Smokers, fat people and now this.
Apr 26, 2012 13:00:56 #
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/326778/20120411/supermodels-without-photoshop-photos-louis-vuitton-2010.htm
Where will it end or will it?
Where will it end or will it?
Apr 26, 2012 13:07:03 #
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
Apr 26, 2012 13:26:24 #
Apr 26, 2012 13:42:01 #
gmcase wrote:
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
First, it is Israel (not the US).
Second, the onlt thing it mandates is disclosure of photoshop use. Personally, I'm all for Full Disclisure.
Apr 26, 2012 13:43:51 #
micro wrote:
First, it is Israel (not the US).
Second, the onlt thing it mandates is disclosure of photoshop use. Personally, I'm all for Full Disclisure.
gmcase wrote:
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
First, it is Israel (not the US).
Second, the onlt thing it mandates is disclosure of photoshop use. Personally, I'm all for Full Disclisure.
The same spirit is behind all such cases. Over bearing government. Pure and simple. If you like it then you should be an elated citizen.
Apr 26, 2012 13:54:04 #
Please don't let Massachussetts know about this law or they'll pass it in a minute. We are unfortunately the untimate Nanny State up here.
Apr 26, 2012 14:16:31 #
That is so stupid it's almost funny.
How pathetic can a society get?
The era of personal responsibilty is long gone.
How pathetic can a society get?
The era of personal responsibilty is long gone.
Apr 26, 2012 14:25:27 #
larrycumba wrote:
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/326778/20120411/supermodels-without-photoshop-photos-louis-vuitton-2010.htm
Where will it end or will it?
Where will it end or will it?
This topic was discussed here a couple of weeks ago - sort of - and the posters all agreed that too much PS can be harmful.
Photoshop makes stars and models look better than they actually are. When young girls see these images of perfection, they try to imitate what they see - by getting too thin. When that doesn't make them beautiful, they get depressed, do stupid things, etc. There has been a trend by some in this country to avoid excessive manipulation of images of models.
I don't get the photos of the models in this article. They banned Photoshop, not makeup. Models on a runway are not "adjusted." It's the ones you see in print that are made to look perfect. There's nothing wrong with a little makeup.
Apr 26, 2012 15:10:37 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
This may be shocking to anyone who's never met a model, but it's hardly news to photographers who've worked with them. Or, indeed, to those who've shot pictures of accident victims for insurance claims. Or anyone who's ever looked at the pictures in 'paedophilia' cases.
Gosh! What a revelation! You can make people look more beautiful or uglier; older or younger; wiser or more foolish (think of pictures of Dubbya, in particular, or Tony Blair -- NO-ONE could make Cameron look wise).
Yes: that's part of the photographer's job. A law like this is good news for photographers, make-up artists, stylists, and the like, because it takes out the lazy, empty, mechanical, software-driven option. Otherwise? Well, basically, who cares? Personally, I'm in favour, because it diminishes the role of the computer.
Cheers,
R.
Gosh! What a revelation! You can make people look more beautiful or uglier; older or younger; wiser or more foolish (think of pictures of Dubbya, in particular, or Tony Blair -- NO-ONE could make Cameron look wise).
Yes: that's part of the photographer's job. A law like this is good news for photographers, make-up artists, stylists, and the like, because it takes out the lazy, empty, mechanical, software-driven option. Otherwise? Well, basically, who cares? Personally, I'm in favour, because it diminishes the role of the computer.
Cheers,
R.
Apr 26, 2012 15:33:37 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
gmcase wrote:
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
"The nanny state" referred to in this post is Israel. Do you propose chopping off King David's head?
I think not. Try reading the article / link and get your head out of Fox news
Apr 26, 2012 15:37:34 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
gmcase wrote:
The same spirit is behind all such cases. Over bearing government. Pure and simple. If you like it then you should be an elated citizen.
micro wrote:
First, it is Israel (not the US).
Second, the onlt thing it mandates is disclosure of photoshop use. Personally, I'm all for Full Disclisure.
gmcase wrote:
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
First, it is Israel (not the US).
Second, the onlt thing it mandates is disclosure of photoshop use. Personally, I'm all for Full Disclisure.
The same spirit is behind all such cases. Over bearing government. Pure and simple. If you like it then you should be an elated citizen.
ahhhh the world reduced to black and white again. It is only an "over bearing govenment" because the private sector has repeatedly shown over and over and over and over that they cannot be trusted to act with regards towards the well being of society.......unless doing so shows a direct correlation to their bottom line. THATS why government gets involved - because left to their own corporations like BP would let the Gulf Burn!
Get it!
Apr 26, 2012 15:44:06 #
docrob wrote:
"The nanny state" referred to in this post is Israel. Do you propose chopping off King David's head?
I think not. Try reading the article / link and get your head out of Fox news
gmcase wrote:
The Nanny State is alive and well and will never stop it's ever increasing intervention in our lives until we chop it's ugly head off once and for all.
"The nanny state" referred to in this post is Israel. Do you propose chopping off King David's head?
I think not. Try reading the article / link and get your head out of Fox news
Hey jackwagon, get your facts straight. I don't watch Fox News. If you read the other replies you would know you are talking from ignorance as I stated the same spirit is behind all such laws. So, practice what you preach and try reading before making false accusations.
Apr 26, 2012 15:54:58 #
Apr 26, 2012 16:10:01 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
gmcase wrote:
quote=docrob quote=gmcase The Nanny State is ali... (show quote)
nah i prefer the tempestuous sea of liberty
Apr 26, 2012 16:12:31 #
Figures. You make false charges and jump to conclusions and then try to sidestep admitting your error. Typical rotter tactics.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.