Photoshopped celebrities before and after

smooth

smooth

Threebrows
Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,553
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Gallery Here

Some of them, like the bags under eyes removal, make you wonder why we are desensitized to unnatural looking portraits.
 
Strange isn't it. The liquify routine in PS has a lot to answer for :lol:
 
It's fair game. Most people know that celebrity images are altered these days. Therefore you take what you see with a huge pinch of salt.
 
Big_Ham said:
It's fair game. Most people know that celebrity images are altered these days. Therefore you take what you see with a huge pinch of salt.
Click to expand...

Totally agree and I am aware that shots are heavily 'shopped. The one that got me though was the removal of bags under the eyes - when I saw the image side by side with natural one you realise how 'unhuman' it looks.
 
When visiting this link my protection programme displayed the following:

Blocked Potentially Malicious Site
Your request to visit ### 85.12.44.161 ### has been blocked.Access to ### 85.12.44.161 ### has been blocked due to the detection of potentially rogue security software by Browser Guard.

Sites with rogue security software may try to install Trojans or display fake alerts to encourage users to download and pay for the removal of nonexistent malware. Installation of rogue security software can lead to loss of private information or system damage.

To override this block, please add the website to the Global Actions List by following these steps:Open Spyware Doctor
Select 'Settings'
Select 'Global Actions List'
Click 'Add'
Enter the following details:
Select 'Web site address / cookie' in the first box
Enter the website you wish to visit in the second box
Select 'Always Allow' in the last box
Click 'OK'

Anyone else had this??
 
eek - sorry Barry. Its on ebaumsworld.

I have updated the link in the OP to a more reliable one.
 
Ironically the bloke is the worst beforehand - looks like a crystal meth before and after.
 
TBH that wasn't as extreme as I was expecting - nothing too dramatic there, I thought...
 
Arkady said:
TBH that wasn't as extreme as I was expecting - nothing too dramatic there, I thought...
Click to expand...

I agree Rob - no huge breast enlargement or tummy tucks, but that was what really got me - you see these sorts of images almost exclusively and I did not realise how desensitized I had become to noticing the little things! (and how different they look without!).
 
Thanks for the new link, works fine. Changes to lighting are understandable, but changes to skin tone give a very false impression of reality.
 
what it also shows you is that these pictures are made in photoshop.

some of the originals are quite poor in their lighting
 
It just goes to show that the images we see every day are intended to be photoshopped rather than putting effort in in the first instance.
Some of the original pictures are absolutely awful.
Oh well, I suppose it's cheaper to retouch than employ a Make Up artist...

Oh well, beaten to it...
 
It was the lighting, exposure and saturation adjustments that stuck out for me - ok, so there was plenty of skin smoothing too but it's a little unfair to show the straight-from-camera version as the only comparison... most of mine look crap before I run them through Lightroom and make some tweaks.
 
I disagree - most images appear dull and lifeless until they're run through some form of processing - those 'before' shots may just be direct saves from the original RAW files - my RAW files look like that for the most part, unless I apply the camera defaults to them for the thumbnail previews...
 
RAW images will look a bit dull, flat etc when first viewed but I'm talking about poor lighting control in the studio to start with.

the PP images have been overdone and not a true representation of the person. the pic of beyonce is a good example of how not to dress someone. the shot of the woman by the window has horrific shadow at the right.


there is a difference between saving an image in post to getting it right before hand.


incapete said:
It was the lighting, exposure and saturation adjustments that stuck out for me - ok, so there was plenty of skin smoothing too but it's a little unfair to show the straight-from-camera version as the only comparison... most of mine look crap before I run them through Lightroom and make some tweaks.
Click to expand...
 
POAH said:
RAW images will look a bit dull, flat etc when first viewed but I'm talking about poor lighting control in the studio to start with.

the PP images have been overdone and not a true representation of the person. the pic of beyonce is a good example of how not to dress someone. the shot of the woman by the window has horrific shadow at the right.


there is a difference between saving an image in post to getting it right before hand.
Click to expand...

I think you're right to an extent - I also think they may have gone out of their way to find the crappiest 'original' photos just to make a point...
 
cowasaki said:
Strange isn't it. The liquify routine in PS has a lot to answer for :lol:
Click to expand...

Transform's probably been used more than liquify ;)


kevmalone said:
Oh well, I suppose it's cheaper to retouch than employ a Make Up artist...
Click to expand...

Nope, it's the other way around.

It's far cheaper to get the makeup right once, than have to have a dozen images retouched at £££'s per hour.

grotty said:
Ironically the bloke is the worst beforehand - looks like a crystal meth before and after.
Click to expand...

He just looks like a normal bloke... It looks like the red channels been desaturated to reduce the blemishes, pretty standard practice before any D&B happens.
 
If they are meant to be pro's who have taken them originals and i can assume they are then what the hell are we all worried about regarding our photography as that lot is a pile of dogs stuff out the camera and NEEDS shopping. I seriously doubt thats top tog stuff straight from the camera as only amatures shoot that bad

something stinks
 
Odd - I get an error trying to open the link page.

Anyone else?
 
No error here.

Some interesting examples... although I personally think the woman in the last shot is more attractive before she was shopped!
 
Who needs slimfast when photoshop can help me loose a few stones :D
 
The edits are pretty basic and fairly quickly done. It is a must though (I've done far more in some of my photos when you get someone with horrendous skin). The other route would be proper make up, and lighting to hide the blemishes. Some of these photos seem to be set up and shot a bit randomly, the paparazzi way.
 
TinaC said:
Could someone come and photoshop me? Save me lots of time and effort trying to lose this weight....
Click to expand...

There is another really quick way CLICKY. It may be permanent too.
I believe you could find some with a bit of luck luck in a supermarket or a garden.
 
TinaC said:
Could someone come and photoshop me? Save me lots of time and effort trying to lose this weight....
Click to expand...

Well, girls are all about curves but I'm sure you'll find someone keen to oblige ;)

There was the BBC3 show with Dawn Porter who went off to be photoshopped
[youtube]MJ2cWv7O6N8[/youtube]

Interestingly, someone pointed me at an article in the daily mail yesterday about Britney showing before and after shots:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...rushed-images-digitally-altered-versions.html
 
Cameron Diaz & Penelope Cruz :love: look great before IMHO
 
This is absolutely nothing new, and has been going on since the beginning of representation. All portraits are touched up to make the sitter look better than they actually do - it's part of the artist's job.

That's why Oliver Cromwell was unique in wanting to be portrayed "Warts and all". If you're doing a portrait it's because that person's rich and important enough to afford to get one, and if they're rich and important enough to afford to get one they're rich and important enough to make it absolutely worth your while making them look daaaammn fine.

Or at the very least you won't work for them and their friends again.
 
I think I prefer most of the "befores" actually:).
And Penelope looks ravishing whatever.
 
Big_Ham said:
It's fair game. Most people know that celebrity images are altered these days. Therefore you take what you see with a huge pinch of salt.
Click to expand...

WE may know that the images are shopped, but do impressionable young girls know ??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top