They Have All Become Cartoons (Yes ladies you can take offense to what I am saying and that is ok)

Un-filtered and unedited image of Bree Arkham

Un-filtered and unedited image of Bree Arkham. Asked to submit a test shot, she did so while driving to work. Now this is a good selfie.

Sadly enough they have all become akin to a cartoon character. If you’re a male you may have noticed over the past year or so and even more so of recent months that many female faces on social media have become very cartoon like. It doesn’t matter young or old, but the need to make themselves look… prettier? I guess? Either way it has led them to look like something out of an animated cartoon.

Yes ladies you can take offense to what I am saying and that is ok, but seriously you really need to stand back and take a look at what you’re doing. I equate it to the botchery that people like Joan Rivers and Michael Jackson bestowed upon themselves. The only difference here is that it is not permanent and it is only being done to images. However we all still have to look at them. From my following many people both male and female on social media I have found the biggest culprits are the ladies who are not bad-looking at all. But still they take it to an extreme and blur their face almost beyond recognition.

Blurring the skin is nothing new with images. Photoshop blurring has been done for many years now. In fact when I starting learning how to retouch and edit human skin in Photoshop the first technique was to use a blur layer on skin. But I soon found it was way too easy to overdo it and it looked very fake. Today’s retouching uses a technique called “frequency separation” and it too (in my opinion) looks very fake when overused as it often is.

The problem with the blur techniques that all the girls are using today is that the filter is applied “globally” to the image. This means it is applied to the whole images like a smear. When a retoucher uses the technique in Photoshop we do not apply it to eyes, nostril openings, lips, teeth, jewelry, hair ect… It is only used on the skin. Many of the images I see every day are actually laughable. It is like when a 14-year-old girl first uses makeup and she goes totally overboard until somebody (hopefully) steps in and shows her otherwise. But until then the female population will continue to look like smeared clowns. Seriously Miss, when did you ever see a real live person with skin that looked like “porcelain”? It does not exist, period, end of story. So you’re making yourself look “unreal” many times the breast implants become the topic. Girls get boob implants and I get it, they want to gain self-confidence or maybe they are in the entertainment industry and that is par for the course. But creating a false image and publicizing it is downright strange if you ask me? (I know you didn’t ask me lol)  When the girl with fake boobs walks in the room she looks the same as she did in a photo. But blurring a photo to make yourself not visible is weird. …I just don’t get it.

GUYS BEWARE: If you are hooking up with babes online and you have never met her in person. Is she luring you in with a selfie that has been blurred? The first meeting could be a doozy when you first see each other and she really “looks worse than a rough strip of Texas highway in the hot summer sun.”

I have posted many times in the past on the topic of retouching and editing skin and blemishes. I have a rule I go by and it takes two different paths. First I decide “is it a real photo I am looking for in the end result”, or am I going for an illustration. If it is a “real” image that I want to be my end point, the rule is as follows; I will remove what should have never been there. Examples are zits, pimples, and other skin flaws. If you weren’t born with it and it wasn’t always there then why have it in the photo. Skin can be softened as can crow’s feet and lines. But once you start removing lines you have crossed over to “fake” and that is not good (in my opinion). Moles and birthmarks are optional and I’ll ask the client or model if he/she is bothered by them and if so I remove them. After all moles & birthmarks can be covered by makeup, so therefore I say they qualify to be removed. Lines can be softened by makeup and I can do the same in PS. The big rule for skin is; Skin has texture, even with makeup applied skin still has a texture or the makeup has some sort of texture. If you slightly blur you will soften the texture. If you use the new professional techniques of “frequency separation” you are simply putting in “fake” texture. If done correctly Frequency Separation looks amazing, done wrong it looks just as fake as blurring.

If the end image is going to be an illustration I will take a different route. There are no limits because it is art, so “yes” I may make her skin like porcelain and that is ok because the image is not expected to be real.

I do understand that everybody wants to look their best… I get that. But how are you looking your best if your face is blurred or smeared?

Let’s look at some example.

Too much blur on skin.

Too much blur on skin.

Model 1 Model 3

In these two examples of frequency separation you have to use you own opinion. Some people like and some don’t.

Model 2

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s