According to this let's-buy-more-gas pamphlet from the American Petroleum Institute, you're all a bunch of racists.
Thanks to Ahistoricality! The pamphlet is here![Warning: PDF] Original stock is here![Warning: They can't do reflections] Via ThinkProgress![Warning: hippies]
40 comments:
I'd argue the "disaster" was better. The two guys they replaced in the Stockphoto were THE SAME GUY.
And they actually recolored his tie somewhat competently. Too bad the dark-skinned guy's photo was of a different quality. That's what makes this look especially bad.
forget the gas company, the stock photo is pretty bad!
i honestly don't know hats worse, the fact that people actually do this or that it gets published
I would have loved it if they kept the original, horrible stock photo, telling America: Looky here, the oil industry supports an army of goofy-looking reddish-brown haired guys and a squadron of elderly gentlemen in hard hats!
(In addition to adding some not-overly-tokenized variation [Cuban and Filipino?] to two of the smiling redheads, they actually cut a third one out altogether.)
gah! the istockphoto is far worse than the OP! Jesus that's a bad reflection.
The original is *awful* too. There are actually at least three guys in that image who are in it twice. The one who was replaced was one, the left hard hat guy is the same person that is on the top left, and the guy to the left of the same hard hat man is the same as the guy two people to his right.
Come on Yuri...you can do better than that.
I wonder whether this Petroleum institute is so lazy or poor that it prefers to use a stock photo instead of a live photoshoot (preferably with actual employees). Also, is it so hard to find a decent quality photo of a black guy's head - this one looks like it's scanned from an newspaper.
Never mind that. Look at the guy with the blue helmet. To his right is incredible flat-head man. On all the examples including the PDF the left side of his head looks like it was erased with the block tool.
OK, now back to the Swarthy effect ...
That blonde chick on the right looks like she was cut and paste from a bridal magazine. What is she looking at? Everyone else is looking at the camera.
...and it honestly wasn't until I had scanned through every single iStockPhoto-bashing comment on the Think Progress page that I went back and realized that your minuscule advisory by the link to them actually DIDN'T say "Warning: nipples". After having enjoyed a number of previous PSDs here I actually didn't find the nipple warning overly strange...
So now you published two PS IMPROVEMENTS in a row, what is the world coming to?
The original stock photo has the same guy twice. I don't get it. WTF? Is that his twin brother?
I got asked to make a change like this to a very similar group of stock people. "Please put a couple of ethnic people in the group" was the request from the client. One option would have been to comp whole new people in there, but I decided to photoshop the people instead. But I just took one person and darkened her skin, and did some retouching to the eyes of another lady to make her look part asian. It felt hideously wrong doing it, but it was the client's request.
The difference is, I took a lot of care to make it not obvious (plus, it was pretty small on a website which was helpful).
The comments on iStockPhoto for that image are pretty amusing...
Oh LoLz...time to pull out the stock Black and Chinese folk cutouts!
how did a young Laurence Fishburne get in that crowd shot?
Apparently ONE of the 9 million jobs in the oil industry didn't go to the middle-aged white guy in the center of the back row of the stock photo. Maybe he just didn't look 'happy' enough for the oil patch... too 'lone-gunman'- or 'postal'-looking perhaps.
so... does one actually PAY Istockphoto for it? and why?
Looks pretty bad (ok very bad) but being that I've been in this situation a while ago, and I know how hard it is to find a good (or at least a not-so-bad photo of a group of people which have more then one non-white person in the mix, I can see why they did it.
Hey this blog is in The Guardian!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/feb/11/photoshop-20-years-old-verb
@ LeGweak
Damn. Lead and another mention in a story in the only newspaper in English worth reading.
Big time.
Real big time.
Cosmo, you da man.
Apparently, all those 9 million actual workers are all stained from oil so they had to use a stock photo. One that assures there's no dirty job that needs to be done.
we are here to provide and hire bpo and kpo services. for more detail contact us.
--------
marqthompson
bpo,kpo
it's the guy they've cut out i feel bad for.
This is what family photos will look like by the year 2016...
Johnny? Family photos will have randomly recolored people in them?
I better get with the times. I think I'll start shopping pictures of my cat so he looks purple.
you would think this kinda company can afford a photo shoot
yeah you would think...
They are all thinner also
Hey, they were trying to be inclusive. And they did remember to make *one* of his hands black, too.
Please don't tell me they didn't have the budget to do something better...
according to popular, visual media, it seems not many people over the age of 40 actually exist anymore.
Man, this one's a twofer.
The original iStock source is (unsurprisingly) a disaster all its own, and then API pulls the ol' switcheroo and makes it...
Well, I was going to say "worse," but I had to compare the two versions repeatedly before I noticed a difference. So how about "equivalent but novel."
OMG, I saw the same stock photo
used in an ad for the 2010 Census for the Russian community. I thought it was a misuse, but didn't realize the original photo had so many duplicate people.
http://2010.census.gov/partners/img/materials/RUSAwarenessPoster.jpg
izlesene
video izle
lig tv izle
I have to admit it took me a while to see what was "racist," until I was able to review the "full size" image on that Russian poster. Okay, so they corrected a rather disturbing lack of people of color, and NO Asians, in the original.
But I have to say, I'm sitting here AMAZED you Photoshop wonders haven't caught that no less than five models were reused in the original (as seen in the Russian poster)? C'mon people. This has to be a $0.50 stock photo. The API obviously doesn't think they should invest too much in their bald-faced propaganda. But at least they added some racial diversity. If anything, that's "reverse racism."
Oh, and the blonde on the far right ... who does her eyebrows, Ringling Bros.?
There is some serious person duplication in the original -- most notably Guy In Red Tie, but also Old Guy, Surfer Dude Hair, and I think only two women were actually involved -- a white blonde and an indistinctly Latin/Asian/MixedRace woman, with different hairdos, outfits, and expressions -- oh, and rescaled heads.
Post a Comment