HOME | DD

BathedInSin In reply to Sinnocently [2014-01-07 20:11:05 +0000 UTC]

I dont see how this is necessary... haha if they can't tell that anatomically this pose is possible, they obviously havent stood in front of a mirror and tried it...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sinnocently In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-07 22:54:18 +0000 UTC]

Couldn't have said it better myself. Kudos.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Sinnocently [2014-01-07 23:12:24 +0000 UTC]

It does look really "dramatic" I would say, because the angles are harsh but women have hips. That's kinda what happens naturally, y'know?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sinnocently In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-08 01:38:28 +0000 UTC]

Yep!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Swordheart-san In reply to bookworm30000 [2014-01-07 09:54:08 +0000 UTC]

agree!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-07 20:12:09 +0000 UTC]

You think her hip was touched up? I think that parts legit. If I pose like this my hip juts out just like that. But the rest I totally agree with.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Menno2 In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-08 02:17:34 +0000 UTC]

it was. not shape-wise, but the skin lacks texture, pores, etc. its even lighter in tone on the left than it is the right. its been warped to all hell. the original should have been left alone, her figure can do the work.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-08 02:24:37 +0000 UTC]

He may have touched up the skin or what not, but you think he screwed with the shape of her hip? Because like I said it is possible to get it at that angle.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Menno2 In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-08 04:21:10 +0000 UTC]

perhaps slightly. that bump in front of her elbow is unnatural.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-08 22:00:00 +0000 UTC]

Oh wow I hadn't even noticed that O.o that does seem strange...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Menno2 In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-09 01:36:56 +0000 UTC]

thats the point of retouching: do it so slightly and gradually that the untrained eye cant catch it, and keep going until its distorted beyond recognition. then, we just accept that distorted vision as reality, giving us unrealistic expectations of beauty.

photoshopping is morally wrong.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-09 01:59:17 +0000 UTC]

I can certainly understand your opinion though I do not necessarily agree in such an extreme manner. The heavily worked up stuff that makes people look almost ENTIRELY different, yah that's a bit much and in some cases grossly unnecessary. I can see how it affects unrealistic expectations. But by the same logic it's morally wrong to enhance our eyes with liner or shadow, our lips with rouge, or our cheeks with blush because it's not "real". It all depends on how you look at what the "adding" process lends to the final work. The person working on this isn't trying to "sell you" any kind of products it was simply to make the girl look more desirable, attractive, fit? or whatever the case may be. If you were creating a drawing wouldn't you want to enhance it to make it more appealing to look at? Erasing sketch lines, darkening the final outlines, adding colors and blending... not everything is uber awesome sexy beautiful on its own, some things need a little oomph. Not saying this model is ugly or even NEEDS that kind of work, but if the image was worked on, i'm sure it was to make the final more appealing not to make people think "I want to kill myself because ill never look like that"

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Menno2 In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-09 04:54:25 +0000 UTC]

there was once a time where photoshop didnt exist. where models weren't pencil thin or bumpy like this photo. marylin monroe had neither of those things and she was loved(and still is loved) for generations. today, she'd be considered a plus-sized model. back then, it was just a girl, being a girl.

back then, james dean and clint eastwood could go shirtless for a photography shoot and not a single bit of photoshop was used. it was just a guy being a guy.

nothing wrong with that. <

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-13 21:21:04 +0000 UTC]

Actually, you're sort of wrong. Back in her [Monroe's] time it was sexy to be "curvy" and there were several products to help women gain weight to not be stick thin. But I know what you mean

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Menno2 In reply to BathedInSin [2014-01-14 06:53:40 +0000 UTC]

fine, so he's not "selling" the idea as a physical item you can pay money for, but thats not what i meant and you know that. you can argue semantics all you want, the fact is its photographers who photoshop their models, magazines, movies, and tv shows that are "selling" the idea that being stick thin or having unreal proportions is what is sexy, and its just wrong.

