The Advertising Standards Authority has ordered skincare outfit L’Oreal to lay off the Photoshop, after it ran a magazine ad showing Rachel Weisz in improbably good form as a result of slapping on Revitalist Repair 10. Rachel Weisz as seen in the banned L'Oreal advert The offending advert featured 41-year-old Weisz's radiant …
So why use a flash at all?
Why not some nice CP tungsten halogen? That is after all what "Colour Photography" lamps were made for!
- Or even some of the better LED fixtures. The Royal Wedding Dresses were shot using static full-spectrum LED lighting. (Not "White" or "RGB". Those do have odd colour casts.)
Perhaps I'm biased as I'm a lighting designer (flash kills lighting), but flash photography always looks shit to me.
If you don't flash, then you don't end up with overbright, washed out, high colour temp, patchy odd-looking skin that you have to spend a long time editing out.
If you don't flash, you can actually look at the model and see what they'll look like in the image.
While your eye has a much higher dynamic range than a film or digital camera, it's still easy to see what the camera will.
Modern digital and film simply doesn't need high light levels - in HDTV we dropped the lumens quite a long way, and we actually got better pictures that way.
(For a while the same light levels were kept, and ended up racking the iris almost as tight as it would go.)
Is that the best they can do?
Must not be very good at photoshop?
Problem is that
people buy this stuff.
I for one will be happy....
To closely inspect Rachel Wiesz to veryify the veracity of these accusations against her beauty!!
Wait, she's already with that James Bond or Austin Powers guy, right? Forget that I mentioned this!
that boots nano-pish is the same
full page adverts in the Metro most days. before and afters of some bird with filler and without it.
Who is stupid enough to believe this crap and pay 30 quid for a 30ml tube of goo ?
Unfortunately lots and lots of (female) idiots.
It's basic logic that if you lack any sort of understanding of science, then snake oil pish like this is just as believable as anything else you read.
I reckon probably wimin are a bit worse off than men as regards scientific knowledge (it's just the way we bring em up...).
However, it is simply the mainstream extension of herbal pills, vitamin supplements, 'anti-oxidants' and a whole lot of other useless shite - most of which is bought equally by both sexes.
In a big pot from Woolies. Cheap and just as effective.
While the cream is on it causes the skin to shrink slightly, reverts when you wash it off. Same as this expensive goop. Egg-white works too but is a bit gukky and the price of eggs today...!
I just saw a picture of her without makeup.
I'd still hit it.
"I'd still hit it"
That is such a grotesquely ugly phrase. In fact, I can't think of another phrase that's more demeaning to a woman.
"I can't think of another phrase that's more demeaning to a woman."
I'm sure if you asked a woman, she could tell you a few.
A few years ago, now...
I don't remember thinking "wow, Rachel is incredibly gorgeous", when I knew her.
what is the asa on
quote "advertisers were keen to present their products in their most positive light using techniques" but they are not photographing their products and I bet she has not been anywhere near a pot of their product so how can they justify their augment. Ffs stop this patent fraudulent advertising
Was she born with it?
Nah, it's A'dobe!
You have all seen the fake ad, haven't you?
That's another incredibly annoying advert..
"Maybe she was born with it....."
All their ads feature women who have earned millions of dollars from looking extremely good on camera. Not only were they born with 'it', many of them subsequently had 'it' upgraded by top plastic surgeons.
The Maybelline has chuff-all to do with it, they'd still look good on camera if they were wearing Lidl or Wal-Mart own-brand face-gunk.
And yet some people see these adverts and thing that coughing up for that brand of face-gunk before their big night out in a Croydon night-club will make them look as good in real life as a Brazilian supermodel does on camera. Truly, the power of self-delusion is amazing.
must be full of nanobots...
Truth in advertising?
Ever compared a fast food ad to what actually ends up on your table? I prefer to see beautiful women and good looking food in my magazines and on my television. So, attack the product, not the advertisement, lol.
Probably because I grew up with computers being used more an more, and that the internet has meant I seen a lot more photographs and videos than my grandparents ever have, a photoshopped (or in any way digitally created) image stands out far more than I think the advertisers realise.
They'll buy anything...
...Mind you, I'm concerned now that that bloke off of thingy told me that there is a Men Expert somewhere working to help prevent me looking 'fatigued'. And there are 10 signs of that as well! what a co-incidence. I'm just off to check my face in the mirror.
- Put down that Oracle database patch: It could cost $23,000 per CPU
- DAYS from end of life as we know it: Boffins tell of solar storm near-miss
- The END of the FONDLESLAB KINGS? Apple and Samsung have reason to FEAR
- Pics It's Google HQ - the British one: Reg man snaps covert shots INSIDE London offices
- Bose decides today IS F*** With Dre Day: Beats sued in patent spat