|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
Guess who's on Photoshop disaster?
No, it's not me or my work, lol. But I was wondering what you guys honestly think of this cover. I think it looks overdone and unnatural especially that is a celebrity. http://fstoppers.com/photoshop-fail-har … ks-bizarre Feb 19 13 10:06 am Link Seems to be a Chinese publication. Maybe they are meeting Chinese customer expectations on a Chinese budget? It does look very unnatural though (darkening behind the hair etc) but again are Chinese presses able to print out a high quality image? The final in print might be very poor anyway due to limitations on their color printing capabilities. Who knows this look might work better given other factors such as paper, ink, etc. Feb 19 13 10:12 am Link Looks like another one of Peter Griffin's wonder models of the 80's  Feb 19 13 10:14 am Link Maybe this is how she really looks  and all other photos of her are photoshopped Actually she kind of looks like that "catwoman" or what was her name...  Feb 19 13 11:52 am Link delete Feb 19 13 01:44 pm Link hahaha, I don't blame the retouchers they are doing what they are told it's more than likely the creative director(s) or higher ups wanting more of this more of that. I just went through the same thing with new staff at a publication I hope I don't end up on photoshop disasters though, lol. Feb 19 13 01:46 pm Link R G wrote: +1 R G wrote: Yup, very possible. Feb 19 13 02:16 pm Link There seems to be something really wrong on eyes/nose area... also body seems wrong too.. Would love to see the before!! Feb 19 13 02:24 pm Link The background looks Gaussian blur to hell really badly that is bleeding onto the the subject. Feb 19 13 02:26 pm Link Christiana1990 wrote: Bride of Wildenstien Feb 19 13 02:37 pm Link wow, i thought it was only the skin and color but look at the hair edges that is not good. hmm, someones head must be rolling as I type this. Feb 19 13 02:38 pm Link Feb 19 13 02:45 pm Link Frankly the years have not been kind to her, and I didn't think she was pretty to start with. Maybe we should blame whoever decided to hire her for a cover in the first place, I mean the retouchers can only work with what they are given. Feb 19 13 02:58 pm Link eos3_300 wrote: You sure those aren't before and afters? lol Feb 19 13 03:07 pm Link Kudos. They made the ugliest woman on the planet even uglier. Feb 19 13 03:19 pm Link They could have softened her features a bit though, it's too strong. Feb 20 13 06:19 pm Link D: Feb 20 13 06:24 pm Link AJScalzitti wrote: Q: What does Matthew Broderick say when he's having sex with his wife? Feb 20 13 06:37 pm Link  Feb 20 13 06:41 pm Link Neigh Neigh, I think the target audience is Mr. Ed. Feb 21 13 03:48 pm Link sheeesh! That scared the hell out of me. I could see it if they were promoting a sci-fi film. Less carving, more cowbell. I can handle almost everything but the mouth. Feb 22 13 07:12 am Link Poor horseface doesn't get any respect. Feb 22 13 07:42 am Link DavidCoward Photography wrote: I would have expected more for Ferris Bueller Feb 22 13 07:50 am Link I saw this cover earlier in the week.. thought about opening a thread on it.. and then thought.. why bother.. what needs to be said... so sad..  Feb 22 13 07:51 am Link I liked the first line in the article. "The general idea of Photoshop is to help make someone look flawless, while still maintaining their unique and human qualities." What a unique concept. Feb 22 13 07:59 am Link Everyone is at a different place... for a different reason...that can be very different from where WE are at right now. Life is a journey... with a full spectrum of people with different competency levels...all trying the best they can to get through. There are always people behind us... with work that is inferior to ours...and people way ahead of us... that we wish we could look like. Who knows...it could also be that the magazine art director is a jerk...or the production/retouch team is an incompetent, annoying relative of the boss. Bad images happen...good ones take a lot, a lot of work and art...and time... and skill... and experience... that We gain along the way. AND...Im not as pretty as I used to be either...and its heading in the wrong direction for me too. Cheers Feb 22 13 08:12 am Link doubtful but who knows, maybe it's deliberate to get it noticed again and people to buy it,, bad publicity is still good publicity? Lool I think the most frustrating about it is the lens blur halo around it Feb 22 13 10:18 am Link JimBobLc wrote: Wow, that's awfully ignorant of you. Feb 22 13 07:25 pm Link I really would love to see the original image because it could be a botex issue as well as the retoucher removing key facial lines....I did like the fact that they didn't mess he hands up this time...... Feb 24 13 03:47 pm Link why the long face ? Feb 26 13 10:59 am Link Maybe better off to use this cover in Thailand instead. Feb 26 13 07:37 pm Link The image and photoshop work isnt that bad, the problem is that they put a women in her late 40's on the cover of a magazine and try and make her look 22. Magazine covers are always overdone, but when you get to a certain age, it actually looks like youve been over done because they try and hide your age. Feb 28 13 01:01 pm Link |
