Re-TOUCHING
Personally, I hate the word "retouching." In the old days (six years ago, Before Digital) they used to take the final print and cover over imperfections with a grease pencil so that, when the reproductions were made (which they did by re-photographing the print and making a negative from that), problems wouldn't show. But the problem is retouching was about as subtle as a pit bull -- the technique didn't just correct and compensate, it obliterated and destroyed. Portraits particularly tended to look plastic and flat and featureless.
Enter Photoshop.
The side-by-side examples below will give you an idea of how dramatically different, but undetectably altered, today's photos can be. I prefer to call it "ENhancing" because the Photoshop versions (on the right in each case) don't just correct, they actually improve what the camera saw: balancing tones, erasing shadows, bringing out detail and color range that would otherwise be lost.
Corporate Portrait, above, required very little skin correction as the subject had never spent much time in the sun. But his paleness caused the camera to overcompensate, exaggerating the natural creases under his eyes...and making his eyes appear to recede. Restoring his actual skin tone brought back the more youthful quality he exudes in person...and allows the viewer to appreciate the power of those piercing eyes.
Street Scene: Fifth Avenue in Spring. This image required that the two distracting shadows and the street sign edge on the picture within the picture disappear. It was also "painted" with a little sunshine to perk up the tree, the building facade on the left and a few of the strollers.
Fashion/Beauty: this image of playwright PJ Gibson was shot under less than optimal condictions and was seriously over-saturated. Restoring the beauty underneath took only a few adjustments in Photoshop. Then it was selectively darkened for emphasis, hair was filled in a few areas and the whole thing was sharpened. Notice the difference in her hair and jewelry, not to mention her eyes.
Architecture: the panel above is a relief sculpture on one of the Rockefeller Center buildings across from St. Patrick's Cathedral - the warrior figure being literally larger than life. It's backlighted, but time and exposure to the elements made it pretty drab and easy to ignore. Photoshop restored it to something very near its original vibrancy.
The Tribute in Light, 2006: The sight from my terrace took my breath away. But it was frustrating to capture because photographing under low light conditions is always tough. And, in this case, the light source is almost exactly four miles away. The camera did its best, but Photshop allowed me to coax out all the subtlety of the interplay of light in the clouds. Finally, it was re-cropped to eliminate glaring lights and straightened. The image on the right is exactly what my eyes saw.