Something we've all seen before

[ksmith]

The photoshopping of an attractive woman into something plastic:

I don't know why magazines bother with models anymore. They should just use computer-generated figures, complete with poreless faces and unblemished skin.

Comments

[scott-lynch.livejournal.com]

Yeah, this stuff drives me absolutely crazy... even the most physically gifted models and celebrities are cleaned up, smoothed out, and in some cases completely fucked with in their photo appearances- is it any wonder that so many millions of 'average' people have devastating self-image problems? It's not even subtle at this stage... actresses, in particular, *especially* those past thirty-five or so, tend to appear on magazines as radiant, plasticized blurs because the easiest way to hide the tiny lines and wrinkles of actual human existence is to PhotoShop 'em into freakish glowing cartoons.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

As a sidebar, I have read that HDTV is driving actors and camerapeople crazy because the detail is so fine that all flaws are readily visible. I know they've formulated special make-up for TV actors now, but the people I have seen who I assume are wearing it look like they have layers of paint on their faces.

Watching British TV is always a little bit of a surprise because they don't seem to tuck, trim, and hide the way that US actors do. You see wrinkles, love handles, imperfect teeth. Real people.

[puddleshark.livejournal.com]

British TV seems to be fast catching up with American TV in the plastic people stakes. The BBC, which is supposed to broadcast to the entire nation - not just the adolescent males, has been involved in some spectacular rows for its habit of sacking intelligent middle-aged female presenters and replacing them with young and beautiful female presenters.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

That's discouraging. Over here, there are times that you can't see the presenter for the glare off her lipgloss.

[mizkit.livejournal.com]

There was a picture of...Kelly Clarkson, I think, recently, on some magazine cover. She was literally unrecognizeable. I mean, I wouldn't have guessed who it was.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I think I saw that one.

There was a brouhaha over here when Katie Couric first took over the news anchor slot on CBS, and one of the articles about her featured a photo in which she looked quite a bit slimmer than she does in real life.

[puddleshark.livejournal.com]

Computer-generated figures seems like the next step but does anyone know, how good is the techonology at present? Is it possible to produce computer-generated images that the reader might mistake for an image of a real person (albeit one with an improbably tiny waist and large bust)?

[cailleuch.livejournal.com]

3D animator here. Yes, the technology is here. It's particularly true when all you have to make is someone who approximately barbie.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I think we should have avatars from Second Life compete for America's Next Top Model.

I'm struck by some of the movies based on graphic novels in which the actors are so heavily re-imaged/doctored/whatever the term is. A cross between reality and animation. How close are we to not needing live actors at all?

[cailleuch.livejournal.com]

It's not that close for virtual replacing real in an entire movie. It takes a lot more work to produce good animation than it does to make 10-15 takes with an actor. Every one tries to say that they are there but you need a photoreal model with really good AI before it is actual fact. It is why all the movies take live action and alter it.

Just doing a photo spread with a virtual model on the other hand is pretty easy. Just pose and shoot. (umm, that didn't exactly come out right!)