MrMohican

The Worst Airbrushed Photo Award!

13 posts in this topic

Not sure what the general consensus on this is but Ive notice the whole editing of photographs and general airbrushing out of anything resembling characte ron escort sites is now well out of hand.

 

I understand that the odd blemish or spot might want to be covered up but when you get to the point where you are erasing any skin tone or texture you realise these things are no longer photographs they've become paintings!

 

In an effort to spotlight the worst offenders I think we should create an award.

 

Feel free to add to this. We'll have a judgement at the end of the year and a prize presented to the worst offending studio

 

I will kickstart the process. The first pic in Ericas portfolio is so bad! The girls face appears so flat and devoid of natural features she looks like a shop mannequin!

 

http://invasianescorts.co.uk/erica/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is beyond photoshop...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or does that look like one of those high end silicon dolls

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what the general consensus on this is but Ive notice the whole editing of photographs and general airbrushing out of anything resembling characte ron escort sites is now well out of hand.

 

I understand that the odd blemish or spot might want to be covered up but when you get to the point where you are erasing any skin tone or texture you realise these things are no longer photographs they've become paintings!

 

In an effort to spotlight the worst offenders I think we should create an award.

 

Feel free to add to this. We'll have a judgement at the end of the year and a prize presented to the worst offending studio

 

I will kickstart the process. The first pic in Ericas portfolio is so bad! The girls face appears so flat and devoid of natural features she looks like a shop mannequin!

 

http://invasianescorts.co.uk/erica/

 

the pics show a very slim young frame but her vid on 007 showes someone more butch and alot older.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go for Evelyns new pics at ASM - I have seen her pretty frequently in recent months. Her new set bare very liitle resemblance to her. Photoshop is involved for sure - I use it most days so the signs are pretty obvious. I'm sure there are worse offenders but it sticks out a mile when you already know the girl pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the pics show a very slim young frame but her vid on 007 showes someone more butch and alot older.

Having met the real Erica, I can say she is neither butch nor old. But she is certainly heavier around the hips and thighs than shown in these pics. Also her boob-job, although substantial, doesn't jut out in that way.

 

The face isn't a problem, as it really does have a strangely flattish look to it. You would easily recognise the girl when you met her, which is what matters. There are far worse cases, for example the shots of 'Helana' (aka Helena/Coco) on AX, as discussed on one of the oriental threads recently. In fact I may go fetch a link for those . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     When will guys wake up and just stop seeing SPs who have over the top photoshoping done to there pics ? If i see any photosoping i just move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is Berksboy these girls quite often are gorgeous in reality! Except just not in the false airbrushed painted fantasy way the agencies present them. I for one always find natural beauty, without the aid of professional lighting and editing far more compelling to look at. The idea that you are looking at a truthful representation is far more likely to get me to visit a girl than the stupid fantasy the agencies perpetrate. One day there will be an agency that wises up to this and I reckon they'll corner the market...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is Berksboy these girls quite often are gorgeous in reality! Except just not in the false airbrushed painted fantasy way the agencies present them. I for one always find natural beauty, without the aid of professional lighting and editing far more compelling to look at. The idea that you are looking at a truthful representation is far more likely to get me to visit a girl than the stupid fantasy the agencies perpetrate. One day there will be an agency that wises up to this and I reckon they'll corner the market...

I doubt it. The number of gorgeous girls who started in MK with ordinary pictures then suddenly got super busy AS SOON as their professional pictures went online was ridiculous. The fact is that they look bland and fade into the background compared to professional pictures which have a far higher colour resolution. An agency with all natural pictures would look dull in comparison to an agency gallery with all professional ones. If your theory were true then a girl would not suddenly see a huge influx of business once her self snaps were removed from a website and her professional ones aired.

 

If professional pictures didnt make you a lot busier then no girls would bother paying the stupidly high fees some of the photographers charge. I have only ever seen two photographers who could touch up pictures to look completely natural and untouched…just a slightly shinier version of yourself. The rest all add what they feel you should have. Sometimes a photographer will email you the pictures after touching them up and then refuse to send you the untouched pictures. This happened to a girl who worked for me. She had to pay for another photoshoot with another photographer. 

Edited by Chloe Kisses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

       Me and i think Mr Mohican are taking about pics that have had a lot of phoshopping done to them not professional pics with good lighting , higher resolution ect.

 

 

     "  Sometimes a photographer will email you the pictures after touching them up and then refuse to send you the untouched pictures. This happened to a girl who worked for me. She had to pay for another photoshoot with another photographer."

 

 

       Well she is a fool then , she was the one who payed for them so she should get her untouched pics or tell him to do one and not pay him .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that Chloe is right. We can all point and laugh at the worst photo-shop offenders but the reality is... LOADS OF BLOKES FALL FOR IT!!!!!!! And that's why the agencies keep bloody doing it! Even though I think it is pretty obvious when girls have been airbrushed beyond a realistic level, so many people just can't seem to spot it. I've had arguments about it on this very forum.

1 person likes this

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