#2 is the most natural overall. That's my pick.

Jim

Thanks guys. I think I may try layering 3 over two and blending, then get rid of the dark circles in 3 completely.

For now though, I'm off to PA for a TDAA trial.

Jim, develop a faster workflow for this because if you actually start doing people, you are going to need one a heck of a lot faster, or you'll never get through it. Mine goes silk powder/fogbuster action(really just unsharp mask) that adds back in detail and contrast, a sparkle for the eyes and done.

Oh, I'm sure I will. It really isn't that long as it is, but if I do more of them, I'll get quicker at it too.

Hey Jim,

I agree with Julie. I think that #3 or #2 are the best ones. I prefer #3 over-all. I think the skin looks the best.

James

Funny, I just got the prints back from this session tonight. They look pretty doggone good, if I must say so myself.

My only question is:

This is a photo forum or, digital pianters forum about how to owerpaint a person on a picture, make it looks like never appear in real life.

I'm sorry guys, but as a photographer it is irritate me when people talking about how to fix all mistakes in PS or other computer softwers. I know this is the easy way because need no knowledge about photography, but this is not photography anymore! This is "computergraphy".

And please don't even mention Ansel Adams as an exuse for all this!

Hi Attila,

Retouching facial lines, etc has nothing to do with "mistakes" or getting it right in camera.

Hi Jim,

Photographers did use good lighting technics, and makeup, and portrait lenses to eliminate facial lines and skin inperfections.

Today's photographers use the sharpest lenses for portrait which shows the smallest skin problems, than use PS bluring tool, to eliminate them. Make no sense! Use portrait lens, and don't set the highest sharpnes on a camera during the photoshoot.

There was photography before PS! But today, looks like no one can do picture without it.

I believe the retouch is OK until it is not create a different person, from the subject. This women is a 40+ but after the retouch she became a teenager.
I believe, any kind of retouch should be only cover temporari skin inperfections, like cuts or pimples, or bug bites, etc. Everything else which is permanent on the subject face should be remain on a photo.

Some photographers employed makeup artists, you are correct. Many still do, but they still do retouching after the fact.

If you think all those wonderful portraits from the film days are simply a result of a softer lens, good makeup and lighting skills, you are mistaken.

Retouchers have been around just about as long as photography has.