 3 marks on my face that I’d never dream of removing, and if another photog did, I would be embarrassed of the photo because I would be afraid that it looked obviously doctored to anyone who knew me. For permanent marks, it really should be by request only.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
I’m pretty much in agreement with the retouching of any temporary skin blemish; spots, bruises and cuts (Young boys and some girls that play contact sports often have these!) Wrinkles are a little more tricky. I tend to soften them, especially around the eyes. Crow’s feet really age a woman and even with a soft light an unprocessed photo makes them very apparent.
I’ve been reading a very good book that covers some of this off. Skin by Lee Varis and published by Sybex (ISBN 0-470-04733-x if you are interested in finding it) Lee points out that no wrinkles on an older person would look plain weird. People in their 40s and 50s may benefit from some softening of the wrinkles but not to the extent that the skin looks like smooth plastic.
I also tend to soften very prominent and raised moles because otherwise they draw the eye.
March 16th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
I look on digital photography no differently than film. You can’t remove blemishes from a negative, so I won’t even consider removing them from a digital photo – unless I am specifically requested to do so. All my own photos are complete with every blemish I had when the photo was taken, and I prefer it that way
March 16th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
To the poster who regards digital the same as film- keep in mind that airbrushing was used quite a bit in the days of printwork- ever wonder where that airbrush tool in Pshop came from? :)
I think the general consensus is that it’s ok to cleanup mild imperfections or blemishes but to do it in a way that it doesn’t ruin the photo and to leave natural imperfections or birthmarks or things that the person would want left in.
With that said, it never hurts to ask the person how far you can go with their photo. Some will say, “Do mild touchup and leave what i was born with there”- and then some will say, “I’d love if you retouched this, this and slim that, etc”.
March 17th, 2010 at 12:02 am
I agree, I definitely do acne but not enough that it looks fake. I hate that fake skin look. As far as birthmarks or moles, etc – unless I was prepared to say, “Yes, I think you’re ugly the way you are and wanted to fix that for you”, for me – it needs left alone! :)
March 17th, 2010 at 12:10 am
@ Donny Lightspeed: Sure, professionals may have used airbrushing on high-end photos, but it certainly wasn’t within the reach of your average photographer the way the digital darkroom is nowadays. I personally do not know any film photographers who altered their prints in any way other than playing with exposures and actual physical processing – none of them (and I admit, I don’t know that many) ever touched-up after developing.
Now you won’t hear me say I disagree with post-processing, because I don’t. I think the ability to manipulate our work after the fact is a blessing in many circumstances, and there are those who don’t think it goes far enough. It’s just that I personally believe that a photograph is supposed to capture that moment in time – warts and all – and therefore anything but the simplest post-processing should be determined by the subject/recipient of the finished product, and not necessarily by the photographer – but of course, all within the bounds of reason. And I did say that I will remove blemishes if specifically asked to do so…
March 17th, 2010 at 1:03 am
At a mall near us is a store by the name of “Glamour Shots”. They are so busy, you have to reserve your sitting way in advance. They do everything – makeup and hair – even supply a lot of the props. Their work is highly sought after. You see grandmothers with their grandchildren, fantasy photos, weddings, babies, men – all ages and walks of life. Companies send their staff there for the pictures on their business cards.
I see nothing wrong with enhancing their appearance. Of course, you have to be careful so you don’t end up having a face look like a mask, which is what happened when I tried to make my 80 year old mother look 30.
But we all push that envelope just a little, don’t we?
March 17th, 2010 at 3:12 am
I remove blemishes, red spots, pimples, cuts, scrapes, etc. But I don’t touch freckles or moles. I try to soften wrinkles and scars so that they are still visible, but less prominent. If I am specifically asked to remove something permanent, I will, but I feel that removing something that is permanent without asking will cause hurt feelings, as if something is wrong with the person. My friend has a mole that covers half of her face, and her senior photographer removed it without asking. She felt hurt and angry that he thought she was so ugly the way she actually looked that he needed to “fix” her face. Before the session, in a casual way, I usually say “do you have any concerns that you would like me to work on?” And they tell me about the ginormous zit that I can already see from 10 feet away, or that they have a tummy, etc. Then I work on those things. Anyway, that’s the way I do it.
March 17th, 2010 at 5:13 am
My younger brother was in a car accident when he was 11. It left him with some large, and rather noticeable scars on his face. When he had his senior photos taken, they came back to us complete retouched. All the scars were gone. (this was in 1988) Although he looked great, it wasn’t an accurate representation of who he was. We were not impressed, and neither was he. It actually made him feel bad, because after about 6 years, he was becoming comfortable “in his own skin” again and adapting to the way he looked. Having the photographer shop out the scars only served to remind him that others saw his imperfections and thought he would be a better person without them.
