Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poll: Photoshop sometimes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Like a model, I voted for "Small amounts" because you sometimes can't control the acne of a bruise appears in you the day of your shoot, and If you had traveled from another country, it is so stressed going to the office and didn't know If you are going to be able for being shot. I like no photoshop in anything more that a brave acne or bruise but it is ok for me in anyways ☺ (I don't care seeing acne, bruises or any other thing considered "ugly", i like the girls just the way they are, and that's why I love AW)

    Comment


      #32
      I would like to add my opinion to the matter of photo-shopping. Although photoshop techniques can easily seen as another tool in the art shed it very much depends on how that tool is used and in what way. I have been a member of Abbywinters for a long time now at least since 2007 in various guises as Davros (we of the evil Dalek empire, lol) and in my judgement I find there being very little that photo-shopping can do to some of these images. Take for instance a photo of Gretchen in her slip. The colours are already very much alive. The naturalism of the look adds so much to the atmosphere of that particular set. Mia D. from 2006 in fish-nets, one of the great sets from this sites. All the colour is vibrant. The artistry is in the pose, the lighting, the moment that the shots are taken. Perhaps my favorite picture on this site stems from long ago in 2005 when Isabel stands in her underwear to one side of the frame while the rest of the frame is taken up in the luscious greenery behind her. That is art without having to turn to a photoshop to enhance it. Blemishes, bruises are not "ugly". They come with life and I do not judge the model on the basis of such fluff. Really, Masie sums it up nicely:
      "we don't have make up, special clothing, or complex hair styling to 'better' the ladies we work with, we just want to celebrate real woman, I think thats a safer term than 'natural woman'. Looking at our place within the world in general I am really proud to be part of that smaller voice that shows real every day woman as they are."
      And that is what is coming across when I explore this site. So no. I am not a supporter of photoshopping.

      PS.
      On other photo which I love is Olivia J. lying on the ground with just a bra top on and playing at hiding behind a small plant. I love the hair on her arms. Photoshopping would remove some of these wonderful enhancements in the name of enhancement. Thank you for hearing me out.

      Comment


        #33
        Davrosin12, let me restate: We'd NEVER remove hair on arms! We're only talking about using photoshop to remove blemishes (eg, pimples or similar), and poo-on-anus (this is the current proposal). We're also not talking about adjusting colours, so your fave pics of Gretchen, Mia D, or Isabel would be unaffected (unless, they had a pimple).

        Comment


          #34
          Masie's point is interesting.

          Originally posted by masie View Post
          Personally if it ain't broke don't fix it. At the moment we have a black and white policy - we are a natural website, we don't photoshop we are on a 'mission' to show woman as they really are because we think real woman are beautiful.
          AW may not use Photoshop but no more does does it take the RAW image direct from the Camera, covert to JPEG and post the images to the site. Somewhere on the site there is (or was - I haven't checked) a description of the post processing methods used and from memory they at least involved tone adjustments and sharpening. Also you presumably crop or at least downside the images to make them more easily downloaded and viewed in a browser? On that bases using Photoshop is just an extension of existing post processing. Even if images were taken direct from the camera, the high end cameras used have multiple configuration options so they may not be capturing an 'authentic' image anyway.

          For me Izzy is absolutely right when she says:

          Originally posted by izzy View Post
          Of course, photoshoping is one of possible solutions, but I think if you are invested enough in your craft (looking from photographer or videographer point of view) you will try to get everything right while shooting not while post processing. Me as a photographer, I rather put more effort in preparation and make sure the model is ready to go in the day of the shoot then later, spend time in front of computer photoshoping images (I could in that same time start preparing another shoot or go to do jogging to refresh my brain!).
          I'd rather AW used Photoshop than turned away a model, but i would much prefer shooters to be shooting and not post processing in Photoshop!

          Comment


            #35
            Whoa! No way. If I wanted to see that kind of thing, I would go to the rest of the Internet. The natural beauty is the charm of AW and why I've been a member for the last 10yrs. Warts (pimples/poo) and all!

