retrowavelength <retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:55602027.4010809@yahoo.com:
> You all may have noticed that some of the Girlie Magazine pics are
> rather heavily worked over in a photo editor. Some of them look nice,
> however I realized today that some of the "improvements" are actually
> removing details in the original photo - the resulting image is false.
>
> The example I noted today is the attached Judy O'Day. The photoshopped
> one has completely erased the fact that Judy had some nice freckling
> across her shoulders. I think I'll be saving fewer of those type pics
> in the future without looking at them critically to see if real
> details have been erased.
>
> --rwl
>
>
I'm not sure that the Girlie Magazine pics are to blame. Sometimes the
problem is with the source material. A picture occurring in two
different mags is often quite different based on many things, from the
editor's preferences to the quality of paper and ink.
Also, many scanners apply a certain amount of "blurring" to lessen the
impact of graininess that the old mags had. This seems to be what has
happened with this Judy O'Day pic. The worst part of this can be seen in
what has happened to her nipples. Her right one is horrific.
I find that every pic pretty much has to be looked at individually.
|
|