My secret will be out…..sorry to all my models…. :(

30 Nov 2011 admin In G+ Posts

New Photoshop Tool Reveals Where Pictures Have Been Airbrushed

We don't know about you, but we get irked when we can sense a photo has been airbrushed, but can't really put our finger on what the changes are.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/29/photoshop-tool-airbrushing-revealed_n_1119212.html

New Photoshop Tool Reveals Where Pictures Have Been Airbrushed
We don’t know about you, but we get irked when we can sense a photo has been airbrushed, but can’t really put our finger on what the changes are.

Comments: 15

  1. Rima Regas 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    Now, onto the silicone implants!

  2. Rima Regas 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Brent Burzycki 😛

  3. Brent Burzycki 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Rima Regas You can use IR imagers to tell if people have fakers……

  4. Norman Ma 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    Photoshop tool?

  5. Brent Burzycki 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Norman Ma Yep does appear it would be something for a future version possibly..

    Here is the Mashable Article:

    http://mashable.com/2011/11/29/photoshop-celebrities-models/

  6. Michael Braucht 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    Whatever. In 5 minutes there will be software created to mask editting effects that are detectable.
    Honestly, if you can't really tell what is fake and what is real, you've got bigger problems – you should probably get out more often.

  7. Brent Burzycki 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Michael Braucht would you like to tell that to the press… they sure seem to be clueless…..

    And anyone that likes watching anything with Kim Karassholian in it…

  8. Rima Regas 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Brent Burzycki I was just being facetious. Seriously, though, many instances of air-brushing and other alterations are detectable by people who are not experts. Beyond the perfect skin and bodies, there is still a lot that gets by the average person.

  9. Brent Burzycki 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    I edit all my images I need to run one via the tool…. I could not imagine with sharpening and other tools I use that it would not just be one huge alert…

  10. Rima Regas 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    +Brent Burzycki There distinctions, I think, that most people would agree on. I would think context and purpose are what determine where the distinctions end?

  11. Jared Nave 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    well … DUH. of course her teats have been altered.

  12. Lyndsy Simon 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    I thought that was an eye-tracking diagram until I read the title.

  13. Elizabeth Hahn 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    Wouldn't it just be easier to say what photos have not been altered?

  14. Brent Burzycki 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    Probably…..seeing most have……altered is also a strange word……. That would need a real definition…

  15. Elizabeth Hahn 30 Nov 2011 Reply

    True. I guess "look 10+ years younger than original" isn't very scientific.

Leave a Comment!

Your email address will not be published.