|
We became instant experts after our first portrait. All you have to do is try it once and you get the idea. Then it becomes a matter of discovering all the sliders and trying out the more advanced tools. The built-in presets are a good introduction to the variety of effects you can achieve, particularly in face sculpting. And the built-in balloon help explains any terms or labels that aren't immediately apparent. It is, in short, a very nice working environment regardless of your skill level.
We tried a number of images:
- Some friends and family spanning the ages: an older woman, a younger one, an adolescent girl and a child
- Amateur shots of people we didn't know
- A few female models
- Some actors
- A standard test shot of three models
We can't show you all of our tests since we didn't get releases, but we can tell you about them. And we've used the Musician sample image to demonstrate how the program works. The free trial version of the program lets you duplicate our efforts for yourself, fortunately.
Presets. The built-in presets demonstrate the program's wide range. You can save your own, too.
As soon as we opened each portrait, ProtraitPro asked us to identify the gender.
We marked the five key spots and Protrait Pro displayed each in turn. We did have to edit them on most of the portraits. A few times, we didn't take the time. But it can't hurt.
But with all the face recognition going on in digital cameras these days, we wondered if we should really have to point out the eyes, nose and mouth?
Face recognition is pretty crude really. It looks for the triangle of eyes and nose. Feature recognition, on the other hand, is a bit more refined, marking off the eyes, nose and mouth, really, rather than a head. The more precise you are with those definitions, the better. So you do it manually.
Sliders. Click a button to see the sliders.
Once we'd marked off the facial features, version 5 of the program connected to the Anthropics server before displaying the correction. Version 6 handled it without the delay -- a big improvement.
Smiles, we're happy to report, presented no problem. That's what really makes a face beautiful. And three-quarter views were legal, too. But we observed a few other things that surprised us.
Sliders Revealed. Make a change by moving the slider left to minimize the effect or right to maximize it.
On the older woman's portrait, we were immediately unhappy with the results. With the slider set to 100 to remove skin imperfections completely, the effect looked more like aggressive noise removal software, completely eliminating rather than softening them. In fact, all skin texture was lost. When we used the Subtle preset, imperfections were set to just 27, which was plenty. The Remove Spots preset set all the Skin sliders to zero with Spot sensitivity at 9, which was even more acceptable.
She was wearing glasses and looking downward, so any eye correction at all would have been a distortion. We simply turned off all eye corrections to get around that problem.
So while the default settings produced unacceptable results, the program's versatility provided just the touch we needed to improve the picture.
We had the same experience with the younger woman's portrait, so we quickly went to the adolescent girl whose skin was not at all wrinkled, of course.
But again, we were surprised. We could see that the software had brightened and sharpened her eyes (which she'd tried to do herself with a heavy application of mascara). Her teeth had also been whitened. She was smiling in the picture and the program remodeled the skin folds around her smile so there were no folds at all.
But it got interesting when we clicked on the More Controls buttons, grabbed the sliders and ran them back and forth over the whole range to see exactly what they were up to.
Face Sculpt, for example, offered these extra sliders:
- Head: This control widened the top of her head above the eyes (although we've seen it make foreheads taller, too). Her head was butted against her father's, though, and when the program widened it, it distorted his hairline.
- Jaw: The Jaw control raised her jaw, making it smaller. At 100, it was really much too small.
- Nose: This control moved the tip of her nose down (although we've seen it move a nose in or out on a three-quarter profile).
- Eyes: This control actually bundles several options: Eye Widening (which tries to open the eyelids), Left Eye, Right Eye (enlarging them) and Eyebrow Shape (which raises or lowers the eyebrows and itself includes options to move the Left or Right Eyebrow independently).
- Mouth Shape: This option raised or lowered the lower lip on our girl. But it, too, has a few options: Upper Lip (expand or contract), Lower Lip (expand or contract), Expression (pinching or spreading the mouth) and Blur Lip Line. There are a few more mouth control further down, though, including Teeth Whiten, Teeth Area, Lip Saturation, Lip Darken, Lip Contrast and Lip Hue.
After goofing around a while, we were glad to click the Default button to restore the program's attempt to flatter our model. But again, we really didn't like what we saw. It's no secret the look she was going for though, and Portrait Pro had a couple of presets for it: Glamour - more and Glamour - some. Both changed her lower lip to cover the bottom line of her top teeth.
With two faces in that image, we simply used the Another Face In This Photo button to work on the second one, while retaining the edits on the first.
OK, how about the child?
Showing unusual restraint, the program seemed to make no change at all to the child's face. Good move.
But we were wrong. It actually narrowed the child's face. When we flipped back and forth between the two versions on different layers in a Photoshop document, we preferred the original over the modified version. It's a child, after all. A broad face is the norm. Perhaps the program should ask the age of the subject as well as its sex.
We know all of the people in those portraits. And we found any face sculpting disturbing, almost as if they had been shot with a wide angle lens. Your mind accommodates the distortion but you know it isn't real. If you don't know these people (say you're the great grandchild looking through the family album), you're getting the wrong impression.
So for our next test, we tried another young woman, but someone we had just met. This near stranger seemed improved. The rosy cheeks were smoothed away (we only had to spot out a pimple when we turned down the default skin revision), her lips reddened a bit, her eyes made more dominant -- all the distractions were removed and she looked lovely.
It's no secret people don't like pictures of themselves any more than they like hearing recordings of their voice. It's certainly disorienting to see yourself in a print compared to that reverse image in the mirror that you've grown fond of. But smoothing out the skin, brightening the eyes, whitening the teeth are a flattery we can all appreciate.
Who better to flatter than Abraham Lincoln, renowned for his unattractiveness. And being long gone, no need for a model release either.
Honest Abe. Roll your mouse over Abe's original portrait to see what Portrait Pro thinks of him. JavaScript required.
We found a portrait of him and ran it through Portrait Pro in just a few seconds. We were half expecting him to switch parties and come out as John Edwards but apart from the softening of his skin texture, it didn't dare to fool around much. Honest Abe, indeed. Or just the lack of color information, perhaps.
We thought we'd give Jimmy Durante a shot at a makeover. The proboscis remained recognizable, the mouth became refined but there was simply no improving those eyes.
Next, Greta Garbo.
The audacity of the program! It wants to know if even Greta is male or female! We straighten it out right away.
Interestingly enough, her nose was a little out of joint, a bit to right. Portrait Professional didn't touch that. But it did give her a slightly stronger jaw, unfortunately. Someone should explain to it that you can't improve on perfection.
But that raised an interesting point. Durante and Garbo were both publicity stills, the kind of prints that would have already been retouched. And Portrait Pro really had little to add. Perhaps there should be a movie star check box, too.
If you believe the notion that beauty is a reduction of variety toward some mathematically describable ideal, you have plenty of company. The alternate conception that it doesn't exist except in variety, of which movement is an important component, is a little harder to grasp for most Sunday philosophers but should keep you up late at night.
Musicians. Roll your mouse over the original portrait to see what Portrait Pro thinks of all three ladies. JavaScript required.
One of the more amusing examples of the mathematical reduction is The Golden Number site (http://goldennumber.net/face.htm) where everything is reduced to Phi (1.618933...). "The human face abounds with examples of the Golden Section or Divine Proportion," the site contends before scribing face after face to prove it.
And in the same league is a Bavarian University of Regensburg research project (http://www.beautycheck.de/) that assembled ideal male and female portraits by averaging a number of real ones (much as if you had a 64 mothers and 32 fathers). The study's conclusion is rather sobering: "To sum up, our study shows clearly that the most attractive faces do not exist in reality, they are morphs, i.e. computer-created compound images you would never find in everyday live. These virtual faces showed characteristics that are unreachable for average human beings."
Skin. The original (left) with default skin imperfection setting of 100 (middle) and Subtle preset of 27 (right). Note also the color shift. We're investigating this issue. Portrait Pro does retain ICC profiles assigned to an image but our Adobe RGB (1998) image didn't survive unscathed.
The German study insisted that the ideal tended toward "babyfaceness," which it defined as "large, round eyes, a large domed forehead and small, short nose and chin." Respondents simply preferred a baby face. "Only very few (9.5 percent) of the test subjects found the original adult faces most attractive. Most of the test subjects (90.5 percent) preferred faces with 10-50 percent the proportions of the babyface scheme."
It should be noted that Portrait Pro's defaults and presets are not based on any of these theories, but on their own research. Portrait Pro was trained by being told which of hundreds of "well-lit photographs of beautiful and not so beautiful people" were attractive and which were not.
It's also worth repeating that this controversial aspect of the program concerns the face sculpting capability. And that certainly has its roots in the portrait painting of the past even as its branches sway in the winds of current research.
You can just turn that off if it bothers you. We found it as annoying as lens distortion for portraits of people we know, but flattering for strangers. But we didn't dare try it on ourselves. We might have bought the thing.
Portrait Pro isn't really about beauty at all, but simple, time-tested flattery. It does simple retouching as well as more dramatic reshaping toward an ideal you may or may not find so ideal. That can't help but interest any professional interested in making a sale. Considering how easy the program is to use, there's nothing to fear, either.
Many of these edits are nothing more than time-honored retouching practice. The sharpened eyes, the whitened teeth and eyes, the more saturated lips, blemish removal are all standard effects, very nicely implemented. Automating things like that is a blessing. They're often very time consuming to do by hand.
But the greater achievement, it seems, is the program's ability to distinguish facial features like skin defects from pores and small wrinkles from the larger ones that define character. Giving you control over these categories of facial features -- as well as being able to store your settings as a preset -- means you can define your own level of flattery.
Portrait retouching software really never looked so good.
|