Realism in fitness photography

[gorez]

Do (fitness)models have any influence on the way their photos are featured on different sites? I have two shots of the same woman, featured as "Roxy rain" on landofvenus.com and ftviedo.com. To the admins: If there is any copyrightproblem feel free to delete the thread. But I had to choose two shots as an example where the difference is really popping out.
So have a look at those http://www.landofvenus.com/submit/roxy/1/image7.html and As in the first link EVERY structure of the skin, any wrinkle has been photoshopped, the second one leaves the model "as it is".
For me this second shot a much more "living" person, than the first one.
Do you think it´s only the photographer´s eye, that makes the difference, or is it the model´s will to defy any age ??

If there were only ageless rubberskinned dolls, there would be no sense in featuring any new faces to the scene!

What do you think ?

[aussie_psych_out]

dude i think that second shot is a much older one. look at her jaw shape, that cant be changed over night. thats a lot of steroid use that has made her look so much older. u can always tell by the eyes.

[FitnessPhotos]

It all comes down to a photographer's eye; some prefer not to retouch their images at all, some will do light retouching, others heavy. It's a personal preference; personally I would occasionally remove acne or scars, but I usually tried to minimize those flaws with makeup beforehand as editting individual images can be a royal pain in the butt.

[sucher67]

I think it has a lot to do with the photographer's style. Models will go to the photographer that has a look they like. Look at Johnny Crosslin pictures-- touchups are a signature of his work. I imagine a model who doesn't like that represention would not go to a shoot with him.

[ProShotPhoto]

I have never met a model who did not wish to look her best.

I think all photographers should wish the very same thing.

The models and photoraphers compete for space in magazines and the editor is ulikely to choose the image with evidence of current or past acne even if the models other assets are exceptional and outstanding.

The people who have control over what goes into a magazine are the editors not the models or the photoraphers. And the editors choose the images thier readership favors.

So ultimately the people wth the most influence on the content of magazines is the reader.

[Venuscam]

As the person who took this image I think I can shed some light.

The image you selected as one that was photochopped was a bad choice as an example. The reason being I do not think that was was chopped at all. Also your comparison photo esd s bsd example to compare it with and I will explain to you why

the other photos was shot in available light and looks like no on-camera flash was used. The model also did not have make professional makeup on.

My photo is a studio shot meaning I did it in a studio using studio strobes. I used two strobes for the shot, one strobe, the main light had a medium softbox, the second off to her left side was lower power and no modifiers. She also had her makeup done by a licensed, professional makeup artist. This was not a cheap shoot like your comparison photo. I also used a softer lense, not one that was real sharp. I will also tell you that when a model has professional makeup for a photo shoot, the makeup is applied very heavy, this is done so it looks better on camera.

As for the comparison image, I would not use it on my site, the model looks tired in it, makeup not applied correctly for a photo shoot and the lighting was bad. Its not my job to make a model look like she does any day of the week, I strive to make them look their best. All women want to look their best. I do not know exactly what it is you think my photography is hiding on her that you want to see, but I am all about making them look their best.

[fivegrand]

That's got to be one of James' worst images ever; his output is usually much better than that, even taking into account the fact that he for the most part conducts "walk up and shoot" photo sessions.

Originally Posted by Venuscam

As the person who took this image I think I can shed some light.

The image you selected as one that was photochopped was a bad choice as an example. The reason being I do not think that was was chopped at all.

*cough cough*

Uh

WHAT?

You say you shot that, and you don't think the image was photoshopped (that's with an "S" by the way)? You mean to say that you actually can't tell the difference between the image posted above, and the image that came out of your camera?

If you are Hope Parr, I hope to hell that you have more control over your image workflow than to not be able to tell that that image has been ran through Kodak's Digital Gem Airbrush Pro plugin.

So one of two things is true here:

1) You are not really Hope Parr, just a troll that doesn't have a clue
2) You are really Hope Parr, and you don't have a clue as to what your workflow is. If you're outsourcing your retouching and correcting, I would hope that you would know what your contractors are doing with your images (but you said that you "do not think that was was chopped at all" - so outsourcing the retouch work is likely not the case).


In response to the OP, generally speaking I tend to work toward a glamourous and refined yet plausible end result with images, doing some skin smoothing and blemish removal while leaving natural skin texture. Of course - what the client wants, the client gets. If the client wants an end product that more resembles a porcelain finish in terms of the skin, I can do that, as much as I personally find "overprocessed" images undesireable. Many skin imperfections can be overcome before the shot, with the appropriate use of makeup and lighting technique. The rest, if necessary, are overcome in Photoshop.

Wanna see the wildest retouch job ever? Click here

[Venuscam]

LOL.. another person who thinks they know something.
first, I dont have digital gem plugin, never seen it, never used it.
second, I do not outsource anything, yes I am me, if your ever in doubt, go to my site email me and ask me if this is me.

Originally Posted by fivegrand

If you are Hope Parr, I hope to hell that you have more control over your image workflow than to not be able to tell that that image has been ran through Kodak's Digital Gem Airbrush Pro plugin.

[gYmgIrL]

I think its whatever you're in the mood for, sometimes you want to see something that's like a fantasy, and sometimes you want to look at someone who's so real you could touch. I think both are important and both are as good (or as bad) as the other.

Thats just my opinion ^_^


..oh wait I didnt answer the question!

Some photographers have contracts that say that they own anything and everything they take of you, even if it looks bad. If they dont sign one of those things, or the photographer is nice then you can have your say about what gets used and not.

xxxx

[bluebird]

In this day and age, I think the consumer understands every product (animal, mineral, human) is presented in it's best possible *light*.

I do, however, thinks it's unethical (if there's such a thing in advertising~lol~) for a representative/actor/model of a specific product to attribute their results to said product, if they weren't. I know that's pretty idealistic to expect, but I do.

[torofuerte]

The OP needs to watch "Bigger, Stronger, Faster*"