Frank Smith

Anyone Else Here Really Hate Photoshop?

20 posts in this topic

I hate Photoshop in general. When looking for wallpaper of my favourite models and such, there is just so much Photoshop I question why they bother pay the models as they might as well draw it from hand. Anyway, relevant to this forum of ours, I hate when you are looking up girls and they have these professional photo shoots and the pictures have been airbrushed, despite all the make-up and fancy camera angles. I now avoid those type of girls, especially the really expensive ones (£150 an hour is my definition) because I have booked and seen massive differences.

Just wondering if guys feel the same, I just can't find it attractive when I know it is fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I much prefer natural looking pictures. If a lady wishes to hide her face that is fine so long as it is done with a bit of subtlety. Just blanking out the face looks so crude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...dificult to answer this one, as a photographer myself I use photoshop a lot. But I do agree that some pictures of the girls advertising have been "done"

and this makes deciding whether or not to see them hard, after all, will it be the girl in the picture you meet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate Photoshop in general. When looking for wallpaper of my favourite models and such, there is just so much Photoshop I question why they bother pay the models as they might as well draw it from hand. Anyway, relevant to this forum of ours, I hate when you are looking up girls and they have these professional photo shoots and the pictures have been airbrushed, despite all the make-up and fancy camera angles. I now avoid those type of girls, especially the really expensive ones (£150 an hour is my definition) because I have booked and seen massive differences.

Just wondering if guys feel the same, I just can't find it attractive when I know it is fake.

Yes,I feel the same way completely. Now if I know the agency well and can trust their receptionist to give me a good steer,then it wont stop me booking but otherwise be it agency or independent obvious photoshopping completely puts me off ,I just move on. There is nothing wrong with a bit of make up, I accept that is part of the look. The lady does not need to look like a bronzed goddess and there is nothing wrong with small imperfections.

Confidence and trust in the photos and in what the lady has to say is key IMO and obvious photoshopping is a big negative here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate when you are looking up girls and they have these professional photo shoots and the pictures have been airbrushed, despite all the make-up and fancy camera angles. I now avoid those type of girls

Absolutely agree, I avoid them too. The type of pics I'd sooner see are self takes, on a mobile, in front of a mirror...the picture quality may be a little lacking but at least you get to see a real person!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate Photoshop in general. When looking for wallpaper of my favourite models and such, there is just so much Photoshop I question why they bother pay the models as they might as well draw it from hand. Anyway, relevant to this forum of ours, I hate when you are looking up girls and they have these professional photo shoots and the pictures have been airbrushed, despite all the make-up and fancy camera angles. I now avoid those type of girls, especially the really expensive ones (£150 an hour is my definition) because I have booked and seen massive differences.

Absolutely agree, I avoid them too. The type of pics I'd sooner see are self takes, on a mobile, in front of a mirror...the picture quality may be a little lacking but at least you get to see a real person!

Kid A - I totally agree but this industry as well as the whole media industry is so image conscious that it will never happen. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't please all of you men ... we really can't

Some say they hate the self taken ones with a camera phone

and prefer super pro pics with tasteful backgrounds

which usually means they have some photoshopping in them.

Some prefer the amateur photos taken without much preparation.

Those pics where the lady does not have a single freckle or mole

on her skin... or shading on any part of her body.... still seem

to fool some men into thinking that the lady they meet will have

alabaster skin and not a crease of fold anywhere on her body.

I have never seen the point in photoshopping my pics ( which show me

as I really look, blemishes and all ) because if those were the type

of photos I had on my site I would be terrified of a client being very

disappointed when he saw the real me.

Edited by ADELE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,I feel the same way completely. Now if I know the agency well and can trust their receptionist to give me a good steer,then it wont stop me booking but otherwise be it agency or independent obvious photoshopping completely puts me off ,I just move on. There is nothing wrong with a bit of make up, I accept that is part of the look. The lady does not need to look like a bronzed goddess and there is nothing wrong with small imperfections.

