Before and After

Can you explain a litte more?
The lighting looks okay in the first, I mean, it's not perfect, but it's nice and soft. 

Ok, so you could achieve photo #2 results if only you would have lit properly?
Would love to see a diagram of the current lighting situation, and how it could have been changed to make it "fix" the pores.  (Very excited to learn since I can only get that smooth look with post processing....) 

Mike is making some good points about lighting, but I just want to point out that realistically different lighting isn't going to make the image look as great as his photoshopped version.
It will help though.

Think about a golf ball.  It is round and has a pitted surface.  In a dark room if you take a flashlight and light the ball from the side the shadows will throw the pits into a sharp relief.  They will be obvious.  However if you add another light at a different angle it is going to reduce the shadows and make the ball look smoother.  Lighting it completely from the front or using flat lighting will make the pits in the front almost disappear.  This is called "glamour lighting" and is used on women for this purpose. 

I hope that analogy helps.  And for the record I like to glamour light my subjects in boudoir photography, but I almost always touch up the skin anyway.  I, like Mike, don't like a plastic look, so I am light handed.

Thanks, sorry, no, I don't.

If I'm applying a make over, I do all.
Some only need minor, such as healing/spot removal, or, a bad make up job under the eyes which I often come across.

"Keeping in mind the transitions need to be smooth"  explanation please.   

Opacity is around 24-35 pressure when working in removal or brushing/toning back. Keeping in mind the lightness or normal using the clone tool then healing to bring in texture.

The make over is done at 100% then there is a reduction in opacity, when I am happy with what was done, I click luminosity. I then flatten image, duplicate, and do Mike's Special Sauce to finish it off.