(no subject)

Date: 2006-10-05 09:14 pm (UTC)
ext_5300: tree in the stars (Default)
From: [identity profile] helen99.livejournal.com
This model could very well be wearing a lot of makeup - maybe that's what we're seeing? What gives away the airbrushing?

(no subject)

Date: 2006-10-06 08:08 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fendahleen.livejournal.com
No, no, it's not too much makeup, that would look different. I'm just comparing the 'ergh' effect it generates, not the visual effect.

The shadows on his face in shot #2 (and to a lesser extent in #3) look too smooth, too artificial, like he's a piece of CGI art. Speaking as someone who paints things in Photoshop, it... well, it looks like someone painted them in Photoshop. Or at the very least went duplicate layer/gaussian blur/overlay, the magic forumla for making everything tasteful and pretty. His complexion in #4 looks like it might be a little rough. Hence, one imagines, the heavy-handed smoothing in the daylight shots.

Please don't think I'm criticizing your darling little piece of Slavic jailbait, though -- he's awfully sweet and I want to steal his shirt/jacket combination, conveniently leaving him with less clothes on for the rest of you.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-10-06 12:33 pm (UTC)
ext_5300: tree in the stars (Default)
From: [identity profile] helen99.livejournal.com
Rialian thinks "airbrushing" is a much better explanation than "maybe he's actually an angel."

(no subject)

Date: 2006-10-07 07:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fendahleen.livejournal.com
Real angels use Fractal Painter, not Photoshop.

April 2010

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags