Comments on: Odd Victoria's Secret image analyzed with Photoshop forensics http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Sun, 19 May 2013 22:36:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Clayton http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674075 Clayton Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674075 Wouldn't that make them designers? Wouldn’t that make them designers?

]]> By: denkbert http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674080 denkbert Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674080 Error 503 ... congrats :) Looks like too many sites featured this analysis at the same time, the page isn't reachable anymore ... Error 503 … congrats :) Looks like too many sites featured this analysis at the same time, the page isn’t reachable anymore …

]]> By: dculberson http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674088 dculberson Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674088 Commercial art is still art. Commercial art is still art.

]]> By: d3matt http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674618 d3matt Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674618 so my main take away was to not use jpeg so my main take away was to not use jpeg

]]> By: ill lich http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674388 ill lich Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674388 Interesting, but that that particular example is not removing a hip or "anorexizing" a model, and isn't that far removed from what photographers used to do with regular old film-- enhancing certain areas, airbrushing out zits, brightening the exposure, etc. (I used to work for a record company that airbrushed out the cleavage crevasse on a certain female country singer because she was concerned they were "tarting her up" too much (in opposition to her Christian values)-- the result was this weird flat ledge on her chest that didn't look at all natural. Interesting, but that that particular example is not removing a hip or “anorexizing” a model, and isn’t that far removed from what photographers used to do with regular old film– enhancing certain areas, airbrushing out zits, brightening the exposure, etc.

(I used to work for a record company that airbrushed out the cleavage crevasse on a certain female country singer because she was concerned they were “tarting her up” too much (in opposition to her Christian values)– the result was this weird flat ledge on her chest that didn’t look at all natural.

]]> By: TEKNA2007 http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674140 TEKNA2007 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674140 Image from the article: http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Uw91icJn-go/Su4j3iV6ECI/AAAAAAAABRI/01Mh1N0hxGk/s800/V275298_35Q-p2l.png Someone just opened the Ark of the Covenant. Image from the article:

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Uw91icJn-go/Su4j3iV6ECI/AAAAAAAABRI/01Mh1N0hxGk/s800/V275298_35Q-p2l.png

Someone just opened the Ark of the Covenant.

]]> By: zikzak http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674152 zikzak Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674152 It's fucked up enough that the fashion industry overwhelmingly represents only light-skinned women as being attractive. But then when they have a very attractive dark-skinned model, they change her skin? The fashion industry may represent the cutting edge of modern urban trends, but it has the ethical framework of colonial-era Georgia. It’s fucked up enough that the fashion industry overwhelmingly represents only light-skinned women as being attractive. But then when they have a very attractive dark-skinned model, they change her skin? The fashion industry may represent the cutting edge of modern urban trends, but it has the ethical framework of colonial-era Georgia.

]]> By: arkizzle / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674419 arkizzle / Moderator Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674419 Kaleberg, Panasonic video cameras have had the skin-smoothing feature for years. And they don't pussyfoot around in describing its intended use (from the manual): <blockquote>SKIN TONE DTL: OFF / ON When ON is selected, soft skin tones are reproduced when people are shot, <b>making them look more attractive</b>.</blockquote> Kaleberg,

Panasonic video cameras have had the skin-smoothing feature for years. And they don’t pussyfoot around in describing its intended use (from the manual):

SKIN TONE DTL: OFF / ON

When ON is selected, soft skin tones are
reproduced when people are shot,
making them look more attractive.

]]> By: arkizzle / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674423 arkizzle / Moderator Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674423 Looks like Sony'e XL series has it too (from the XL2 manual): <blockquote>Using the Skin Detail Function You can adjust hue, chroma, area and Y level to determine the skin area and soften the details to reduce the appearance of skin imperfections. A zebra pattern identifying the skin area appears, alternating with the normal picture (a white pattern appears on a connected TV or computer screen).</blockquote> Looks like Sony’e XL series has it too (from the XL2 manual):

Using the Skin Detail Function

You can adjust hue, chroma, area and Y level to determine the skin area and soften the details to reduce the appearance of skin imperfections. A zebra pattern identifying the skin area appears, alternating with the normal picture (a white pattern appears on a connected TV or computer screen).

