PEOPLE DONT HAVE PLASTIC SKIN LIKE THIS OF THE DAY WHY OH WHY DO CELEBS, PHOTOGRAPHERS, BLADDIE AGENTS ETC DO THIS TO US?

Yawn. Ouch. Whatevs. Grrr. Etc.

Same old same old by Mario Testino.

And of course, I do know the answer to the rhetorical question I posed myself, above.

It’s because the celebs, huge magazine, photographers, agents etc want to.

And anyone who wants to use the celebs or their images has to comply with what they want.

That would be us.

The end.

Via Fashnberry

6 Responses to PEOPLE DONT HAVE PLASTIC SKIN LIKE THIS OF THE DAY WHY OH WHY DO CELEBS, PHOTOGRAPHERS, BLADDIE AGENTS ETC DO THIS TO US?

  1. Loudine April 13, 2012 at 02:53 #

    Barbie skin. Does anybody still believe this shit?

  2. Edee April 13, 2012 at 08:30 #

    I really appreciate Mario, but does he not shiver when a photo editor rips his work to shit. As essentially, it’s what they doing. There is nothing real about this photo. Photo’s should have soul, her eyes have the glassiness that is only achievable through heroin addiction.

    And whilst I am on that note, why does Mario get the byline, surely the shmuck editing the images should get it.

  3. D April 13, 2012 at 10:16 #

    Mmmm, as a sometime photographer who has spent many hours looking at very close up views of facial skin photographed with a 22 megapixel camera and good lens, I can tell you that 1) if anyone knew the excruciating detail of giant pores and base-encrusted hairs photographers can see on their monitors, they wouldn’t ever pose again, and 2) there is huge natural variation in skin coarseness. Some people really do have incredibly finely-pored, smooth skin, and they are generally the easiest to photograph and light with even the harshest of lighting, and require minimal retouching.

    Being something of an appreciator of Scarlett, and deliberately looking out for things like this, after having watched several of her movies, and perhaps even having seen leaked cell-phone pics of her straight out of the shower, I’m inclined to believe that the pic above is actually only 25% Photoshop, and substantially natural. There’s a reason the camera and cinema loves her, and that porcelain skin is a substantial part of her non-standard beauty.

    Normal humans should not however compare themselves, she is probably the 0.0001%. HV, I’m happy to DM photographic evidence to support my thesis if you’d like to post a follow-up retraction of your awful implication that Scarlett isn’t actually perfect, and Photoshop rather than genes and flattering lighting accounts for all unnatural beauty.

  4. D April 13, 2012 at 10:20 #

    P.S. I do agree however, that they’ve overdone the Photoshop smoothing on that photo – it does look plastic, but my point is that it’s perhaps not quite as artificial as you might think.

  5. D April 13, 2012 at 10:23 #

    Oh, crap, sorry, moderate this one away please, but in favour of your too much Photoshop everywhere campaign, I just noticed her bosom. WTF is going on there? Methinks that cleavage is distinctly odd.

  6. Daydreamer April 13, 2012 at 13:03 #

    Do women actually want to buy a magazine with the covergirl looking so plastic/fake?

Leave a Reply

Hurricane Vanessa - Vanessa Raphaely blogs from the Cape of Storms. It's not just about sex and shopping.| Login | hs