– Looking for Skin Smoothing plugin…

The Cerebral Ass

"The Cerebral Ass

Dave Cramer wrote:
:: try CleanSkinFX 1.0!
::
:: it is available FREE in the current issue of Digital Camera! ::
:: it can be found at most upscale bookstores!
::
:: Dave.

Free from Mediachance too
http://www.mediachance.com/digicam/cleanskin.htm

—
Tricia
23109810

in article XvjKa.32946$, The Cerebral Ass © at
wrote on 6/25/03 8:49 AM:

"Mike" wrote in message

in article Y3GJa.18067$, The Cerebral Ass ©

at

wrote on 6/23/03 9:40 AM:

I was hoping something existed out there
that would help me save time, and is specific to skin-tones.
I guess there isn’t. 🙁

Sometimes you just have to do the work and not try and cheat.

Then I guess you do it without using layers, right?

Cuz that would be, y’know, cheating. =) Be a REAL man. Use crayons!

You can cry about it all you want. Not going to help you though.

hahaha.

—
Mike

* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!

Site at: http://www.artistmike.com

I normally use the blur tool, the clone tool or despeckle.

—
If I ever went into battle, I’d take a bunch of poodles with me. Given a choice between shooting me or a poodle, the average person would surely aim for the poodle.

http://www.bonestructure.net

This works well with faces. Copy the layer and either use Filter > Blur > Gaussian Blur or Filter > Noise > Median. Reduce the opacity of this layer to let the original show through a bit. You can then erase out the newly blurred "sharp" features like eyes, teeth, lips and hair in the new layer to let these features maintain their sharpness.

Peadge 🙂

"Bonestructure" wrote in message

I normally use the blur tool, the clone tool or despeckle.

—
If I ever went into battle, I’d take a bunch of poodles with me. Given a choice between shooting me or a poodle, the average person would surely

aim

for the poodle.

http://www.bonestructure.net

Peadge wrote:

This works well with faces. Copy the layer and either use Filter > Blur > Gaussian Blur or Filter > Noise > Median. Reduce the opacity of this layer to let the original show through a bit. You can then erase out the newly blurred "sharp" features like eyes, teeth, lips and hair in the new layer to let these features maintain their sharpness.

Nice if you want people to look like they wear masks…
Try this, looks more natural I think:
http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Stephan

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

This works well with faces. Copy the layer and either use Filter > Blur

Gaussian Blur or Filter > Noise > Median. Reduce the opacity of this

layer

to let the original show through a bit. You can then erase out the newly blurred "sharp" features like eyes, teeth, lips and hair in the new

layer to

let these features maintain their sharpness.

Nice if you want people to look like they wear masks…
Try this, looks more natural I think:
http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Stephan

The solution I offered works well when dealing with larger photos at higher resolutions. Images like those you supplied would still benefit, but, being so small, they often have jpeg induced artifacts compounding the lack of smoothness. Regardless, here’s a link to a version of your photo using my technique. Ending up with a "mask" look may be more skill and patience related than technique. Notice too that the color doesn’t look so washed out.

http://tinyurl.com/4bcxr

This is for educational purposes only.

Peadge 🙂

Peadge wrote:

The solution I offered works well when dealing with larger photos at higher resolutions. Images like those you supplied would still benefit, but, being so small, they often have jpeg induced artifacts compounding the lack of smoothness.
snip<

You are kidding right?
Or do you really think I would do anything to a portrait that small?

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

The solution I offered works well when dealing with larger photos at

higher

resolutions. Images like those you supplied would still benefit, but,

being

so small, they often have jpeg induced artifacts compounding the lack of smoothness.
snip<

You are kidding right?
Or do you really think I would do anything to a portrait that small?

For some, images that small are their only option.

I’ve reworked people’s web sites who have supplied me only with small low-res images. I agree that the larger the image, the better. I just disagree with your idea that the method I described will inevitably produce a "mask" look.

Peadge 🙂

Peadge wrote:

For some, images that small are their only option.

I’ve reworked people’s web sites who have supplied me only with small low-res images. I agree that the larger the image, the better. I just disagree with your idea that the method I described will inevitably produce a "mask" look.

Disagree,that’s OK but everything I’ve seen done using your method looked "retouched"

Stephan

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

Disagree,that’s OK but everything I’ve seen done using your method looked "retouched"

Stephan

Did you look at how it turned out with your image?

Yours: http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Mine: http://tinyurl.com/4bcxr

Your method is still pretty neat.

Peadge 🙂

Stephan, I like your method but I can’t seem to get past the "Inverse" stage. The Inverse option is greyed out when I duplicate the layer. Any help appreciated.
Murphy
"Peadge" wrote in message

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

Disagree,that’s OK but everything I’ve seen done using your method looked "retouched"

Stephan

Did you look at how it turned out with your image?

Yours: http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Mine: http://tinyurl.com/4bcxr

Your method is still pretty neat.

Peadge 🙂

If you apply Peadge’s process first

i.e. duplicate layer>median noise (1 pixel -ish)> erase layer over eyes

Then apply Stephan’s to the same layer
Invert>Desaturate >Mode darken >Opacity (12% -ish)>Levels

I think it works even better

—
www.micromountain.com

Peadge wrote:

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

Disagree,that’s OK but everything I’ve seen done using your method looked "retouched"

Stephan

Did you look at how it turned out with your image?

Yours: http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Mine: http://tinyurl.com/4bcxr

Your method is still pretty neat.

