The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at www.theonlinephotographer.com!

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Creating Beauty

I can't speak to the underlying company, product, organization or campaign, but this certainly is an eye-opening little mini-film (runs less than a minute).

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON thanks to Stanco

7 Comments:

Blogger Yvonne said...

This is great. It was an eyeopener for me years ago when I worked for a women's mag to go on a fashion shoot to see this kind of transformation. I was rather taken aback when this plain girl with bad skin walked in - she was the model? A couple of hours of hair and makeup, and, sure enough, she looked the part.

8:18 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

As a retoucher, this comes as no suprize to me. The level of alteration some beauty mags request is staggering.

I don't do any retouching work for mags, mostly portrature work and when such edits shown in the video are requested, I try to explain to my clients that it would be more effective to enhance the person's beauty/character rather than superficially create it. Most of the time, they agree.

I didn't reconize the software they were using in post. Anyone know what program that was?

10:14 AM  
Blogger MJFerron said...

Excellent clip. Reminds me of what I try to do to my landscapes in Photoshop. :0 Now I feel guilty.

11:07 AM  
Blogger gravitas et nugalis said...

In my commercial life I used to do a lot of photography for Bausch & Lomb , Ray-Ban and Contact Lens Divs. so none of this comes as a surprise to me.

Interesting that you used the term "eye-opener", because everyone has a "lazy" eye. Needless to say, this doesn't wash in the B&L world so a standard retouch was to copy the non-lazy eye, flip it, and paste over the lazy eye (just like in the film if you look closely) Now that's an "eye-opener".

But once again, me thinks you are more interested in the notion of "No wonder our perception of beauty is distorted" than the specifics of makeup transformations.

On a nature photography forum, I am known (and in most quarters despised) for my views on the velvia-ization (analoge or digitial) of nature. It seems, that even amongst those (nature photographers) who proclaim to revere the natural world, nature just isn't good enough unless it's amped-up to 11 on the saturation/drama meter. And, of course, if it's an amped-up nature icon (or iconic-type subject), so much the better.

Hence the notion of eco-porn and its deleterious effects on conservation and preservation. But that's a whole other subject.

2:01 PM  
Blogger Svein-Frode said...

Very Nice! I'm doing increasingly more formal portraits and I have clients demand this sort of thing all the time... I refuse to do it, except for removing some temporary skin issues and bad makeup.

3:30 PM  
Blogger Paul said...

Bizarre. I posted this on a local photog board, was branded a communist by the resident clique and practically chased down with torches and pitchforks.

Though not my preference, I wouldn't worry too much about the velvia-ization of landscapes in this same vein. It's not like you're giving trees an eating disorder.

9:51 PM  
Blogger stevierose said...

Very interesting film. I have made it a regular habit to sit down with my daughter and go over the cover shots on the women's magazines she reads showing her all of the obvious manipulation that has been done in PS. Now she shows the same things to her friends.

Katrin Eismann, the master retoucher and retouching teacher, told me that she regularly goes to high schools in NYC and shows the girls exactly what is done to these fashion photographs so that they can realize that they do not represent reality. I think it is her effort to partially undo what her professional skills may have contributed to self esteem issues in girls.

10:02 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home