How much tweaking do super models in photoshop really go through?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Models Photoshop
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the extent of digital manipulation and airbrushing applied to photographs of supermodels before they are published. Participants explore the implications of such alterations on perceptions of beauty and reality, touching on both technical aspects and personal opinions regarding the authenticity of images in media.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express astonishment at the degree of alteration in supermodel photographs, noting significant differences between original and edited images.
  • Others argue that airbrushing detracts from the human appearance, suggesting that imperfections can enhance attractiveness.
  • Several participants challenge the authenticity of the before-and-after images, questioning whether they depict the same subject or if the alterations are exaggerated.
  • There are claims that professional editing techniques can drastically change a model's appearance, including altering body shapes and features.
  • Some participants discuss the role of makeup, lighting, and camera techniques in enhancing models' appearances during live events, suggesting that these methods can mitigate the need for heavy post-processing.
  • Concerns are raised about the unrealistic standards set by heavily edited images, with some participants advocating for more natural representations of beauty.
  • References are made to historical practices in media, such as using filters or gauze to soften appearances on camera.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of airbrushing and digital manipulation, with multiple competing views on its effects on beauty standards and authenticity in media.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the discussion is influenced by personal experiences and perceptions of beauty, which may vary widely. The technical aspects of photo editing and the subjective nature of beauty are acknowledged but not resolved.

Joel
Messages
100
Reaction score
1
You all know how perfect pictures of super-models are and how they get a little tweaked before going to print. But did you know how much tweaked?

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/bikini/index.html

Pretty nasty.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
:eek:
Although I probably wouldn't turn down the original either. :wink:
 
That's really astonishing. I flipped back and forth several times, the difference was so surprising.
 
indeed a very great link Joel...quite errr refreshing...a lot of guys will be disappointed though

marlon
 
Too bad I can't get airbrushed like that in real life. :-p
 
Evo said:
Too bad I can't get airbrushed like that in real life. :-p

you don't need that EVO, why being so humble ? There are other girls here that need a restoration, but certainly not you...And i am not trying to suck up here, it is the truth o:)

marlon
 
Evo said:
Too bad I can't get airbrushed like that in real life. :-p
I gladly offer my services in that capacity. I do not own an airbrush, though, so it will have to be finger paints.
 
marlon said:
And i am not trying to suck up here, it is the truth o:)

marlon
:biggrin: You are already tops in my book now Marlon, but flattery still works. :wink:
 
Evo said:
Too bad I can't get airbrushed like that in real life. :-p
I didn't know you were green. and your tongue looks like a frogs
 
  • #10
Personally, I'm turned off by airbrushing. The more airbrushing the less human they look. The less human they look the less sexy they are. In the second photo, the imperfections, the hair, the dimples, the extra fat in the natural version, all serve to make her look much sexier than the rendered, plastic, mannequin figure in the airbrushed version.
 
  • #11
Bogus - just look at the chin. Its not the same photo/whatever. Plus, who has skin like that? I've never met even a 50 year old sailor with skin that bad.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
russ_watters said:
Bogus - just look at the chin. Its not the same photo/whatever. Plus, who has skin like that? I've never met even a 50 year old sailor with skin that bad.
I'm pretty sure it's the same photograph, well more or less. In the airbrushed ones you can tell that the areas that are radically different are rather heavily worked on. It also seems that the "originals" have been made to enhance the texture too. I seriously doubt she would look like that in person.
 
  • #13
russ_watters said:
Bogus - just look at the chin. Its not the same photo/whatever. Plus, who has skin like that? I've never met even a 50 year old sailor with skin that bad.
I was thinking the same thing. I didn't notice on the chin, but if you look at the close up of her hip that has her hand in it, when you flip back and forth, the position of her hand moves slightly from side to side. Not just narrowed down or smoothed, but moved.

Though, it does still demonstrate how much you really can edit a photo to make someone look completely different. :biggrin:
 
  • #14
That is a bit far. One question though: If this was very common with supermodels, then how are they fixed on tv? Not that I know anything about this, but I do believe that the victoria secret, yearly?, tv event is live.
 
  • #15
Fix em up ahead of time lol.
 
  • #16
I'm sure a lot can be done with simple optics and good lenses. :biggrin:

But I agree this may be an extreme example, but it's still good to keep in mind before anyone starts that new skin-fat-wrinkle-age, all in one programme.

Here is another one from the same guy, who apparently is some kind of photographer/editor: http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/blonde/index.html Here he claims to have cut off the upper part of her hair - would that be possible? I'd say so...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
Several years ago I read a magazine article showing before and after shots of models. Some of the models were scary/ugly in real life but had certain features they could play with, of course you won't see them on tv. That doesn't mean there aren't many beautiful women. The main difference is the close up for pictures that tend to highlight every flaw, these are "cleaned up".

