it looks like they cloned the front of a knee onto the back of a knee and then pasted on a side-facing foot. not saying that is what they did, only that is what it looks like. that looks like the shape of the back of a leg, not the side.
wv: loltedi "lol, ted, i think this does look ridiculous"
Calf of both legs is fucked up, left knee looks strange and if you didn't notice at first, take a closer look at her left arm and where it connects to her body...
The leg has an obviously too consistent shadow to be real therefore I think it is an awfull job...imo the model was photographed with the ladder in a studio and the wall and floor were added in Photoshop...the overlay layers used to produce the light enduced some tough retouching on the leg ...my opinion is that the leg was somehow hidden by a highlight and he had to reconstruct the leg and paint the shadows over it...I have already done such lousy jobs and that's exactly what it looks like to me
I encourage everyone to look down at one or both of their legs to see if their knee is larger than their ankle. I hypothesize that EVERYONE has a knee larger than the corresponding ankle, except the unfortunate model and my imaginary homeschooled girlfriend.
Definitely one of those - hmm not too bad - but on closer inspection... holes, weird shadows - and now I feel certain that her leg wasn't rotated to that angle originally.
Maybe you need to know a lot more about human anatomy but this is wrong in many ways. Yeah she is thin and flat, but the human body has curves caused by the bones underneath (no matter how skinny you are) that have been totally flattened out by someone. It looks freakish!
You can see where they cloned part of the wall texture from behind the wooden structure to behind her left knee. There is a very distinct-looking pattern of three splotches. So, there is definitely some sort of cloning going on - perhaps to make the leg look thinner?
See the pattern behind the wooden structure -- to the right of the tied part of her right shoe, just past the left-most vertical plank, and just below the second horizontal plank from the bottom.
For those of you who want to see what Current Resident meant (I think it was that, otherwise there's some more cloning). Try it out and overlay those two pieces in PS, you'll see.
Oddly enough, they did put in effort in adapting the cut out piece to the other part of the picture. Seems like they rotated it just slightly, darkened it in some way (probably Brightness/Contrast) and distorted in some way.
Her calves are screwed up badly as well, so is the left knee. People, if this ain't a PsD, I don't know what.
I'm merely asking why something that doesn't fit under this blogs title is in it. Photoshop trickery maybe (but what isn't nowdays), a disaster it's not.
The knee is all kinds of chopped to fuck; in fact, her whole left leg is pretty butchered both in terms of shadowing and shape.
Moving to the right, the shadowing on the ladder behind the leg is poor (at most).
Moving on up, her left arm is about as sturdy looking as a toothpick (granted, she might be that thin, but I don't think so). There's also something pretty interesting going on with her shoulder there. By interesting, I mean disastrous.
Overall the pose is poor - it should have a pretty good field/sense of depth but it looks flat, largely due to the dodgy shadow re-touching.
When you look at the other pictures in the gallery on the page, it's makes it stand out even more as what it is: a disaster.
well, the arm connecting with her breast is pretty scary. I wonder when they will stop to pay useless models, when is clear that a human being's anatomy is not ok for advertising. This one seems an ugly painting and just does't remind a photo.
The ladder really confuses me. Would a three-legged "ladder" really be able to lean at that angle? It makes my head hurt trying to figure that thing out. Maybe I'm overanalyzing.
I think they tried to mangle together two poses. Something is all screwed up with her hips, too, if you follow the line of her shirt on her left versus the way the shorts are working.
DISASTER can be obviously missing limbs or it can be "enough small screwups to make her anatomically impossible".
I think the PSD artists spend so much time staring at the screen that they're going blind.
The main problem is that her tibia would be broken if this were a real photo. The bottom part of her leg is curving inward up towards the knee, which is impossible. That's not the way human bones are shaped.
They clearly tried to flatten the knee (and perhaps the calf and thigh on the back, though that's not quite as obvious), and got a little overzealous with it. I probably wouldn't have noticed if it hadn't been pointed out to me, but yeah, the human anatomy doesn't work that way.
Actually, jimkeller24 you only got a small portion of the cloned section.
The area cloned is much larger, and yes there was an attempt made by working the image somewhat, to hide the fact that it is a cloned section. Then the fake leg was applied over this larger section.
see here http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/2373/cloneproof2.jpg
OK, I understand now. If you can get forty people to examine a picture closely for a total of twenty hour-equivalents ("man-hours" for older folks) and someone in that forty can see some PS artifact somewhere, then it's a DISASTER!
All the nerds are supposed to be at Comic Con this week.
@Richard, @Waldobaby: come off it. The back leg is a complete fabrication (a pretty good attempt but doesn't work) the arms are screwy .. but what does it for me is the Escher like frame whose shadows don't meet up and which stand both in and away from the wall.
It may not be a disaster to a layman but as an arthouse style fashion shot it's a big FAIL.