its still sexy to be curvy. a curvy woman is a healthy woman. collectively telling women to be think to the point that your ribs show, and warping their bodies with surgeries and photoshop, pressures them(and in fact teaches the young generation) to be unhealthy and to hate themselves. theres no way around it and even you cant deny it.

and sorry but theres a difference between a stylized, clearly comical anime depiction of a cartoon character, and a photo that has been slightly altered just beyond human capacities made specifically to fool the eye and trick us into thinking that is what beauty looks like
(just like theres a difference between mickey mouse and a real mouse). lets be serious here, you cant compare the two. for that you might as well include marvel comics, but that is absurdism at its finest. there is a limit as to what to include, of course. cartoons are clearly out of the mold, but photos that have been altered should not be presented as reality: its a flat out lie!

this isnt photography because what we're seeing is not a photograph. a photograph depicts reality, and this is not reality. it is a digital image that has been changed, and if the photographer thinks that this woman needs ANY tweaks to her physique for her to fit his image of beautiful, the author has been brainwashed as badly as any of us, because its clear to see underneath the photoshopping, that this woman is clearly a healthy, fit, beautiful woman as-is.

nobody should feel pressured by ideas of beauty to lose weight. if someone wants to lose weight it should be to simply become healthier; their body image should have nothing to do with it.

im glad you lost weight, but it saddens me that you did it because you felt the pressure of being possibly branded with labels like "ugly" or "fat" by others. you call it motivation, i call it self-hate fed to us en masse by a society of self haters who say that being yourself and accepting yourself is just not good enough.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BathedInSin In reply to Menno2 [2014-01-15 21:06:31 +0000 UTC]

I did not at all think that was what you meant. I said my peace on the matter and my point stands.

You may think curvy is sexy. Some people think super obese is sexy and some people think stick-thin is sexy. "attractiveness" is subjective. As an artist you know that to be true.

I can indeed compare the two because art is subjective and theres little difference between hyper stylized cartoons and real people. Eventually if "real people" are doctored enough they're just as much a cartoon as a cartoon.

You don't know that this image is actually doctored. The photographer claimed it wasn't and unless you can find the "original" or the file that was changed you can't know for certain. Sorry to say but you can suspect all you want. You don't know the model and you don't know if she may have some kind of abnormality here or there, or how thin she is or is not. For all we know she could weight 300 pounds and the image is so well doctored we believe she's actually skinny as hell in real life. Truth of the matter is we just don't know for sure.

"Nobody should feel pressured" and all that..... yah in a perfect world. But 'being healthy' isnt the only reason and that cant be argued. Sometimes being skinny is a stronger motivator to lose weight than "I want to be healthy"  and usually people losing weight will outright say "I want to lose weight, and be healthier" implying that one weighs more than the other (no pun intended!)

Perhaps it is self-hate. But My top 3 reasons were 1) I wanted to feel good about myself, and being in good shape and more able physically makes me confident and assured... 2) I wanted to be healthier and more able/agile. and 3) I wanted to be skinnier. I can't refute that a lot of our culture fuels the "You can be better" mentality, but in some cases it is kind of true. Being "average" doesnt seem to be super awesome for people. Having an average education with average looks and average interests makes you blend in- and hey- some people are into that. They don't want to stand out. But switching gears a bit here and going to a topic like the job market- If you go into an interview and you're mister or miss plain jane average, and then a candidate walks in who is self-assured, has a higher level of education, more experience, and isn't all that bad looking... who do you think is more likely to stay in mind? Not saying "just your looks" will open doors for you, but in some cases it is sad and true. I know a handful of girls who got jobs or boyfriends "because they're hot" regardless of experience or actual mutual affection/interest. The two people I feel the worst for are the super attractive hot people with actual intelligence and value and the super ugly people that are sweeter than pie. Both get  a bad rap, I think, without good reason. But we also live in a pretty shallow society overall. It is absolutely sad but who's to say it won't become fashionable to be over 300 pounds in the next 20 years?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1