You are about to send product files to a studio you have not met, in a country you are not in, with no client names on its website. That is a reasonable thing to be careful about. This page is what we would want to read if we were you.
It is quicker if we say it first.
If any of those is disqualifying, it is disqualifying today rather than after a test batch, and that is better for both of us. If they are not, the rest of this page is how to check the things that can be checked.
The work is white-label by policy. Our name does not appear on a client's delivery; their name does not appear on our site. Those are the same rule read from two ends.
It is worth being direct about what that means for you. The rule that stops us naming them is the rule that stops the next studio naming you. A supplier who shows you a wall of client logos is telling you exactly what they would do with yours.
So the absence is a constraint we chose, and it costs us. It is also the only part of our proof we cannot hand over, which is why everything else on this page is designed to be checkable without it.
| Claim | How to check it yourself |
|---|---|
| Consistency across a batch is measured, not asserted | The consistency standard publishes the figures for a finished set — 24 garments across 7 material problems, every frame 2600 × 3400 pixels, background brightness 255 with no variance — and the ImageMagick command to reproduce the measurement. Run it on our set, or on a batch you already paid someone else for |
| Rates are published, not quoted on request | The rate card is on the site with volume tiers. Nothing is behind a form |
| We are not the cheapest and say so | The price index lists named competitors sorted by price, with a source link for every figure, and we are in the table rather than above it |
| We say where we are the wrong choice | Choosing a retouching partner names the four kinds of supplier and the cases where we are not one of them |
| The no-AI position is specific, not a slogan | No generative AI sets out the position operation by operation, and what you can put in a contract to hold us to it |
| The studio exists where it says it does | Our Clutch profile carries the registered studio location and company details independently of this website |
None of those requires you to believe us. That is the point of publishing them.
Everything above is paper. The work is not.
Send five frames from a real job — ideally the four that break suppliers: something translucent, something pale on a pale background, something with fine edges, and one where a real contact shadow has to survive. They come back free, within six hours, with no commitment and no payment detail taken.
Judge at 100 per cent rather than at thumbnail size, and look across the set rather than at the best frame. If it is not good, you have lost an afternoon and learned something about us at no cost. If you want to run the same test against a supplier you already use, the retouching audit measures finished frames you have already paid for.
The detail your legal team will ask for is set out on the security and confidentiality page, including how files move and who can reach them.
In Bangladesh. We state it on the site rather than behind a Western front address, because you will find out anyway and a supplier who hides it has told you something about how they handle other questions.
58 retouchers work across three shifts, six days a week, closed Sunday, which is how a London or New York working day always overlaps a live shift rather than a mailbox. Sustained capacity is 1,800+ images a day and up to 40,000 a month.
For an emergency or an unusually large drop, some retouching may be done by contracted partner studios. We would rather write that down than let you discover it. The part that does not move: every image passes our own in-house QC before it reaches you, and the partner studios work under written confidentiality terms equivalent to the ones we signed with you.
These are the questions that separate suppliers. Ask them of us and of whoever else you are considering, and compare the answers rather than the brochures.
A supplier who answers all seven without hedging is worth a test. One who answers five is worth a smaller one.
We would rather name this than let it sit unsaid.
We do not have reviews. We do not have years. We do not have logos we are allowed to show. Those are earned over time and we are early.
What we do have is a rate card you can read without a call, a measurement anyone can reproduce, a written position on AI that can go in a contract, a stated location, and a free test on your own files that costs you nothing but the sending. For a first batch, that is the honest set, and we would rather you judge it than a sentence about passion.
Yes. Retouch Atelier was established in 2026. The team behind it has more than eleven years in commercial retouching, but the company itself is new and we do not imply otherwise. If a long corporate track record is what you need, we are not the right supplier and you should say so early.
Because the work is white-label by policy. Our name does not appear on a client's delivery, and their name does not appear on our site. The same rule that stops us naming them is the rule that stops the next studio naming you. It is a deliberate constraint, not an absence of work.
Not yet. There is a Clutch profile and it carries no reviews at the time of writing. We would rather say that plainly than have you discover it. The way to judge the work before anyone has reviewed it is the free test on your own frames.
Two ways. First, the consistency standard page publishes the measured figures for a finished set — 24 garments, every frame 2600 by 3400 pixels, background brightness 255 with no variance — together with the ImageMagick command to reproduce the measurement on any batch, including ours. Second, send five of your own frames: they come back free within six hours and you judge the result rather than the claim.
In Bangladesh, stated openly on the site rather than obscured behind a Western front address. For an emergency or an unusually large drop some retouching may be done by contracted partner studios under written confidentiality terms, and every image still passes our own in-house QC before it is delivered.
An NDA as standard, and the client's own DPA. Standard Contractual Clauses or the UK Addendum where the transfer requires them. Client images are never used to train any model, and files are deleted on the agreed date.
Who physically touches the files and where they sit; whether the supplier will sign your DPA rather than offer their own terms; whether your images can be used for training; what happens to the files afterwards and when; whether the people who did your test are the people who will do the work; and what the price is in writing before the first batch rather than after it.
We'll tell you which technique it needs — and show you the edge quality.