|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
Victoria's Secret - Photoshop fail
Lol, who employs these people? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic … highs.html Mar 16 11 03:42 am Link it is amazing that those images get through to be printed. Mar 16 11 04:54 am Link ROFLMAO!! Seriously! Always amazes me these get THROUGH to print!   Ya know its as bad as some covers currently being released. (Not by me of course coz I rock!) I'll try and find it, the model - she has a dislocated arm behind her head...... Mar 16 11 05:15 am Link I guess the company owner, and the art director/photographer had a disagreement, and split the difference Mar 16 11 05:17 am Link *Shocked* Her thighs look like very skinny arms.. AHH. Mar 16 11 05:24 am Link lol, these threads never stop to amuse me hehe ^^ Mar 16 11 06:29 am Link Forgetting anatomy for a moment, the way her thighs curve actually works well with the composition of the picture. And it's a better picture than 95% of those on MM - and certainly better than my own. Mar 16 11 06:33 am Link David-Thomas wrote: at least you speak for yourself. Mar 16 11 06:40 am Link David-Thomas wrote: Well we all can at least agree with u on this part :p that retouch is pure ass and unreal as hell.... Mar 16 11 06:46 am Link I guess it does work with the composition of the image. But then it becomes more of an art, rather than a photo. Also on the link it goes on about the Ralph Lauren campaign, good read:) http://www.stylebyme.net/wp-content/upl … mpaign.png Mar 16 11 07:24 am Link I am a little bit skeptical. Some of them look valid and still wrong, but the one with filippa for example, where her waist is slimmer than her head, I just can't believe it went through at Tommy. I am sure someone made this and leaked it out as it was an official retouch. Maybe someone can point me to an online source that has the official ad, then I believe it. Mar 16 11 07:56 am Link bobbyp wrote: I posted just after you did so yeah thanks for the link Mar 16 11 07:57 am Link bobbyp wrote: lol! how could they forget her arm? There's the photographer, the art director, the photo re-toucher, the layout composer, the page editor, and the publisher. Mar 16 11 08:33 am Link Haha...even to the un-trained eye this could be spotted! Mar 16 11 09:53 am Link "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence [or taste] of the American public." - H. L. Mencken The fact that there are comments being made justifies their view - ignoring this might have been better... Mar 16 11 10:41 am Link Iam Rinaldi wrote: I wonder if those two are deliberately distorted like that for billboards?? Mar 16 11 11:08 am Link I think the creative team of R.L. simply made it that way. They want to get noticed and it worked, they got press. When I saw the ad, it looks like one of those paintings with big heads. for the victoria secret, i can think of several things. 1. One over controlling art/creative director or boss, that keeps telling the retoucher what to do, the retoucher just does not want to argue so he just did it to get over with. 2. Rushed for publication, send it now or it will not be printed, they never had time to review. 3. In los angeles, or even other places, I have to admit that there are people who makes it or they get the job because of who they know and how they look. so maybe, the people who got hired are the wrong people for the job. Mar 16 11 11:11 am Link This is obviously a case of the "re-toucher" telling them he needs a raise......this is a case of "you get what you pay for"....and he decided for her thighs to look real that is another $1000.....lol Mar 16 11 11:11 am Link These always astound me. I'm not very good with photo shop (for model retouching at least), but I think anyone with a brain cell would see these screaming mistakes. These are the people that are being paid a fortune.. maybe if they put a tf call up they would get a better standard lol.. but that's a different thread. Mar 16 11 11:29 am Link Benski wrote: Haha, I like the way you think! Still don't think that explains it. Mar 16 11 11:29 am Link MP Retouch wrote: Haha, not so much that one (only explanation I have for that is if they're going to mount it over a tunnel entrance and need dual carriageway traffic to go through the legs). Mar 16 11 11:35 am Link That bullshit just can't be true! For me, it's a stupid sabotage, black humour, joke... or whatever. VS's proved for the ages that at least they have a eye for what is esthetic... I doubt that the other brands could afford such a failure either! Don't believe in everything what the yellow press tells... Mar 16 11 01:52 pm Link The really funny thing is the selection process for creative talent & the account execs that make the hiring decisions... got to love the results! lol Mar 16 11 02:05 pm Link The really funny thing is the selection process for creative talent & the account execs that make the hiring decisions... got to love the results! lol Mar 16 11 02:05 pm Link lol, how much do they really want the models to weigh when folks do this? LOL Can they look a bit more realistic folks? LOL! Mar 16 11 02:07 pm Link Greg Curran wrote: Not really Mar 16 11 04:06 pm Link Maybe she really really really likes to ride horses... Its victoria's secret.... like anyone is looking at the legs... Mar 16 11 06:16 pm Link Yep... SERIOUS Photoshop fuckup... OR... maybe she's an amputee...   Mar 16 11 06:33 pm Link HonuCreativeArts wrote: Yeah right... Victoria's Secrets puts on an EXTREMELY popular televised fashion show... and what do their models use to walk down the runway?... Mar 16 11 06:37 pm Link I'm guessing this is a marketting ploy... Here we are talking about it. There is no way in hell a name like Victorias Secret would release images like this without knowing how horrible the post work is. Mar 16 11 06:38 pm Link Geoff Jones wrote: I disagree...the site I linked before shows how the biggest world wide companies make these kinds of mistakes all the time. Mar 16 11 07:06 pm Link I just did a catalog job a couple of weeks ago and can't wait for the work to show up on photoshop disasters... But when they need 800 images done in 4 days, thats what happens. Mar 16 11 07:07 pm Link Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote: Hmm yeah you may be right. Mar 16 11 07:09 pm Link Wow! Who looks at the edits?! Mar 16 11 07:16 pm Link We all make mistakes, although, these are a bit more than the normal mistake Mar 16 11 07:22 pm Link Funny funny..... Probally fired experienced retouched to hire a less expensive newbie.... Mar 16 11 07:26 pm Link I'm a MUA not a retoucher and i still believe i could do better then that lol. Please someone pay me what retouchers for VS and RL make! Mar 16 11 07:51 pm Link these look more like easter eggs than oversight small things so you could say "look what we did, can you spot it!" lol Mar 16 11 07:51 pm Link As usual i don't get how these morons get employed by mags yet i cant land a published gig for the sake of my life. Mar 16 11 09:44 pm Link P A P A R A Z Z I wrote: maybe because you steal other peoples work.. your avatar looks eerrily familiar to a piece that I and Pete harrison did as a collaboration several years ago.. Mar 16 11 10:38 pm Link |