Was she sitting on the corner of a desk originally?
wow -- eric, i appreciate your chart, i wish I could see something more like that when PhD pages mystify me - i am studying lynda.com excercises on photo retouching, and sometimes I am clear on what works and what more sophisticated experienced retouchers can do - i guess the hard thing is how they handle glamming up female models - it's hard to create things out of nothing. Because of you i can see what's wrong w/ this pic when i wasn't sure before.. I find that unsettling because I have used Photoshop since 3.0 and still don't think i can figure out what's what sometimes. I wonder will i ever get it right? Well maybe having higher standards is at the heart of not winding up in PhD - unless of course you are a poor slob working out of the Carpathian mountains, slaving away over 75 images a day that you can't batch process getting paid 5 bani a day.
No need to nit pick. If she put her right foot down, she'd smack her head on the wall. It's not a trick of perspective, it has to be a comp. There's not enough space between her and the wall to accomodate that leg arrangement. But then, it's a hair product ad, not hosiery.
the colors are oh-so-slightly off from leg to leg. and the knee they're going with is not anything worth seeing. I'm sure her original leg was just fine, why put someone else's leg atop her foot and ankle, I have no idea.
51 comments:
Looks fine to me...just one hell of an ugly knee.
Well, it seems they tried to flatten it out but failed miserably.
the lighting is all out, especially the transition from shorts to thigh.
i still would though
yeah, that leg does kinda look fake. Why can't they just take a regular photo and leave it un-touched? It's not that hard, folks...
Your change of sex surgery went excellent Dr. Richards...
it looks like they cloned the front of a knee onto the back of a knee and then pasted on a side-facing foot. not saying that is what they did, only that is what it looks like. that looks like the shape of the back of a leg, not the side.
wv: loltedi "lol, ted, i think this does look ridiculous"
it looks like hyperextended knees. (or like she grew too fast and her growth plate is exposed, i dunno)
Calf of both legs is fucked up, left knee looks strange and if you didn't notice at first, take a closer look at her left arm and where it connects to her body...
The only mistake i can see is that rustic and weird ladder. It looks like one of those pictures of impossible possitions =)
Not a PSD to me. She's so flat, she doesn't even have a knee protuberance when she stands straight, so what?
It also looks like she has some sort of skin-colored patch or something on the side/back of her straight leg, below the knee. You can see the outline.
The leg has an obviously too consistent shadow to be real therefore I think it is an awfull job...imo the model was photographed with the ladder in a studio and the wall and floor were added in Photoshop...the overlay layers used to produce the light enduced some tough retouching on the leg ...my opinion is that the leg was somehow hidden by a highlight and he had to reconstruct the leg and paint the shadows over it...I have already done such lousy jobs and that's exactly what it looks like to me
ha it wont let me post my explanation here
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/
2128/divabloodyhair2.jpg
that ones pretty bad ... thats some nasty nudging on the leg ...
I encourage everyone to look down at one or both of their legs to see if their knee is larger than their ankle. I hypothesize that EVERYONE has a knee larger than the corresponding ankle, except the unfortunate model and my imaginary homeschooled girlfriend.
Definitely one of those - hmm not too bad - but on closer inspection... holes, weird shadows - and now I feel certain that her leg wasn't rotated to that angle originally.
Maybe you need to know a lot more about human anatomy but this is wrong in many ways. Yeah she is thin and flat, but the human body has curves caused by the bones underneath (no matter how skinny you are) that have been totally flattened out by someone. It looks freakish!
It looks kind of like they took a pole and then painted a leg onto it.
not a disaster, my knee has a girlfriend like that.
This blog gets worse... disaster?!?!!
You can see where they cloned part of the wall texture from behind the wooden structure to behind her left knee. There is a very distinct-looking pattern of three splotches. So, there is definitely some sort of cloning going on - perhaps to make the leg look thinner?
See the pattern behind the wooden structure -- to the right of the tied part of her right shoe, just past the left-most vertical plank, and just below the second horizontal plank from the bottom.
Also, is it just me, or does the floor line look... broken, between one side of the left vertical wooden plank and the other?
It's weird and there is obvious photoshoppery going on, even if it's not really clear what they did. It totally counts.
There seem to be enough not quite disasterous PSDs to add up to one big-ass PSD.
But what stands out is that she has been flattened like a Byzantine icon. Or Wiley E. Coyote after a steamroller runs over him.
It looks to me like they have extended the length of her leg, but forgotten to fix the curve at which the original knee went in.
An oversight of the artist trying to make her legs look longer than they are. Mind you, I wish I had legs anywhere near like that!
My girlfriend can do that.
It looks like it could be two right feet to me. And the shadows are all weird
For those of you who want to see what Current Resident meant (I think it was that, otherwise there's some more cloning). Try it out and overlay those two pieces in PS, you'll see.
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/3439/cloneme.jpg
Oddly enough, they did put in effort in adapting the cut out piece to the other part of the picture. Seems like they rotated it just slightly, darkened it in some way (probably Brightness/Contrast) and distorted in some way.
Her calves are screwed up badly as well, so is the left knee. People, if this ain't a PsD, I don't know what.
Detractors of this blog, and those that claim this not to be a disaster, are clearly home-schooled.
I'm merely asking why something that doesn't fit under this blogs title is in it. Photoshop trickery maybe (but what isn't nowdays), a disaster it's not.
