Sandrine Bascouert
Member
That's why I consider any discussion on my Photoshopping practice as irrelevant
Only count the intent....
(I know it's not as simple as that)
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
Another Watch.
- Thread starter Cody White
- Start date
That's why I consider any discussion on my Photoshopping practice as irrelevant
Only count the intent....
(I know it's not as simple as that)
Alain Briot
pro member
Good. I'm glad you won't join the ranks of the delusional photographers. There's enough of them as it is!
Martin Evans
New member
This comment has made me start looking at the glossy magazines in a different way. One of the UK weekend newspapers publishes a supplement called "How to Spend it". I have always detested it, on principle, but a careful look through a recent issue made me realize how much work probably goes into all the photographs. The male fashion expert on the cover of the January 8th issue is carefully brought forward out of a progressively faded background. The full page spread of a new powerboat (Hunton 1005 RIB) reveals a lot of "enhancement" of the foreground and middleground water to convey an impression of speed. The fashion photographs are, as always, very high class. And then there are the watches, watches, jewellery, and more watches! All repay careful inspection and attempted analysis of the photographic techniques.
Martin
Alain Briot
pro member
Hi Martin,
There is what we think of the product advertised (watches in this case but by extension any luxury product) and then there is how the photograph of this product was made. Notice I said "made" and not taken. There's nothing about a photograph being "taken" here. It is made. Even better, it is constructed. Carefully, and craftfully, constructed.
The problem with expensive objects such as watches and other luxury products is that they represent a want rather than a need. Unless we are the intended audience, meaning those who purchase these products, we tend to look at them with a certain disdain. We tend to approach them as objects that blasé people purchase because they have everything, because they are bored, and because they find excitement in owning what we consider to be totally superfluous and unecessary.
This may or may not be true, it all depends where you are at and what you believe in. However, what is important is that just as much work goes into photographing a Big Mac (to take one example among many) as goes into photographing a luxury watch. Look carefully at the BigMac photographs the next time you are at a McDonald restaurant. The sesame seeds each looks perfect, there is no "bald spot" and all the seeds are matched in color and shape . Hamburger buns don't come that way. In regular buns seeds are randomly spaced. Some are missing. Some are split in half and others are afflicted with a variety defects: wrong color, wrong shape, wrong refletance levels, etc. So what is done is the perfect seeds are picked from a large number of buns, then glued one at a time, using tweezers and a minute amount of glue, onto the bun that will be photographed.
The same is done for the cheese (goal: the perfect melt), the meat, the "special sauce", the pickles, etc. Nothing is left to chance. Yet, this product is a need, not a want, provided we look at a Big Mac as food (we need to eat) and not at being a particular type of food (we may or may not like fast food or McDonalds).
The moral of these remarks? Photographs used to sell the products offered by large companies are not accidental and do not depict reality. Like cars and like a multitude of other products that are sold on the basis of an image, when we buy a Big Mac we never get one that looks like the one on the advertising. No BigMac looks like the one that makes us want to buy. That one is a construction, an idealization. No matter how real it looks, it is not real. The goal is to make it look appetizing, not to make it look like the ones coming out of the kitchen.
Alain Briot
There is what we think of the product advertised (watches in this case but by extension any luxury product) and then there is how the photograph of this product was made. Notice I said "made" and not taken. There's nothing about a photograph being "taken" here. It is made. Even better, it is constructed. Carefully, and craftfully, constructed.
The problem with expensive objects such as watches and other luxury products is that they represent a want rather than a need. Unless we are the intended audience, meaning those who purchase these products, we tend to look at them with a certain disdain. We tend to approach them as objects that blasé people purchase because they have everything, because they are bored, and because they find excitement in owning what we consider to be totally superfluous and unecessary.
This may or may not be true, it all depends where you are at and what you believe in. However, what is important is that just as much work goes into photographing a Big Mac (to take one example among many) as goes into photographing a luxury watch. Look carefully at the BigMac photographs the next time you are at a McDonald restaurant. The sesame seeds each looks perfect, there is no "bald spot" and all the seeds are matched in color and shape . Hamburger buns don't come that way. In regular buns seeds are randomly spaced. Some are missing. Some are split in half and others are afflicted with a variety defects: wrong color, wrong shape, wrong refletance levels, etc. So what is done is the perfect seeds are picked from a large number of buns, then glued one at a time, using tweezers and a minute amount of glue, onto the bun that will be photographed.
The same is done for the cheese (goal: the perfect melt), the meat, the "special sauce", the pickles, etc. Nothing is left to chance. Yet, this product is a need, not a want, provided we look at a Big Mac as food (we need to eat) and not at being a particular type of food (we may or may not like fast food or McDonalds).
The moral of these remarks? Photographs used to sell the products offered by large companies are not accidental and do not depict reality. Like cars and like a multitude of other products that are sold on the basis of an image, when we buy a Big Mac we never get one that looks like the one on the advertising. No BigMac looks like the one that makes us want to buy. That one is a construction, an idealization. No matter how real it looks, it is not real. The goal is to make it look appetizing, not to make it look like the ones coming out of the kitchen.
Alain Briot