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by garionhall View Post
              Davrosin12, let me restate: We'd NEVER remove hair on arms! We're only talking about using photoshop to remove blemishes (eg, pimples or similar), and poo-on-anus (this is the current proposal). We're also not talking about adjusting colours, so your fave pics of Gretchen, Mia D, or Isabel would be unaffected (unless, they had a pimple).
              Garion, thanks for that clarification.

              Would you consider using photoshop to remove a tattoo? Ever?
              Last edited by JacksonP49; 17 December 2014, 10:43 PM.

              Comment


                #37
                The fact that Abbywinters doesn't photoshop is why I am a member. I don't want to see fake women. You have a great formula for success and I think you should stick with it.

                Comment


                  #38
                  Whilst trying to be sensitive to the feelings of models who might want 'imperfections' covered or shoots not having to be cancelled, I'd rather not allow Photoshopping. Like many subscibers I suspect, I dont mind the odd pimple or fleck of poo. If we did there's plenty of sites to cater to a desire for 'perfection'.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    In reading the discussion I realize I am not certain what is meant by makeup. Usually it seems it would refer to enhancement of facial features or facial skin, but if a model were to apply a small dab of matching skin tone cream on a body pimple before the shoot, is that makeup? I'm not favoring this, just wanting to understand the parameters.

                    I likely wouldn't view images of models anywhere were it not for the ability provided by AW to feel like I can get to know them via solo and backstage videos and, just as importantly, by their forum postings. This makes all the difference to me. When a model has won me over (usually pretty easy) then any blemishes recede into irrelevancy.
                    Last edited by simono; 18 December 2014, 03:16 AM.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      While I'm right there with Masie on "if it aint broke...", I voted for 'sometimes'.
                      I really want to qualify that...

                      I keep paying for AW for two reasons - the great women and the great 'feel' of the shoots.

                      I love that AW models are tall, short, skinny, curvy, asymmetric... you know, real...
                      I personally don't mind the occasional scraped knee, band-aid, pimple, scar, whatever...
                      Sometimes it is why a model or a shoot is interesting.
                      Sure, sometimes it's a distraction. I'm over it

                      It's nice to have some art in your erotica... but... if you push that too far then you can lose something in the quest for visual perfection.

                      Show me graphic artist or photographer who can resist, once started, "one last tweak" and I'll give you $50...
                      If you start doing it you have to be really careful about where you draw the line; maybe it shouldn't be an individual decision.

                      Perhaps if a model looks at an (otherwise great) shoot and is really distressed.
                      For a hypothetical : "I totally forgot that tattoo had my full real name in it"... go ahead, photoshop that and save the shoot.

                      A pimple on an otherwise lovely bum? (Hi, Yara ) Leave it (unless it's a great big weeping mess...)

                      A big dag? (ask an Aussie); yeah, well I know some people are into that...

                      I understand that trying to get two or more people in the same room with no blemishes on a given day must be hard.
                      I understand that some models may have confidence issues that mess with the "feel" of a shoot.

                      If it's seriously going to cause problems then maybe you need another category (like 'After Dark') to catch those shoots.

                      Hell, I'm sure some of the photographers would love to have certain models for a totally 'artistic' shoot where they could relight and retouch to perfection; clothes, make-up, whatever... but not every shoot.

                      Just don't lose what you have.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        The idea that the basic, shared, universal human realities of having a body make someone "imperfect" and unattractive and that people ought to be different from how they are naturally to be thought acceptable is a concept central to the commodification and objectification of bodies generally and women's bodies specifically. The objectifying descriptive copy and tags used for Abby Winters shoots have long disheartened me, but I've kept with the site because the shoots themselves seem to be conducted with integrity and respect for the people who model. If that, too, changes—that is, if the site caves to the idea that women's bodies ought to be brought into line with a single unrealistic standard of appearance before they can be called attractive or acceptable—then I couldn't spend money here in good conscience anymore. The only reason we think having pimples on your face or a little poop on your anus is objectionable in the first place is because we're socialized toward a narrow concept of beauty that doesn't have room for the facts of life. In some—though not all—ways, Abby Winters has fought that; using Photoshop would be a step in the wrong direction. The answer is not to go along with the social forces we know to be damaging, but to push back against unrealistic beauty ideals and carve out a larger and larger space where the body in its natural state is loved and respected. (When I say "natural state," I'm talking about however the person whose body it is personally chooses for their body to be, not about an objection to tattoos or piercings or what hair to cut or keep.) Get better, not worse: don't use Photoshop.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          we luvng ur pretty flowers is natural ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥

