Thu 23-Feb-12 02:42 AM | edited Thu 23-Feb-12 02:53 AM by MelT
I am not too sure about bigger being easier Rick and I rarely disagree with you. Of course it depends on the ultimate size for the end result. I found playing around with the 16ish x 24ish native size sample file it was rather tough going because there is so much detail to be retouch. Think of fine facial hair that is VERY apparant in the shot above when viewed at full resolution. Even the detail in hands may need some work as well. Haven't seen adwork yet that celebrates the fine facial hair that may be on a woman .
Yes...medium format shooters need to deal with this but then again, how many photographers doing ad work, etc are actually doing their own processing? I would think instead they are simply turning over the files to the graphic artist to deal with. A professional graphic artist should have better skills doing this type of work with the photographer (or creative director) giving guidance what he/she wants.
I would think if you are at that level, a photographer would have someone on his/her staff to deal with the processing just like many years ago, we had a woman retouch negatives in the studio I worked for and the owner had me deal with the darkroom work but of course, he would approve or disapprove the final results or have me do minor tweaks.
I know if I was at that level of photography, I would have someone on staff to deal with the processing or outsource it to a graphic artist that I have developed a close relationship with who eventually learns my style, etc. Then again, I am not at the level so I am left to deal with these files with an overabundance of detail myself .