I am sure many of you guys here know that with the world of digital editing, lots of the faces we see on our magazines and such not are extremely edited to make more them more "Appeasing". So, I made the following image below in only about twenty minutes. And take note that I am not quite good at this at all and people out there are MUCH MUCH better at it than me. But as you can tell you can completely change the structure of the face and in some cases the whole person can become indistinguishable if edited too much. The techniques used can be applied to remove imperfections and such things alike. Just an interesting topic to discuss over, what's everyones thoughts of the idea?

Reply

Well since this being your first and all I say you did a haflway descent job, but the goal is to still make it realistic as possible and thus the reason you have that Gaussian blur glow going on. Of course you could pass it off as an early CG design as how early you want go I would say when the PS2 came out and the CG movies got even scary realistic. I think the guy appreciated the 10 years you took off him though .

Reply

He does look different now. Smaller chin and jaw line. to a certain extent it looks a bit disturbing. He has a big face and then when you go down, it's too small of a jaw. If you didn't remove too much of the jaw, I could have believed that it's real.

Reply

If we wear special clothing to make us look better, and pay money for a fountain of youth, what's wrong with adding Photoshop to your attractiveness arsenal? Like everything else, there is an invisible line that shouldn't be crossed, such as attempting plastic surgery via a paintbrush.

Personally, I always add a model glow to my photos since it's easy to do, and gives the image a more professional appearance, but it looks natural and doesn't mess with any of the infrastructure of the face.

Reply

I do agree with you mostly, but there is a difference when it comes to digital photo retouching and wearing clothes to make us look "better" These clothes do not actually portray someone as something they are not, if someone wears a sweater and they look nice in it, it is he combination of their attractiveness and the sweater that gets the effect. Now with retouching in a photo we end up changing the appearance someone to the fact of it not being them at all. If that is confusing here is an example, if you remove a mole on someones picture, and someone sees that picture they would expect them to not have a mole. Therefore portraying the person as something they are not.

I do understand to the point that should not be crossed, but in my opinion there should be no editing done if someone is going to put across the message that, that is actually how they appear to the naked eye.

Very good point you have brought up.

 

 

 

Reply