I have to say that the client should be consulted before photoshopping anything- including acne (although I don’t expect there would be many people who wouldn’t want acne wiped out!) It can’t cause any harm to ask.
March 17th, 2010 at 10:42 am
I agree that it’s best to check with the client.
March 19th, 2010 at 4:01 am
I agree with most of your post with the following exceptions.
If I have been hired by the client to do a portrait then it is up to them what I leave on or take off. Like you I have never had anyone complain about my removal of pimples, skin bumps, acme, nose hair, chin hair (women), lip hair (women), underarm stubble, razor burn, food on teeth, lipstick on teeth, etc.
If I have been hired to do portfolio shots for a model I am usually asked to remove stretch marks, moles, scars, crows feet, sags, bags, brighten teeth, etc..etc…etc..etc…I have even added strands of red hair, asked to change the color of bikinis and work on ‘ugly’ toes…phew!
BTW…models are not the vainest of subjects….Real Estate Agents seem to take that prize :-)
(“Can you make me look 20 years younger and take off 20 lbs.”)
If I have hired someone for a shoot (promotion, stock, adv., etc) then it is up to my discretion what I remove…or add (beauty mark). I will, at my discretion, remove tattoos, piercings, moles, scars, and change eye color.
In reference to tatts….sometimes people will have a tattoo that is actually covered under a copyright law…..so before anyone climbs on a high horse about how sacred their tatt is….if I think it is covered in any way shape or form by a copyright….it goes or the model goes.
March 19th, 2010 at 4:09 am
I always found the best way of resolving most conflicts is having everything in writing thus addressing any issues. Bottom line is never assume anything and put everything in writing if you want to get paid. I always ask questions before and try and find out what the client wants/expects before doing any work because some have unrealistic expectations. I think the best photo manipulations are clients asking if you can remove someone out of an image (ex spouse, boy/girl friend, neighbor, casket) you name it. I remember hearing about someone who got mad at the photographer because they did not remove the oxygen tubes from a person in a group reunion shot. So many weird expectations best way to minimize most issue is asking & pre-planning & positioning clients creatively using interesting angles, lighting, makeup and backdrops thus taking any focus off any questionable areas and redirecting your eye towards where you want the client & others to see.
March 19th, 2010 at 4:21 am
In 1965, when my senior pictures (from a very upscale private girls’ school) came back from the photographer, I had a gut reaction that there was something “wrong” with the pictures, but it took me a while to realize what it was, and when I did, I was quite upset. I have deep “smile lines” that run from my nostrils to a bit below my lips, and the photographer had totally and completely airbrushed them away. Once it hit me what he’d done, I thought “that’s a beautiful picture, but it isn’t _me_!” It never occurred to me then that I could object, so that’s the way I looked on my grandma’s and auntie’s dressers for nearly 40 more years. I still look at that picture and am annoyed. It’s like looking at someone who was play-acting at being me….
The only time I end up doing any significant face-fixing is when I’m restoring old scanned photos, and I’m always aware of not overdoing it. (But of course, there’s nobody around to look at those photos and say “that’s not me!”)
March 19th, 2010 at 4:28 am
@ Tyler – I photoshop the fat and the old of pictures of ME! LOL!
I agree with Greg though, don’t get too heavy handed and be sure you know what you are doing. I was once with a photographer who was processing a picture of a lady, who was probably in her 50’s, though she looked much older than that because she had a led a very rough and troubled life. She had pockmarked skin, wrinkles, bags, etc. She got so heavy handed with the touchup that it didn’t even look like the same person anymore. She thought it looked great, I thought, if I was the subject I would be ticked that my picture came back looking absolutely nothing like me and like I was wearing 1/2 thick caked on makeup. Never did find out what she thought when she got them, but I would never have done that so heavy handed. That lady earned her “scars” and faced adversity at every turn to come out stronger for it. Surely I may have applied a bit of digital makeup and cleaned it up a small bit, but never that much!
I think a pre-session checklist is a good idea. When the client fills out the paperwork, ask them the check off things they would like done (if any), then have a few boxes like braces removal, remove pimples, remove moles, whiten teeth, etc. Leave a space for other as well. There may be something on their face that you think looks just fine, but they have a problem with it. That leaves the ball in the clients court to decide what gets done or doesn’t get done.
March 19th, 2010 at 6:36 am
I’ve had some awkward situations with Photoshopping others’ pictures… What if I make someone’s facial features slimmer for example… and that way give them the impression that I think they’re fat?
March 19th, 2010 at 10:24 am
My nephew just got his senior cap and gown photos back, and the photography company erased his freckles. My sister-in-law isn’t too upset about it, but his freckles are just a part of who he is, so we think it’s quite ridiculous.
