Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 28 Jul 2011 (Thursday) 14:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Photoshop has gone to far

 
huntersdad
Goldmember
4,483 posts
Likes: 99
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jul 29, 2011 07:32 |  #16

400dabuser wrote in post #12839334 (external link)
We have, just that we have standards. We don't want our kids minds manipulated into thinking that you have to be stick thin to get into modelling/Hollywood or "perfect" to do such things :lol:

I don't know that I would call Julia Roberts stick thin - I thin she is just healthy. Kinda like Jennfier Anniston. I also don't think that photo was really any different to any other picture of her used for advertising any other product.

I can appreciate what the UK is saying though. As the father of a daughter, as she grows, I'll teach her the same thing. And one of the best examples I can think of is actually from the UK - Kate Winslet. Neither overweight nor skinny, just nicely proportioned and very beautiful.


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
5D4 / 35 F2 / 50L / 85 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
umphotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,048 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1823
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jul 29, 2011 08:35 as a reply to  @ huntersdad's post |  #17

I think all legislative branches of all governments should stay the hell out of things like this. You cant legislate morality and you sure as hell are not going to change the fact that people want to look better in photographs with Photoshop. Do you honestly believe that women DONT KNOW that those are photoshoped images. Come on. Anyone with 1/4 of a brain knows that photos of actors are manipulated. No one associates that a product is going to make you look like Julia Roberts. They do associate that if its good enough for Julia Roberts than its probably good enough for themselves.

Everytime any government tries to do something like this, a blackmarket is created and usually thrives. Governments may think they are doing something positive, but in reality, their actions will not change human nature, especially with photography. People want to look good in a photograph. Photoshop is another way to accomplish that goal.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
david ­ lacey
Senior Member
968 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Colorado
     
Jul 29, 2011 08:47 as a reply to  @ umphotography's post |  #18

They pulled a form of advertising for being "misleading", that is pretty funny. That is the foundation of advertising and especially for beauty products.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrWho
Goldmember
1,162 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Aug 2009
Location: North of Baltimore, MD
     
Jul 29, 2011 14:19 |  #19

If they're going to photoshop it that much, why not just make a 3D render of the person? No point of even bothering with a camera if 95% of it is altered in photoshop. The celebs who have the "no unaltered images shall be released" might as well change it to "no images shall be released".


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wfarrell4
Goldmember
Avatar
2,551 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2011
Location: NJ
     
Jul 29, 2011 14:32 |  #20
bannedPermanent ban

Guns kill people and that Ticonderoga you used on your spelling test is the reason you failed it right?


Will: flickr (external link)
Canon EOS

Merry Christmas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,620 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 118
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jul 29, 2011 14:32 |  #21

I see nothing wrong here. It's advertising. They do whatever to sell.

I think the problem lies with education. It's like outlawing guns, violence on tv, nudity, bad lyrics in music, etc.. It's all dumb. If everyone was still living in the 60s (when they faked the moon landings) I could understand this. But, now the term used as a verb: "Photoshop" is being used in current movies (I just saw a preview where a woman refers to a man's body as being too perfect and calls it Photoshopped). People now know that nothing they see can be trusted as truth. It's a fact of the times.

If you don't want your kids to be dolts, then teach them better.

Stop legislating stupid crap - we don't need need laws for stuff like this.


Year of Night - 365 Night Project - check it out! (external link)

Follow me into the night.
Unique Night Photography - twilightscapes.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Jul 30, 2011 07:46 |  #22

DAMphyne wrote in post #12842158 (external link)
What does airbrushing have to do with politics?

I guess you didn't read the linked article?


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
35,603 posts
Gallery: 128 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4255
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 30, 2011 07:50 as a reply to  @ post 12842158 |  #23

It has nothing to do with politics so keep the politics on political boards not on POTN.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RichSoansPhotos
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Likes: 37
Joined Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
     
Jul 30, 2011 11:11 |  #24
bannedPermanent ban

huntersdad wrote in post #12842241 (external link)
I don't know that I would call Julia Roberts stick thin - I thin she is just healthy. Kinda like Jennfier Anniston. I also don't think that photo was really any different to any other picture of her used for advertising any other product.

I can appreciate what the UK is saying though. As the father of a daughter, as she grows, I'll teach her the same thing. And one of the best examples I can think of is actually from the UK - Kate Winslet. Neither overweight nor skinny, just nicely proportioned and very beautiful.

I'm not on about Julia Roberts, in general most models still are/used to be stick thin i.e. skeletal which imo is not healthy. Most if not all Hollywood actresses are generally healthy. It may have to do with parts that don't want to be seen on adverts trying to market make-up in general. We all do have the odd blemishes. But the point is that the ASA are making, is that the make-up industry are using airbrushing techniques to sell items that wouldn't necessarily be true in real life. Females do sometimes suffer from complexes that they are not "perfect"

I agree with that Kate Winslet is has the right proportions, but she was airbrushed in a different manner years ago to make her look thinner. Which could of made a few females go on an extreme diet which can often lead to Bulimia or anorexia




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,727 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Jul 30, 2011 11:16 |  #25

Not this again...


NYC Wedding Photographer (external link) | Blog (external link) | facebook (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Jul 30, 2011 16:00 |  #26

airfrogusmc wrote in post #12847522 (external link)
It has nothing to do with politics...

You're kidding, right?

The effort to eliminate "overly perfected and unrealistic images" of women in adverts is led by Scottish Liberal Democrat and Member of Parliament Jo Swinson, who has been fighting the deification of unobtainable beauty since 2009


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DAMphyne
"the more I post, the less accurate..."
Avatar
2,154 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Northern Indiana, USA
     
Jul 30, 2011 16:10 |  #27

All this from a group of guys and gals that make it our dream to get perfect skin...in Photoshop.

It's not like this is the first time people have bitched about airbrushing. Playboy used to(Still Does) airbrush all the time, and I complained.


David
Digital set me free
"Welcome Seeker! Now, don't feel alone here in the New Age, because there's a seeker born every minute.";)
www.damphyne.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
D ­ Thompson
Goldmember
Avatar
3,827 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Georgetown, Ky
     
Jul 30, 2011 16:53 |  #28

david lacey wrote in post #12842514 (external link)
They pulled a form of advertising for being "misleading", that is pretty funny. That is the foundation of advertising and especially for beauty products.

It's not just beauty products. Has anybody actually seen this (external link) when they've opened one up? :lol: Mine are never that pretty.


Dennis
Canon 5D 20D
I have not yet begun to procrastinate!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Quad
Goldmember
Avatar
1,872 posts
Joined Nov 2005
     
Jul 31, 2011 09:12 as a reply to  @ D Thompson's post |  #29

I dream of the day that a software company selling focus software is sued (or banned or something) because they get caught using the aperture to control DOF and not using the software for their advert's before/after pics.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,601 views & 0 likes for this thread
Photoshop has gone to far
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Kerry Woo
713 guests, 332 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.