It's not just airbrushing, professionals have computer programs where they can select parts of the photos and alter shape and size and then put the parts back together, which is the effect you see with the chin and hip on the first model. My best friend in Italy has an advertising agency and those bikini models look MUCH better after the photos are fixed. :biggrin:

The skin on the first girl is not uncommon for that color skin, I've seen it in many women of color before, their skin is rough/grainy.

The first was, as they said, a dramatic change in order to make it more apparent. I've seen models in Avon catalogues showing different makeup and from one page to another the same model's lips and eye shape change drastically.
 
  • #18
mattmns said:
That is a bit far. One question though: If this was very common with supermodels, then how are they fixed on tv? Not that I know anything about this, but I do believe that the victoria secret, yearly?, tv event is live.

The thing is they'd never start out with such a horrid shot as the "before" picture on that site. Sure, you can make someone look that bad with harsh lighting that accentuates every imperfection on their skin, but nobody photographing models is going to do that.

They start out with gobs of make-up, a good hair stylist, and then use carefully placed lighting, while the model sucks in her gut and has a healthy dose of tape under the lingerie to hold things in desirable positions (past Miss America contestants have vouched to this in interviews). Besides, they start out with skinny women to begin with, and everyone looks good in a Miracle Bra! Then they aren't photoshopping out bags under the eyes and skin blemishes (the make-up already covers that), but are just touching up lines where a shadow makes their arm appear fatter, or to give more of a curve to their waistline, and make their thighs seem more slender. If you saw these models without their make-up, they don't look like anything special. Other than being so tall, they really wouldn't stand out...I've read (somewhere in some forgotten source of unverifiable credibility :rolleyes:) that many claim they were picked on as the "ugly duckling" in school because they were just sort of gangly and plain looking.
 
  • #19
They use camera filters on TV and most movies too. Barbra Walters is the worst offender for this..she looks like she's in a haze on TV.
Jamie Lee Curtis did a before and after set up in a magazine, it was shocking to see how normal she was.
 
  • #20
hypatia said:
They use camera filters on TV and most movies too. Barbra Walters is the worst offender for this..she looks like she's in a haze on TV.
Jamie Lee Curtis did a before and after set up in a magazine, it was shocking to see how normal she was.
They filmed Doris Day through gauze over the lens to get rid of wrinkles.
 
  • #21
http://ww4.lhj.com/lhj/story.jhtml?storyid=/templatedata/lhj/story/data/jamieleecurtistruethighs_08212002.xml
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
hypatia said:
http://ww4.lhj.com/lhj/story.jhtml?storyid=/templatedata/lhj/story/data/jamieleecurtistruethighs_08212002.xml

That's great! I've also seen Cybil Shepherd in interviews recently where instead of trying to hide her age, she comes on singing "Menopause Blues." I think it's great that at least a few Hollywood women have the guts to look real. Afterall, Evo's the only real woman who's *ahem-cough-mumble* years old and still looks like she's in her 20s. Now if only the clothing designers would realize those are photoshopped figures and start cutting the clothes to fit the rest of us, we'd be all set.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
Moonbear said:
Afterall, Evo's the only real woman who's *ahem-cough-mumble* years old and still looks like she's in her 20s.
Only my face, as I've mentioned, I'm now sagging and jiggling in places I never used to have places. :bugeye:
 
  • #24
mattmns said:
That is a bit far. One question though: If this was very common with supermodels, then how are they fixed on tv? Not that I know anything about this, but I do believe that the victoria secret, yearly?, tv event is live.
TV is nowhere near the quality of magazines. Not just the rez, but the fact that on TV, they're in motion.
 
  • #25
I have friends who do this type of retouching. One of the things that is commonly done for fashion photos is to stretch the legs, even if the model is long-legged to begin with!
 
  • #26
Math Is Hard said:
I have friends who do this type of retouching. One of the things that is commonly done for fashion photos is to stretch the legs, even if the model is long-legged to begin with!
Aha! I have been noticing legs are longer than they used to be, for some time now. I thought it might have something to do with better nutrition. Now I know!
 
  • #27
Nicole Kidman looks exactly as in her movies. But she looks like a mannequin with all the botox injections in her face. She's pretty but not natural either.

I'd take all the minor imperfections if it comes with a good attitude.
 

Similar threads

How Much Do We Really Know About the Universe?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Can Photoshop CS5 Help Me Enhance a Shadowgraph?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
How do we model water flow problems?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
How much physics is needed for Bialek's Biophysics book?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Graduate Modeling an Einstein solid that is coupled to a paramagnet
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Modeling Air Compression Cylinder
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
How much damage can a shopping cart do to a vehicle?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Is math really that important to do physics?
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
8K
How to model the behavior of a closed loop position system?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Do Scientific Models Need to Reflect Underlying Realities to Be Valid?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K