]]> By: arkizzle / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674427 arkizzle / Moderator Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674427 And Canon (ok, I'll stop now..): <blockquote>Skin Detail Function When shooting close-ups of people, the camcorder automatically softens details to reduce the appearance of skin imperfections <b>for a more complimentary appearance</b>.</blockquote> And Canon (ok, I’ll stop now..):

Skin Detail Function

When shooting close-ups of people, the camcorder automatically softens details to reduce the appearance of skin imperfections for a more complimentary appearance.

]]> By: Pantograph http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-675979 Pantograph Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-675979 Well it beats rubbing Vaseline on the lens. Well it beats rubbing Vaseline on the lens.

]]> By: Clayton http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-673986 Clayton Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-673986 That's a really cool piece for me, someone mostly unfamiliar with photo-editing software. The only gripe I had was that the author continually referred to the photo-editors as artists. Bleck. That’s a really cool piece for me, someone mostly unfamiliar with photo-editing software.

The only gripe I had was that the author continually referred to the photo-editors as artists. Bleck.

]]> By: MadMolecule http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674248 MadMolecule Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674248 Don't know how recently they did this, but the image on the linked Victoria's Secret page has been replaced with a different version of the same photo. The bag that was photoshopped out of the "disaster" version is there again. Don’t know how recently they did this, but the image on the linked Victoria’s Secret page has been replaced with a different version of the same photo. The bag that was photoshopped out of the “disaster” version is there again.

]]> By: jeligula http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674014 jeligula Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674014 Thanks for this post. I have been using Photoshop for over 10 years and this was fascinating in the extreme. @ #1: He was referring to the "photo editor" as an artist because in most cases the people who do these edits are employed in many levels of design at the company in question, not just editing photos. This is especially true these days when companies are downsizing and the specialists who only do one thing are the first to go. Thanks for this post. I have been using Photoshop for over 10 years and this was fascinating in the extreme.

@ #1: He was referring to the “photo editor” as an artist because in most cases the people who do these edits are employed in many levels of design at the company in question, not just editing photos. This is especially true these days when companies are downsizing and the specialists who only do one thing are the first to go.

]]> By: Kaleberg http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674282 Kaleberg Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674282 When Louis Godey's artists did this kind of stuff to get those impossible waists in Godey's Lady's Book, it was simply considered artistic license. Then came photography with its aura of truth. With Photoshop and its peers, that aura of truth has evaporated. We are back where we started where one must assume that all images may evidence artistic license. My guess is that the next five years will see cameras that smooth one's skin, highlight facial features and knock off a few pounds as transparently as adjusting the focus and white balance. This will probably only be the beginning. Photos will be no more believable than drawings. They'll project artistic truth, not physical truth. Given my usual anti-DRM sentiment, I have to admit that DRM might have one valid use, in special DRM crippled cameras that would only produce verifiable pictures with auditable filtering, processing and photogrammetric properties. P.S. After seeing the new Star Trek movie with its nearly continuous lens flare effect, I've been waiting for a camera with a built in lens flare filter driven by an accelerometer. When Louis Godey’s artists did this kind of stuff to get those impossible waists in Godey’s Lady’s Book, it was simply considered artistic license. Then came photography with its aura of truth. With Photoshop and its peers, that aura of truth has evaporated. We are back where we started where one must assume that all images may evidence artistic license.

My guess is that the next five years will see cameras that smooth one’s skin, highlight facial features and knock off a few pounds as transparently as adjusting the focus and white balance. This will probably only be the beginning. Photos will be no more believable than drawings. They’ll project artistic truth, not physical truth.

Given my usual anti-DRM sentiment, I have to admit that DRM might have one valid use, in special DRM crippled cameras that would only produce verifiable pictures with auditable filtering, processing and photogrammetric properties.

P.S. After seeing the new Star Trek movie with its nearly continuous lens flare effect, I’ve been waiting for a camera with a built in lens flare filter driven by an accelerometer.

]]> By: CANTFIGHTTHEDITE http://boingboing.net/2009/12/28/odd-victorias-secret.html#comment-674030 CANTFIGHTTHEDITE Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-674030 Super-informative post! Book-marked for future reference. Super-informative post! Book-marked for future reference.

]]>