Hyperextended knees with the circumference of a thumb aren't a disaster? Great, let's get rid of doctors if all of those things are normal!
Any orthopedic surgeon would be happy about this case.
Alright Richard, I'll explain.
The knee is all kinds of chopped to fuck; in fact, her whole left leg is pretty butchered both in terms of shadowing and shape.
Moving to the right, the shadowing on the ladder behind the leg is poor (at most).
Moving on up, her left arm is about as sturdy looking as a toothpick (granted, she might be that thin, but I don't think so). There's also something pretty interesting going on with her shoulder there. By interesting, I mean disastrous.
Overall the pose is poor - it should have a pretty good field/sense of depth but it looks flat, largely due to the dodgy shadow re-touching.
When you look at the other pictures in the gallery on the page, it's makes it stand out even more as what it is: a disaster.
Hardly a 'disaster' by any stretch, come on Eddie surely you can find better material than this??
well, the arm connecting with her breast is pretty scary.
I wonder when they will stop to pay useless models, when is clear that a human being's anatomy is not ok for advertising.
This one seems an ugly painting and just does't remind a photo.
Make Money online wrote:"Nice to read your blog about online part time jobs to make money."
So THAT's where the people come from who make all these PsD's!
The ladder really confuses me. Would a three-legged "ladder" really be able to lean at that angle? It makes my head hurt trying to figure that thing out. Maybe I'm overanalyzing.
I think they tried to mangle together two poses. Something is all screwed up with her hips, too, if you follow the line of her shirt on her left versus the way the shorts are working.
DISASTER can be obviously missing limbs or it can be "enough small screwups to make her anatomically impossible".
I think the PSD artists spend so much time staring at the screen that they're going blind.
I keep expecting it to bend the other way...makes me feel kind of ill to look at it.
The main problem is that her tibia would be broken if this were a real photo. The bottom part of her leg is curving inward up towards the knee, which is impossible. That's not the way human bones are shaped.
They clearly tried to flatten the knee (and perhaps the calf and thigh on the back, though that's not quite as obvious), and got a little overzealous with it. I probably wouldn't have noticed if it hadn't been pointed out to me, but yeah, the human anatomy doesn't work that way.
Actually, jimkeller24 you only got a small portion of the cloned section.
The area cloned is much larger, and yes there was an attempt made by working the image somewhat, to hide the fact that it is a cloned section.
Then the fake leg was applied over this larger section.
see here
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/2373/cloneproof2.jpg
Her left (our right) arm is definitely too low.
I just don't understand why this whole "wasting disease" look is seen as an ideal. Hello, lack of muscles?
but yeah, she's really messed up. But who needs anatomy? Skinny is more important!
an argentinean rollingstone blog has in it's header a reflected image of your header:
http://www.rollingstone.com.ar/weblogs/poplife/index.asp
:P
well thank god. it had been two posts since anyone got to showcase their expert knowledge of anatomy.
I bet that hat comes right off!
OK, I understand now. If you can get forty people to examine a picture closely for a total of twenty hour-equivalents ("man-hours" for older folks) and someone in that forty can see some PS artifact somewhere, then it's a DISASTER!
All the nerds are supposed to be at Comic Con this week.
@Richard, @Waldobaby: come off it. The back leg is a complete fabrication (a pretty good attempt but doesn't work) the arms are screwy .. but what does it for me is the Escher like frame whose shadows don't meet up and which stand both in and away from the wall.
It may not be a disaster to a layman but as an arthouse style fashion shot it's a big FAIL.
Was she sitting on the corner of a desk originally?
Waldobaby is right.
wow -- eric, i appreciate your chart, i wish I could see something more like that when PhD pages mystify me - i am studying lynda.com excercises on photo retouching, and sometimes I am clear on what works and what more sophisticated experienced retouchers can do - i guess the hard thing is how they handle glamming up female models - it's hard to create things out of nothing. Because of you i can see what's wrong w/ this pic when i wasn't sure before.. I find that unsettling because I have used Photoshop since 3.0 and still don't think i can figure out what's what sometimes. I wonder will i ever get it right? Well maybe having higher standards is at the heart of not winding up in PhD - unless of course you are a poor slob working out of the Carpathian mountains, slaving away over 75 images a day that you can't batch process getting paid 5 bani a day.
Nope, this is definitely not photshopped....
...it's windows paint!
No need to nit pick. If she put her right foot down, she'd smack her head on the wall. It's not a trick of perspective, it has to be a comp. There's not enough space between her and the wall to accomodate that leg arrangement. But then, it's a hair product ad, not hosiery.
Looks like someone abused Liquify and then just clicked with the burn tool, and then clicked again above holding shift.
Or in other words: The model was chroma-keyed into the picture and they had to change her look.
hey, a one legged bodybuilder. cool!
the colors are oh-so-slightly off from leg to leg. and the knee they're going with is not anything worth seeing. I'm sure her original leg was just fine, why put someone else's leg atop her foot and ankle, I have no idea.
Post a Comment