Comments on: Sex, Lies and Photoshop

By: Big Ron

Big Ron — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 07:20:35 +0000

Been reading some of the comments here and found them the usual oh we only use it a little,(photoshoping) bullshit, You individuals from photographers to designers to photo editors and media in general are propoganist for an elite.
Big corporations need your skills to sell a lie the lie is that the product they sell is what they the consumer want by design you furnish ideals which nobody wants from TV to magazine advertising to billboards you push a message of you can never have enough greed is good and that perfection can be achieved all advertizers are liars and murders!

By: Big Ron

Big Ron — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:57:34 +0000

As a father of two girls I am worried that they will be manipulated by the media into thinking that they need to aspire to these cultural icons. The media and photographers are to blame editors and big business structures push a unrealistic aspirational idea into the young minds of pre-teenagers and hope it sticks that the models being depicted are to aspire to so pushing a lie to maintain a state of mind in female population that they cannot achieve without the media corporations idea of beauty. Big business thrive when people are not challenging them how many Coke adverts have people with size 12+ people in them or Macdonald’s advertising need i go on as Bill Hicks said if you work in advertising go Kill your self.

By: shaun mcmanus

shaun mcmanus — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:42:23 +0000

it is a very sad state of affairs with all the photoshop going on sadly we have to also pratice photoshop on a lot of the models that come to our studio

By: Greg Scraper

Greg Scraper — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:15:43 +0000

I tend to feel that pictures shot like that in a studio situation don’t actually convey reality; that is to say, a 2D representation of a 3D object that is generally seen in motion gives a viewer more time to notice flaws that may or may not be emphasized by the camera, lighting situation, the model’s pose, the relative simplicity of the background, etc. What you get when you do that is a sort of hyper-reality, where a situation that was designed to be viewed for just a passing moment is drawn out and analyzed.

What photo retouching attempts to do is to correct that error. I agree that it can be taken to extremes by people who aren’t adept at photoshop (which I believe is a catagory that 90% of photoshop users fall into). But overall, it’s a coping mechanism for the inability of the photo to convey an accurate representation of reality. I don’t think anyone set out to make 14 year old girls have eating disorders. Besides, you think what’s done to people is bad? You should see what’s done with food.

Another way to try and reverse the effects of hyper-reality is to use natural outdoor lighting and a camera with a good lens and filter. But even with that, we’re still left with two dimensions trying to represent three.

By: Jake

Jake — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:37:03 +0000

I just saw a magazine on the rack yesterday at the store. Paula Deen was on the cover. She looked all of 30 years old. I think we’re going a bit too far…

By: David Airey

David Airey — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:44:50 +0000

The “big circle with a dot in the middle” is his brush cursor. ;) I think the tool being used at the time is the clone stamp tool, but don’t quote me on that.

By: Graeme

Graeme — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:26:34 +0000

Hello Dave,

It’s the tool the fella was using when he was ’slimmimg’ the girl. Big circle with a dot in the middle and he was using the outline of her to make her look ’slim’ I suppose.

Thanks Dave

By: David Airey

David Airey — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:33:53 +0000

Andrew, li,

My first davidairey.com-inspired wedding! What an honour. ;)

Rebecca,

That ‘untouched’ page at the back would have me interested alright.

Graeme,

You’ll have to be more specific there buddy.

By: Graeme

Graeme — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:29:43 +0000

Very interesting that. Can I ask what tool the guy is using in Photoshop?

Thank you

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:13:52 +0000

Very interesting and eye opening article. I never really thought about what goes into all those models pictures and frankly I’m alittle relieved.

How about a mandatory page in the back of all magazines that has a thumbnail of ALL of the ‘before photoshop’ pictures in the magazine. That would be the first page I would turn to. It’s interesting to see the before and after shots.
A warning label is laughable. It doesn’t work on cigarettes or guns and they are alot more dangerous than photoshopped photography. Face it, magazines are created to sell merchandise and make money and handsome, attractive models are part of the reason we all buy them.
A before page would let viewers see what a model really looks like and just how much photoshopping had to be done to achieve the look.