Pop The Highlights With Gry Garness

We have featured a tutorial on here from makeup artist turned photographer/retoucher Gry Garness before. This one is a tutorial on how to pop the highlights and create shimmer in the skin. Without a doubt Gry is a master at her craft.

Now this isn't a full retouching tutorial, this is a final step in Gry's post production process. She mentions in the video that if the skin retouching isn't absolutely perfect on the layers below that this effect will only exaggerate the flaws. Many people argue that this amount of retouching is false advertising, and I can see their argument, but Gry must be doing something right judging by her list of clients which include Sony, Universal, and Ben Sherman, just to name a few. She sells a two disc DVD series full of beauty retouching tutorials on her website. She also offers Photoshop training for people living in (or willing to travel to) London or Spain.

Log in to post comments


Kevin Lee's picture

her skin is so soft O_O has like no detail lol

Plastic head floating on a plastic neck

The original, to me, looked much better. I don't get advertising.

I agree with you.

Thats because beauty and cosmetic clients like their shots to look like this. If you can think out of the box on this and take the tuto as a method of working, then there is nothing to stop you from applying her techniques to your own image signature style or preferences. It can be applied to metal, wood plastic anything that needs to have a sheen created on it.
By the way i prefer her approach a million times to that on the portrait professional software that you can see at the top of the thread!

The plugin software on the market cannot create anything remotely good...

Ruben Hamelink's picture

"Many people argue that this amount of retouching is false advertising, and I can see their argument, but Gry must be doing something right judging by her list of clients..." 

The fact that shes doing exactly what the adversting departments of those companies ask for (doing something right) has nothing to do with wether it is or isnt false advertising. In my opinion it is, this is going too far though.

Well I think she is doing an incredible work.
Now if she was an artist sharing her vision, it won't be an issue with anyone, but if company use her work to advertise something I don't think she is guilty of anything.
But more generally I don't believe someone could be naive enough to believe that because one as customers  one make good things, like fast-foods restaurants got tons of customers that doesn't means that they are making extraordinary good food. It means they answer the need of their clients.

disaster...no skin texture whatsoever...I understand that this is the industry standard these days but I would gladly see it die off like a pair of stonewashed jeans...

Marios Forsos's picture

Some people should simply NOT be educators or trainers!  The most boring, disjointed, useless presentation of a technique ever!

Whether you like the results or not, the technique is awesome. I really like the way she presents her tutorials. It's calm, concise and full of tips. Nice one!

I think there are bad methods to retouching even though some people say "the best way is the method you're comfortable with!" The reason I think this is because the software "Adobe Photoshop" is made from computer code; it is not a food that tastes different according to who uses it. These are ones and zeros. The desired outcome you deem as good or the image you want to create is subjective but the technique should be treated in the same way as a carpenter and his tools--use the correct tools for the job. Gry's technique is logical and good.

If you have looked at any of her images and said "the originals looked better" then you are not going to get much from this. Why? Her instructions are not about pleasing your illogical brain, they are about teaching a set of tools or a tool (if you consider photoshop to be one tool.) If you are genuinely interested in learning photoshop you won't care about what works of hers looks "good" or "bad", instead you will care about what makes you better with the program. Such people remind me of those who say "wow dis tutorial is cool but I wuz distracted by the lady hehehehe ;)"

I like her style but for the sake of discussion let's assume we all find it disgusting. If she creates disgusting image after disgusting image but we learn a lot from how she creates these images, does it really matter what they look like? Conversely, does it help us if someone creates nice looking images that are created in a technically weak way and teach us nothing? Like I said, I do like her style but for those that don't, it doesn't really matter.

If you are not able to understand how TERRIBLE youtube is at displaying images, again perhaps these tutorials are too advanced for you. She teaches methods that can be used for LARGE prints, not for people that think lossy flash youtube crap is important. I do think her website could do with a bit of a revamp and I think some links to actual images in the youtube description might help; however, people are always going to do their very best at trying to impress me with their stupidity so perhaps it's not worth the time. Unfortunately I feel like you have to be somewhat competent with the program to even understand how good her technique is, so it sucks to see these comments from such ignoramuses.

If I become good at photography, I will happily pay gry to edit my images and I will also pay for lessons from her. Unfortunately I do not have the funds at the moment.

Finally, I've left this comment until last because I hate when people say how attractive I am... She has a nice voice that is easy to listen to and she explains herself well without "um's" and "argh's." Unlike many americans, she doesn't yell when trying to teach you something.

There are a lot of comments from people here about how plastic the skin looks in this tutorial. What all the people commenting are not even taking into consideration is that this is a YouTube video and therefore is not going to display the true detail of the retouching and it will instead appear to lack detail or look "plastic". (does this really need to be pointed out to "photographers" watching a youtube video?). I own the DVD tutorial and I can tell you the skin texture is retained, also this particular technique uses the most highly retouched effect in the entire training dvd and is meant for the most retouched look, she even explains this clearly in the DVD. This training is not for novice retouchers and it's even quite advanced for those of intermediate level. This DVD is the best training I've come across and my skills have vastly improved as a result. I highly recommend anything Gry Garness has authored. The comment from Marios Forsos below is completly ignorant. If he actually viewed the entire training DVD in it's complete context he would retract that statement I'm sure. Bear in mind this training DVD is for beauty/glamour retouching mostly aimed at commercial and magazine clients and is suited for that end result.