Better than the women available on CM?

Better than the women available on CM? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

SugarMyChurro -> Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 2:51:26 PM)
"Redbook" caught red-handed retouching Faith Hill http://www.afterellen.com/blog/annawahrman/redbook-retouches-faith-hill ----- I always enjoy seeing how people really look instead of what's on the magazine cover. I gather this woman is a country-western singer of some note. Seems pretty enough without the touching up to me. I'm sure we can't stop magazines from presenting those imaginary images on their covers, but I think what would be neat would be to legislate the necessity to document the photoshopped changes made to the cover image somewhere within the same magazine. The publishers get their slick covers, and we get a nice reality check inside so that women don't jump out of windows.

popeye1250 -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 3:04:58 PM)
Churro, don't they call that "air brushing?" I hate it when they do that! I want to see a woman's natural beauty. And that also means no "bought and paid for" tits! You read "Redbook" a lot do you?

Lordandmaster -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 3:10:02 PM)
Faith Hill is quite pretty in the real picture--but not prettier than the pretty housewives who live in my snooty-ass neighborhood. She looks impossibly perfect in the phony picture.

ElectraGlide -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 3:11:02 PM)
They made her arm look thin and un-healthy around the inner elbow area.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 3:46:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 You read "Redbook" a lot do you? Not actually. Nor do I frequent lesbian websites. I just happened upon that article and found it interesting. BTW, airbrushing is what was done with traditional media. In digital form it's often called "photoshopping" after a popular program that functions as a kind of digital airbrush and overall image manipulation tool - it's called Adobe Photoshop.

Level -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:04:01 PM)
I'm not a fan of airbrushing, myself; as stated, she doesn't need it, hell, I don't think anyone does. I like "real" people. Remember the photo shoot Jamie Lee Curtis did, where she "came out", unaltered? http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2002/08/27/ED242187.DTL&o=0

spiral23 -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:12:49 PM)
i much prefer the real faith....the other looks unreal to me...that flawless perfection never does

kittinSol -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:13:03 PM)
After seeing the 'before' and 'after' mugshots, I'm not that surprised. The 'after' shot just looks like a photoshoped picture. The area around the eyes is brighter than it would be naturally: but most images of people today are manipulated in that way. These images fascinate me. I think that graphic designers overuse these programs like some makeup artists might overdo the foundation. They have a personal ideal of perfection and they transpose this ideal on to the glossy paper. Nobody's fooled by them, yet it's something more and more people seem to aspire to. I think it's because so many of us are terrified shitless of death. And a few wrinkles on a woman's face mean she's well on the path to her eternal nap. I am battling with my own mortality right now: I wish I could have a permanently airbrushed face wherever I went. Though I was carded earlier when buying a bottle of Penfold's 'Koonanga Hill' - so I guess I should be grateful? This 'quest for eternal youth' is so pernicious.

marieToo -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:32:18 PM)
And they even trimmed the pudge off her back... I want a photo editor that does that!! Ok.......For a magazine photo, I really don't see anything wrong with editing a photo. The original photo is merely a rough draft from which a beautiful image is polished out. To me it's creativity and art, not a statement of dishonesty. Most witted people realize that no one actually looks that perfect, but it's certainly more pleasant to look at. In the original shot, I don't think she neccesarily looks better than some of the CM women. I think she's on the pretty side of average. I've seen better looking and worse looking both on CM and in real life.

Level -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:38:16 PM)
There are certainly a number of gorgeous women at CM. [8\|]

popeye1250 -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:39:58 PM)
"Creativity." You mean like Clinton and Bush are with the "truth?"

GhitaAmati -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:42:55 PM)
heh..popeye...ya think someone could take an airbrush to bush....

kittinSol -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:44:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marieToo And they even trimmed the pudge off her back... I want a photo editor that does that!! Ok.......For a magazine photo, I really don't see anything wrong with editing a photo. The original photo is merely a rough draft from which a beautiful image is polished out. To me it's creativity and art, not a statement of dishonesty. Most witted people realize that no one actually looks that perfect, but it's certainly more pleasant to look at. In the original shot, I don't think she neccesarily looks better than some of the CM women. I think she's on the pretty side of average. I've seen better looking and worse looking both on CM and in real life. I went to the beach today: a nice beach in New England, but it's certainly not California. The number of babes was astounding: I couldn't keep my eyes off them. At one point, somebody in my party pointed out to a particularly large wave: I turned around and saw this beauticious young woman step out of the ocean, the foaming water raised behind her like a ... huh... well... the image is obvious... and it was better than any magazine shot I have seen in a long time. Except for the pictures of Angelina. But she is an exceptional looking woman too. So much beauty, so little time!

LightHeartedMaam -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 4:48:45 PM)
If it wasn't for PhotoShop/airbrushing, you guys would be totally disillusioned with Playboy.

Arpig -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 5:52:52 PM)
actually i think she looks beter pre photoshopping

Lordandmaster -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 6:06:24 PM)
Boooo. I thought she was going to show her tits. quote: ORIGINAL: Level Remember the photo shoot Jamie Lee Curtis did, where she "came out", unaltered? http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2002/08/27/ED242187.DTL&o=0

subfever -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 6:13:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro ...but I think what would be neat would be to legislate the necessity to document the photoshopped changes made to the cover image somewhere within the same magazine... Yeah... that's what we need. More laws to control us... [:o] I think Playboy has been airbrushing for how long now... 35-40 years?

Level -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 6:13:38 PM)
Teats? Did someone say teats? Edited to add

Lordandmaster -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 6:21:11 PM)
In the good old days, Jamie Lee Curtis couldn't be in a movie without taking her top off.

HaveRopeWillBind -> RE: Better than the women available on CM? (7/21/2007 6:25:18 PM)
Magazines and other print media have been altering photos for decades. The degree to which it is commonly done has increased in recent years. Everything that can be done with programs like Photoshop could also be done with traditional film and print photos by manipulating them in the darkroom or through airbrushing, but Photoshop drastically reduces the amount of time needed to alter a photo. That's why it seems to be showing up so much more frequently. Today any given photo technician can alter way more photos in a given workday so you see it more.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125