Confidence and trust in the photos and in what the lady has to say is key IMO and obvious photoshopping is a big negative here.

Same here as regards if i trust the Establishment or a recommendation given to me by someone i trust. I much prefer to see the lady as she really looks but in my view photoshopping is here to stay sadly. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't please all of you men ... we really can't

Some say they hate the self taken ones with a camera phone

and prefer super pro pics with tasteful backgrounds

which usually means they have some photoshopping in them.

Some prefer the amateur photos taken without much preparation.

Those pics where the lady does not have a single freckle or mole

on her skin... or shading on any part of her body.... still seem

to fool some men into thinking that the lady they meet will have

alabaster skin and not a crease of fold anywhere on her body.

I have never seen the point in photoshopping my pics ( which show me

as I really look, blemishes and all ) because if those were the type

of photos I had on my site I would be terrified of a client being very

disappointed when he saw the real me.

I really sympathise with the ladies on this one - men seem to want to hold them to impossible standards and I understand your fear Adele.

I had a punt today and had a long shower afterwards with the lady. Although I've seen her many times before, I found it a real turn on to see her without any make up and her hair just washed because she looked so natural and I could ignore any imperfections. She also seemed genuinely happy that I complemented her on it. But I suspect most guys want the full works in photos etc because this is a fantasy business after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a way the difference between professionally taken (and hence photoshopped) pictures Vs mobile camera taken pictures is the professionalism, not entirely true though. Since I always book through agencies, I only see the professionally taken pictures but then you get used to the photoshopped pictures and by experience you start seeing the hidden face if you look closely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really sympathise with the ladies on this one - men seem to want to hold them to impossible standards.

I think it's quite the opposite. In society in general the "pressure" (not too sure how real it is) for women to look good, you know, the type who are never seen without makeup and feel insecure because they are not has picture perfect as an Photoshopped Cheryl Cole, I think that kind of mentality comes more from other women (and media) more than men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate Photoshop in general. When looking for wallpaper of my favourite models and such, there is just so much Photoshop I question why they bother pay the models as they might as well draw it from hand. Anyway, relevant to this forum of ours, I hate when you are looking up girls and they have these professional photo shoots and the pictures have been airbrushed, despite all the make-up and fancy camera angles. I now avoid those type of girls, especially the really expensive ones (£150 an hour is my definition) because I have booked and seen massive differences.

Just wondering if guys feel the same, I just can't find it attractive when I know it is fake.

Photoshop is great for brushing out say...plug sockets or wires that have found their way into your frame, or to hide faces and identifying features or surroundings of escorts who like a little more discretion.

I can't understand why people use it to try and hide imperfections. Nobody is perfect but using PS to hide things like stretch marks, flabby baby bellies, for trimming hips, flab or muffin tops or the bingo wing is in my opinion is rarely well done and even more rare to find one done that actually adds something rather than detracting from a picture. It often looks so amateurish it immediately takes any ambiance away an image might have had.

If you don't like it the way it is then don't photograph it!.

Flagrant photoshopping to me would scream FAKE EVERYTHING and should be a warning to anyone interested in visiting the lady that all isn't as it appears. If someone has something about themselves they don't feel comfortable with why not use photo angles and clothing to enhance their better points ?

Some photoshopped galleries look more like Madame Tuturds waxworks.

Photoshop should be used to correct mistakes and to enhance the appearance of a photo but using it to mislead as some webmasters/ladies do is dishonest and deceptive. You can't build a reputation on dishonesty and deceit.

