NSFW : Photoshopped women - their faces and bits
Poll: NSFW : Photoshopped women - their faces and bits
Total Members Polled: 114
Discussion
I purchased a magazine recently, first one in years. I was waiting for a woman you see, became bored, picked up then purchased on a whim. FHM. Helen Flanagan on the cover.
I watch very little TV but did get roped into celebrity jungle this year, I can't rember which soap Helen is in but viewed her for the first time on the aforementioned programme.
Pretty girl. Stunning eyes. Pendulously cerebellum-exploding breasticulators! But most importantly, she had the girl next door look in the jungle, as her makeup encourage weren't there to paint her face every morning.
I could barely recognise the front of her bonce in FHM. Other parts of her body, yes. But as I turned the pages with one hand, I was reminded for the one hundred and umpteenth time, how much I dislike airbrushing, over-makeup and computer enhancement to the extreme.
Now this isn't about Helen, whether you like her or think her attractive or desirable (or not) but if I could choose between never seeing a dermatologicaly flawless face in a magazine again, or the real woman just as she was, I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat.
If you are going to voice an opinion, perhaps hint whether you are in your 20's, 30's, 40's etc, for perspective. Thirties for me, but I've always felt this way. I simply prefer the un-made-up girl next door look.
Not a new conundrum by any stretch, but what do the PHers of 2013 think?
I watch very little TV but did get roped into celebrity jungle this year, I can't rember which soap Helen is in but viewed her for the first time on the aforementioned programme.
Pretty girl. Stunning eyes. Pendulously cerebellum-exploding breasticulators! But most importantly, she had the girl next door look in the jungle, as her makeup encourage weren't there to paint her face every morning.
I could barely recognise the front of her bonce in FHM. Other parts of her body, yes. But as I turned the pages with one hand, I was reminded for the one hundred and umpteenth time, how much I dislike airbrushing, over-makeup and computer enhancement to the extreme.
Now this isn't about Helen, whether you like her or think her attractive or desirable (or not) but if I could choose between never seeing a dermatologicaly flawless face in a magazine again, or the real woman just as she was, I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat.
If you are going to voice an opinion, perhaps hint whether you are in your 20's, 30's, 40's etc, for perspective. Thirties for me, but I've always felt this way. I simply prefer the un-made-up girl next door look.
Not a new conundrum by any stretch, but what do the PHers of 2013 think?
There's a bit of slap to cover up a blackhead, then there's replacing every square inch of skin with the skin tone equivalent of polyfilla; the end result is frankenstein barbie. The magazines have always been a bit airbrush-happy, but it's got ridiculous in the last decade. I passed my 30th some time ago.
hidetheelephants said:
There's a bit of slap to cover up a blackhead, then there's replacing every square inch of skin with the skin tone equivalent of polyfilla; the end result is frankenstein barbie. The magazines have always been a bit airbrush-happy, but it's got ridiculous in the last decade.
This, exactly. Bright red zit, hide it, fair play. This (SFW) on the other hand... urgh.Does some really unhealthy things to both sexes especially when young if they start thinking that there are real people who actually look like that.
BlackVanDyke said:
This, exactly. Bright red zit, hide it, fair play. This (SFW) on the other hand... urgh.
Does some really unhealthy things to both sexes especially when young if they start thinking that there are real people who actually look like that.
Does some really unhealthy things to both sexes especially when young if they start thinking that there are real people who actually look like that.
They give her an extra vertebrae, and presto! She looks like a giraffe.
BlackVanDyke said:
hidetheelephants said:
There's a bit of slap to cover up a blackhead, then there's replacing every square inch of skin with the skin tone equivalent of polyfilla; the end result is frankenstein barbie. The magazines have always been a bit airbrush-happy, but it's got ridiculous in the last decade.
This, exactly. Bright red zit, hide it, fair play. This (SFW) on the other hand... urgh.Does some really unhealthy things to both sexes especially when young if they start thinking that there are real people who actually look like that.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Maybe, given time, but I'm not sure I see the point.We used to do a lot of work for Olay and Head & Shoulders and generally there was a quite a bit of clean up involved but never to that degree.
I know that's an excercise to show what is capable but it seems equally as much of a showcase on what the software can do as what the artist can do.
I'll look at the results in a different way of course, not so much judging the difference between the before and after, but judging the quality of the after in isolation.
After all, that's what my client will be paying for ultimately.
I don't mind a bit of touching up to make them look at their best, but when the first thing you notice is the weird 2D effect that too much photoshopping gives to skin it just sticks out like a sore thumb but I guess it's what people like looking at?
eg
Just looks really flat to my eyes.
Or when it goes really bad and doesn't look like the original person:
eg
Just looks really flat to my eyes.
Or when it goes really bad and doesn't look like the original person:
BlackVanDyke said:
This, exactly. Bright red zit, hide it, fair play. This (SFW) on the other hand... urgh.
Works in reverse too....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpXInB9aV7A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7nqZ-k3qQo
RobbieKB said:
Making people thinner and/or more shapely: no.
Doing what a top make-up artist can do, just on PS: yes.
I'm fairly sure I could have a hard time defending these views, but that's just my surface opinion on the subject.
I'm of two minds as well. If I could tick two boxes, it would be the "not fussed" and also "no extreme brushing" boxes.Doing what a top make-up artist can do, just on PS: yes.
I'm fairly sure I could have a hard time defending these views, but that's just my surface opinion on the subject.
If I could pick one, it would be no brushing.
I wonder when things will change...
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff