Jump to content
Forum Look Announcement

mainly

Members

  • Joined

  • Last visited

View Profile Find content

Posts posted by mainly

    2 hours ago, Stranger50 said:

    The making clothing sheer thing is an easy and frequently employed manipulation in fakes.

    its not fake. it's just the original photo with the exposure bumped up. he didn't add anything to the pic. the nipple was still visibale before but when the photo is brightened it becomes more visible.

     

    of course there is what you might call fakery employed, (called retouching) where they change the look of the entire body, skin made clearer, waist made slimmer, legs made smaller, etc. but thats done by the photogs themselves.(actually they pay retouchers to do it) then published in magazine. this is done on every single photo of models. 

    5 hours ago, cylnz said:

    So it would be like when Marco glaviano used a distortion tool to make her boobs bigger. 

    not really. there is fakery done to photos, usually called retouching. but in this case it's just the exposure bumped up a bit.

     

    if you take a pic then bump up the expose in lightroom. does that mean its fake? 

     

    it's  called retouching. although ususally they do it to cover stuff up. not the other way around.

     

    but that's done in virtually every published fashion photo. legs made slimmer, face, arms made smoother, waist made smaller, skin color changed. 

     

    but in this case the change may have even been done by the photog himself since he released the brightnened version on his own instagram, and cindy then commented on it herself. 

     

    even the photo you posted was veery likely  retouched. 

    30 minutes ago, cylnz said:

    For some reason I cannot edit the post above.

    Supposed above is fake pic. I have posted the real unedited version here

    Albert-Watson-Blumarine-San-Francisco-autunno-slash-inverno-1989-slash-90-Modella-Cindy-Crawford.jpgIt’s just someone bumped up the contrast. Probably him. He posted it on his Instagram. Not really a fake.  . 

    5 hours ago, Stranger50 said:

    Great work! I still hold out slight hope to see more from this shoot. IMO some of the shots released later were better than the ones that made the pictorial.

    the finals of these shoots are so heavily retouched if you saw the unretouched raw pics you would barely even recognoze them.

     

    unlikley we'll ever see any more from this shoot as it's so old. even the shots that were released later are stll retouched.

    1 hour ago, ArianaVSCouture said:

    @mainly, thanks! The pics are from fashionanthology.com. ;) I don't know about hqs, but the original ones are bigger and  have a bit better quality. For example, here's two original runway pics from  Chanel Haute Couture S/S 1993:

    chanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-4.thumb.jpg.3a26da6ecb2ada42ccacc0119e196ab3.jpgchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-12.thumb.jpg.f3927ccb778a319f570123ac4644dd2c.jpg

    And the rest:
    chanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-1.thumb.png.6e958429c93d0d79d40dac01cd8faf28.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-2.thumb.png.dc5fdc576dac09005fec8da006515237.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-3.thumb.png.d7993c3f9daa446abcd3f654694a251b.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-5.thumb.png.d928249bcdaad68691009362f16b9069.png

    chanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-6.thumb.png.7a72741ab37916a859fce1b31522d9f3.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-7.thumb.png.dc110edf09d39ff6e3248521e6f56fa7.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-8.thumb.png.1d1736653326f784b084d194cfac4b02.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-11.thumb.png.df03d891a3a4f4c2f0eaca2aecd17632.png

    chanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-9.thumb.png.5115df51c97e46675741742c1e516d6b.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-10.thumb.png.7b5de2d75a00839155e879c6e5110f78.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-13.thumb.png.de4a89eb567eea11ee24fea335e223d8.pngchanel-haute-couture-ss-1993-14.thumb.png.c50f8f8f985cf4d5c3604bdeda52d240.png

    oh yeah... that dumb site where theres no way to get hq originals...