March 19th, 2010 at 8:02 pm
Yeah, I’d even be careful about pimples and acne. I had a heap of them as a teenager, and really, they were a part of me for that (long) period of my life. Never liked them, but they were a part of me. These days I have them less often but I’m still careful to not get rid of ALL of them, mainly tone them done a little to look like me on a good day – otherwise it doesn’t look like me at all.
March 19th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
I think it is important to understand what a client wants with regards to removing blemishes on them in pictures. I had a picture of me taken years back. I almost did not recognise who was staring back at me because the darks spots on my face ( which are very noticeable features of mine) were completely erased!
Mkae sure the client is cool with it!
March 21st, 2010 at 1:29 am
As a yearbook editor, I deal with a LOT of zits. In senior portraits, I remove enough to make them look good, but do not erase all. I find it doesn’t look like them, and it makes them look a little plastic. If it’s really bad, I soften the whole look so it gives the appearance of an art shot, so it’s more of a stylistic approach.
And yes, I always talk with the student first.
March 26th, 2010 at 12:29 am
I like what Erika said LOL! If the picture is going in a frame it doesn’t hurt to touch up the obvious. My sister is harder to photograph than Count Dracula she hates everything about herself “I look fat, my skin is oily, I don’t like my eyebrows” the list is endless. I find with her that a suttle filtering and black and white makes her a little happier. The shiny skin seems to look better in black and white.
March 26th, 2010 at 1:49 am
I generally work with models and photographers, so the amount of retouching is generally up to the photographer.
But for basic retouching on MY photography, I am always careful to leave people looking like themselves. I hate seeing photos of older people not quite looking like themselves with a lot less wrinkles and botox tight skin.
Another fun thing to remember is tattoos!
I’ve had people ask for two sets of photographs, one with tattoos and one without (for those certain family members). I think the best thing to do is ask a client what they want in the picture and what they don’t want, such as photography “studios” asking if they want the skin “softened” or not, but we’re better than that.
March 26th, 2010 at 11:35 am
I once removed the very dark under eye bags of a different ethnic background than myself…they thought they didn’t even look like themselves and didn’t want the photo! I put them back in but tried to lessen them with a light brushover like you mentioned, to make their eyes stand out more, and they still weren’t happy. Had to leave them in!
March 27th, 2010 at 5:34 am
Edit > Fade is probably my best friend. (Photoshop CS4) This simple slider command basically takes the last thing you did and enables you to play with the opacity of the effect.
So instead of healing something completely, you might try fading it instead. This is especially good for eye bags or Lawrence-Fishburn like skin uniformity (Which I think makes him look tougher and dynamic. Why would you remove something like that?)
1) Heal-tool the imperfection
2) Edit > Fade (Learn the shortcut to speed this up)
3) Bring the effect BACK as desired. I typically settle on 20-30% depending on the lighting.
You always want people (and especially clients) to think of you and recommend you as a great PHOTOGRAPHER, not a great touch-up artist. They know it needs to be done, you know it’s part of the develop process – but if the picture you hand back isn’t them, and could never be them under the best lighting conditions, then you’ve succeeded in creating a new beautiful person, but failed at recording a memory.
That said, you could also pose them doing something that reflects their personality, instead of a bare-bones, this-is-your-face-today portrait.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:43 am
It’s the same rule for me when I’m doing my self portraits, what’s not permanent goes. I always leave by mole because one, it’s never going to disappear, and two, I actually like it being there.
For friends that I photograph I simply ask if they’d like me to process anything, without sounding biased. But I do understand the issue, some people just feel it’s important to embrace themselves.
March 28th, 2010 at 9:17 am
Generally, I say if it’s permanent, it stays. As far as zits, makeup smudges, crumbs, dirty noses, etc… They’re gone. I want the photo to reflect who the person is and how people view them, not how clean their face was at that particular instant. Even permanent ‘blemishes’ is sometimes soften, because in real-life they are not nearly as distracting as in a still portrait.
April 3rd, 2010 at 6:53 am
As a wedding gift, I was to be the ‘photographer’ and create an album of the event, which
to my surprise became a treasured work of art & skill! Positioned obnoxiously ….I did get an
excellent shot of the bride placing the ring on the groom’s finger [close up]. While editing the photos-I noticed a speck / smudge, like a freckle-on the bride’s hand, without hesitation-I removed it! Then with second thoughts, she might notice it was missing……so I put it back!
I continued working, but haunted by that ”freckle” so I went back to the picture and magnified it several times.
It was a misquito!! Arched and ready to strike! I did remove it again, after I saved the close up shot.
Did a small insert on the larger corrected photo and put in the back of the album; The last five pages of the book contained ” take out-photos ” …..to be sure-EVERYONE favored that fun capture!! And she never moved. **Photo is not up to grade-due to resizing for sending.
Leave a Reply