The irony is that ladies often look just fine as they are. If only perfectly formed flawless women could go into escorting, them 100% of us would be looking for new careers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate those technically bad pix that some escorts use taken by someone who has no idea what a technically good photo should look like. I feel if the girl is happy to use such a photo how sloppy and undiscerning is she with the rest of her life? Cameras can be very unkind, some girls are not photogenic, some blemishes are emphasised by the camera, I use Photoshop to correct things like contrast, framing, exposure, grain, colour balance etc and also to make the photo look like it would to the human eye instead of the super critical camera. It also bugs me a great deal when photographers don't take the time to evaluate the body they are photographing and present its best bits from the nest angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely agree, I avoid them too. The type of pics I'd sooner see are self takes, on a mobile, in front of a mirror...the picture quality may be a little lacking but at least you get to see a real person!

Ha you've been looking at my site?

As for photoshop I think it's ok to PS a spot, dark shadows, plug sockets etc etc but some photographers go completely OTT and do away with freckles, over white the eyes and so on.

I used to use pro togs but now I prefer for a more amateur look, I'll probably change my mind next week and prefer a glossy look. Each to their own I say xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha you've been looking at my site?

As for photoshop I think it's ok to PS a spot, dark shadows, plug sockets etc etc but some photographers go completely OTT and do away with freckles, over white the eyes and so on.

I used to use pro togs but now I prefer for a more amateur look, I'll probably change my mind next week and prefer a glossy look. Each to their own I say xx

I like to have a mixture on my website. I have a professional photoshoot once a year but from time to time I put snaps on my blog too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is perfect but using PS to hide things like stretch marks, flabby baby bellies, for trimming hips, flab or muffin tops or the bingo wing is in my opinion is rarely well done and even more rare to find one done that actually adds something rather than detracting from a picture. It often looks so amateurish it immediately takes any ambiance away an image might have had.

Helen, I disagree. I don't think many people can detect when the light brushes of Liquify and Pucker tool on Photoshop were used to reduce various flabs, bingo wings arms, bellies, etc. in the matter of few clicks. (as long as they did not gone over the top with them).

Most guys simply just notice the over smooth and polished skin, which gives a game away, they are to blind to spot anything else which was done in PS.

Edited by Xenia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Helen, I disagree. I don't think many people can detect when the light brushes of Liquify and Pucker tool on Photoshop were used to reduce various flabs, bingo wings arms, bellies, etc. in the matter of few clicks. (as long as they did not gone over the top with them).

Most guys simply just notice the over smooth and polished skin, which gives a game away, they are to blind to spot anything else which was done in PS.

But I think that is the whole point Xenia - if the skin looks obviously fake, why bother taking a look at the rest of the photo? There would always be a creeping doubt that a lot more could be hidden by PS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it when they use PS to cover over tattoos. I realise that they can lead to identifying the girl almost as easily as a face shot, but as someone who isn't a fan of them, it can be a bit jarring to book a girl expecting unmarked skin and wind up with a someone who has a back tattoo that looks likes Jackson Pollock's vomit.

Edited by Tibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My photoguy uses PS to cover up slight imperfections that may not usually be there - things like the fact my dress had a crumple in it, mark where I'd been sat, odd shadows etc. This generally makes for a more pleasing image, but I tell him not to cover over or alter anything else. Tattoos?I have 2 that are fairly unnoticeable to the point where a lot of clients actually forget, and on noticing on return visits they think I've had them added in the interim. In most poses they aren't noticeable at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really talking about small tattoos here - I booked a girl who it turned out had a dragon up most of her right hand side and angel wings on her back, that weren't there on the photos on her website.

Of course, by the time the clothes were coming off and I saw them I'd already paid and we were well into the booking - I could hardly ask for my money back and get her to leave on the strength of an unaired personal opinion. And let's be right - even if I had checked and she'd lied I still wouldn't have have not asked for my money back - I'm not brave enough to do that. <_<

And yes I did check afterwards that the photos were shopped and taken after the tattoos were done. ;)

And it's a real shame that professional photographers don't need to bother about proper lighting or set up any more. Why worry about doing things right first time when you can fix it via fakery? :angry:

Edited by Tibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now