real life Disney princesses (and Jessica Rabbit!!)

[Nwerke]

did you know that in europe, countries are starting to forbid photoshopped pics in magazines?

Damn straight! Now, let's get to work on this pesky "illustration" business, next. Artists! Mob of layabouts! Don't deserve patronage; let's kick their ilk from the pages of our magazines pronto.

I just think in this case it's almost more fair to say it's fan-art than 'real life' princess photos.

But then the fan-art crowd will cry foul. "That's not fanart! That's a shop! you...you...PHOTOGRAPHER!!!!"

We are talking about the extent of photoshop done to the pictures in the OP link

...who cares? Really? Did these folk collaborate to make some pretty images? Yes they did. Was that the point of the exercise? Yep. Is this a problem? Not from where I'm standing.

Sorry if I sound snippy here, I'm not meaning to, I just don't see why this needs to be decried. Every image ever created is a lie, if only in the fact that it's a mere representation of reality, not reality itself. People have been playing with that since the dawn of time; more power to them.

 

[Zombie_61]

It all depends on the purpose for which the image was created my friend, not about the photographer. If a client comes to me with a commission for an idealized portrait then so be it and break out the photoshop. If the image is for a newspaper and they want me to cover an event and capture raw essence of the scene, then contrast and color corrections aside, i keep the photoshop to a minimum. Saying a photographer needs to pick a different career if they need photoshop for a better image is similar to saying they need to choose a different career because they needs to change to a different lense because the current one does not give the desired effect.

Point taken. But, as you've illustrated (no pun intended) there is a difference between using Photoshop to make minor corrections/improvements and using it to completely change the content of a particular image; it's the latter I'm not in favor of personally. But I do agree the photographer should give the client what the client wants.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

...who cares?

I do, 'cause it looks like crap.

 

[nick daring]

I prefer these ladies' versions...

Nick

 

[The Wook]

Wook, I thought it was kinda funny...that pre-shopped pic is on the photogs website. I don't know much about him and the only reason I know OF him is the Disney stuff...but maybe he takes pride in his photoshop skills? Or maybe he just thought no crazy costume person would point out how much it was changed... >_>

He doesn't know us very well, does he? :lol

The Wook

 

[Gigatron]

I just think in this case it's almost more fair to say it's fan-art than 'real life' princess photos.

Wook, I thought it was kinda funny...that pre-shopped pic is on the photogs website. I don't know much about him and the only reason I know OF him is the Disney stuff...but maybe he takes pride in his photoshop skills? Or maybe he just thought no crazy costume person would point out how much it was changed... >_>

The only two changes I see is in the little floral pattern that runs vertically along the center panel of the dress, and the extra set of eyelets in the bodice. Other than that, everything looks pretty spot on to the dress in the "behind the scenes" shot. I wouldn't even say that those were significant changes. Maybe if the original dress looked like it had been sewn together by a cross-eyed monkey, and then run over by a train, I could see a complaint about photoshopping. Maybe the dress builder was given one set of plans, and then after the final piece was submitted for approval, Disney decided that they wanted to see some changes. If the change is small enough, it's easier to do it in post, that it is to rebuild the dress.

If you're referring to the color change, you don't need photoshop for that, at all. The sensors in digital cameras are designed to read all the colors and lighting in a scene and balance them so that the subjects aren't over or under exposed. So, what happens is, against a light-colored background, a pink dress will appear darker. The same dress, against a dark-colored background, will appear lighter. Plus, you need to account for the difference between temperature-controlled studio lighting, vs, a combination of natural light and overhead lights (probably flourescents). Lighting, alone, can contribute to huge color shifts. I deal with that problem all the time, whether shooting people, events, or products. It's a damn headache because then I have to spend time trying to bring everything back to normal.

-Fred