Peadge 🙂

Please compare the two on prints at least 5×7 and tell me what you think.

Stephan

Murphy wrote:

Stephan, I like your method but I can’t seem to get past the "Inverse" stage. The Inverse option is greyed out when I duplicate the layer. Any help appreciated.

Control + I to inverse and then Control +Shift + U to desaturate Does that work?

Stephan

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

Please compare the two on prints at least 5×7 and tell me what you think.
Stephan

I agree with Broga that a combination of the two techniques proves superior to either separately.

Broga said:
"If you apply Peadge’s process first i.e. duplicate layer>median noise (1 pixel -ish)> erase layer over eyes

Then apply Stephan’s to the same layer Invert>Desaturate >Mode darken

Opacity (12% -ish)>Levels

I think it works even better."

Peadge 🙂

I tried Stephan’s technique on 3 or 4 pictures and all I’m getting is a gray cast on the end result which makes the picture look flat. I must be doing it wrong. (?)

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

"Stephan" wrote in message

Peadge wrote:

Disagree,that’s OK but everything I’ve seen done using your method looked "retouched"

Stephan

Did you look at how it turned out with your image?

Yours: http://tinyurl.com/6hodq

Mine: http://tinyurl.com/4bcxr

Your method is still pretty neat.

Peadge 🙂

Please compare the two on prints at least 5×7 and tell me what you think.
Stephan

She wrote:

I tried Stephan’s technique on 3 or 4 pictures and all I’m getting is a gray cast on the end result which makes the picture look flat. I must be doing it wrong. (?)

You have to change your blending mode to "darken" Does that work now?

Stephan

There is a plugin made by kodak for photoshop, I think its called airbrush pro bt not certain . I’m sure a search will come up with it

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:13:44 -0600, Bonestructure wrote:

If I understand this, you want to blend or smooth some skin tones and not have the image look over touched up.

Create a duplicate layer and drop opacity to 0, select bottom layer and depeckle and blur till the skin looks like what you want overall but the over all picture sucks. Go back to the top layer and increase opacity to 100 and then use the erasure on ablout 10 to 20 percent (both opacity and flow) and start blending the parts of the skin you want smooth. I use this with a model that has large pores and a few other creases do to age. I can knock 5 to 10 years off her and not have her look touched up.

This method will leave the contrast levels sharp and things like the eyes, mouth and hair still very sharp.

I normally use the blur tool, the clone tool or despeckle.

Stephan …

She wrote:

I tried Stephan’s technique on 3 or 4 pictures and all I’m getting is a gray cast on the end result which makes the picture look flat. I must be doing it wrong. (?)

You have to change your blending mode to "darken" Does that work now?

Stephan

One thing I’ve done is gaussian blur the entire image, click the history brush on it, then go back to un-blurred image and use history brush to selectively blur portions (at varying opacities) that need to be softened, as in the following two examples:

http://www.amenfoto.com/gallery/tweaked_portraits_1/sheila_1 975.html

http://www.amenfoto.com/gallery/tweaked_portraits_2/leah_2.h tml

Hope this helps,

Adrian

http://www.amenfoto.com

"A Pictures Worth a Thousand Nerds."

If you need especially a plugin there is:

http://www.asf.com/products/plugins/airpro/pluginAIRPRO.asp

Fixx wrote:

If you need especially a plugin there is:

http://www.asf.com/products/plugins/airpro/pluginAIRPRO.asp

Neat! Converts humans into window dolls.
Does it work the other way around also?

Stepahn

I use the smudge tool in both PS and PSP
in PSP set opacity to about 10 and work your way higher if need and set Hardness to 0 Size the brush to about 3 to 6 depending on the size of the image…… Zoom in large to work on the detailed area, and smudge it. You can find Smudge in the Retouch tool on the first tab set to Smudge. This has been my fav way of doing it for many years now.

"CherokeeCandy" <putertutor(removethis)@intergate.com> wrote in news::

I use the smudge tool in both PS and PSP
in PSP set opacity to about 10 and work your way higher if need and set Hardness to 0 Size the brush to about 3 to 6 depending on the size of the image…… Zoom in large to work on the detailed area, and smudge it. You can find Smudge in the Retouch tool on the first tab set to Smudge. This has been my fav way of doing it for many years now.

softens but can look very fulse,

Try this

duplicate the layer and blur the top layer using the gaussian blur filter, try set at 2 (expiriment with this setting later)

Now select OVERLAY as the colour mode for this layer

Now go to the bottom layer and select curves and adjust the colour to suit.

This can give skin a nice natural glow without looking like plastic.

—
Youth is wasted on the young!

On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 09:43:08 GMT, Kingdom wrote:

softens but can look very fulse,

Try this

I will, but something I found you really need when touching up skin is noise. A blur is always a blur…

To add just the right amount of noise you have to select JUST the skin, and blow it up as high as you can and still see facial features. ie: Life size or double life size. Then add noise in increments until it looks porous. Don’t use the monochrome.

duplicate the layer and blur the top layer using the gaussian blur filter, try set at 2 (expiriment with this setting later)

Now select OVERLAY as the colour mode for this layer

Now go to the bottom layer and select curves and adjust the colour to suit.
This can give skin a nice natural glow without looking like plastic.

—
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html

For a quite surreal effect I create a copy layer of just the face area then use the smart blur filter, tweak the opacity as required and using the eraser remove the eyes and mouth and tidy the hair on the copy layer. Martyn