artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene





Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye


IRC Channels



Comment Feed:


29 May 2007

Photoshopping 100 pounds away You really can't believe your eyes these days.
she was cuter as a plus-size.

posted by jonmc 29 May | 15:47
Comments about the finished product aside, that was some impressive and skillful Photoshopping.
posted by mudpuppie 29 May | 15:53
Wowo. That's freaky.
posted by richat 29 May | 15:54
Oh yeah, it's neat that we can do stuff like that, but it kind of bugs me in certain ways. ver heard the old cliche 'I've got the pictures to prove it?' If photoshop keeps improving eventually that's going to be meaningless.
posted by jonmc 29 May | 15:56
Her elbow and legs look kinda weird in the finished product. And Jon is right, she looked better as a before than an after.
posted by doctor_negative 29 May | 15:56
I mean to say that I agree with mup. I'm not sure I have any comments on either the before, or the after. What can be done with photoshop though, is freaky.
posted by richat 29 May | 15:57
The Soviets made "the pictures that prove it" useless way before Photoshop.
posted by small_ruminant 29 May | 16:02
I do this for all my photos.

I'm actually a middleaged black man.

But really, that was impressive.
posted by CitrusFreak12 29 May | 16:45
Yes, I must admit it. Charles Nelson Reilly never held up a card on Match Game reading "O RLY"... That was actually Bill O'Reilly.
posted by wendell 29 May | 17:07
This kind of stuff has been done for a long time, especially in in fasion(and porn) photography - another article. We just have better, faster, and more accessible tools these days.
posted by Miko 29 May | 19:05
I understand about the photoshopping to remove "faults" and adjustments made to suit what magazines etc think people what to see, but why wouldn't they just use a skinnier girl to start with? Have things got to the point where it is cheaper to take photos of someone who doesn't charge the earth and then pay a graphics drone to make the photo into something that more closely resembles what they want? Or am I overthinking something that is just a "proof of concept"?
posted by dg 29 May | 19:32
dg im pretty sure the whole thing (video) was simply done to prove a point: you can't believe what you see.
posted by lonefrontranger 29 May | 20:53
Yes, this was your basic plate of beans.
posted by Miko 29 May | 21:03
I gotta remember to use that “By and large" comment on the via ( page. The entry itself made me do a double-take, though. I think I agree with what he's trying to say, but it sounded kinda off the first time I read it, like women in magazines are solely for his sexual arousal.
posted by danostuporstar 30 May | 08:07
My brother used to work for Arena magazine in the UK and often told me about the large amount of air brushing that goes on for the supposedly picture-perfect models. Not that I was under any illusion that it didn't happen, but the extent to which it occurs is frankly, astounding.
posted by TheDonF 30 May | 08:12
I for one would like this person's contact info so I can be encouraged to take pictures more.

I'm tired of photoshopping my head on bodies for my photo albums so I can construct some semblance of a past around me. I personally hit jackpot when I used Bai Ling's body for my "fashion awkward" teen years. Right now I need to recreate my "wild partying college days" so I've been archiving some Lindsay Lohan party pictures. Sometimes, I like to have tea parties with my photo albums and they say I'm pretty =(.
posted by kkokkodalk 30 May | 11:43
... women in magazines are solely for his sexual arousal.
I've been trying for two days now and can't think of a single other use for them.
posted by dg 30 May | 23:20
Happy Birthday to the often lurking wens. || I look like an Oompa-Loompa.