                          Comment


                            #43
                            I'm firmly in the "no, never" camp, for all the reasons so cogently explained by others, particularly Masie, Izzy, Misha, Jada and Noa, whose opinions I think should carry special weight. This comment from Misha exemplifies everything I love about AW. It's such a special place and I wouldn't want to lose it by making exceptions to a rule that has worked so well for so many years.

                            "When delivering an Information Session to applicants for nude modeling work with us, I always say: ‘ we don’t use make-up and Photoshop in the shoots because we believe that you are most beautiful when you are totally natural’. I wish I could show you the delighted faces I always get to see after saying this."

                            Thanks Misha! Actually, I'd love to see this reaction, it were somehow possible.
                            Last edited by massfan3; 18 December 2014, 05:16 AM.

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by Thamesflood View Post
                              Somewhere on the site there is (or was - I haven't checked) a description of the post processing methods used and from memory they at least involved tone adjustments and sharpening. Also you presumably crop or at least downside the images to make them more easily downloaded and viewed in a browser?
                              To clarify:

                              Originally posted by AW FAQ
                              Lightroom is used to process and manage the images. That involves a minor Levels or Curves adjustment (for exposure and colour balance correction), some additional Saturation, an edge sharpen, and another sharpen. Branding with our logo and a pixel size reduction (by 42%) is done using Photoshop.
                              Account & Billing DVD Orders Fetish Pages and Clams Join Site Guide Organisational PPS Technical Video & Audio


                              I need to update that FAQ, it's actually all done in Lightroom now, and has been for a few years. FTR, we very seldom crop - this is a pet-hate of mine: We should capture images with appropriate framing in the first place, not crop them later - to me, that's being lazy when shooting.
                              Last edited by garionhall; 18 December 2014, 06:33 AM. Reason: Clarified FAQ age and cropping.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by JacksonP49 View Post
                                Would you consider using photoshop to remove a tattoo? Ever?
                                To date, we've never done that. When I asked the question at the top of this thread, I did not mention tattoos - I think that's a good example of the "slippery slope" argument Masie raised. We start with pimples, and it organically creeps to other perceived "flaws" - it's dangerous.

                                I think I recall models asking us to remove tattoos before occasionally, because they had some special meaning (maybe, I really forget the details), but we ended up shooting around it (covering with clothing, most likely), and showing her the final set before release to get her approval.

                                But, this is a discussion thread, so your (and others!) opinion on this is welcome!

                                Comment


                                  #46
                                  Originally posted by simono View Post
                                  In reading the discussion I realize I am not certain what is meant by makeup. Usually it seems it would refer to enhancement of facial features or facial skin, but if a model were to apply a small dab of matching skin tone cream on a body pimple before the shoot, is that makeup? I'm not favoring this, just wanting to understand the parameters.
                                  Yup, we'd consider that make-up (and to date, we've never done it).

                                  But that's a discussion for the Make-up thread, not this, the photoshop thread!

                                  Comment


                                    #47
                                    As usual, I find Masie's opinion really sensible. Abbywinters without Photoshoot remains one of the best websites ever. The girls look and behave natural and that's the main reason why they are so attractive in every possible way. A little poo, to most viewers, could be quite erotic and could only enhance their appeal.

                                    Comment


                                      #48
                                      Personally, I prefer even less image refining e. g. less color correction and would go for "No Photoshop at all". I know this is the Photoshop thread, but to understand where on the spectrum of the poll questions our members stand, it can imagine including a "Even less image editing" to be useful.

                                      If I as a customer would have to expect some images to be photoshopped I would ask myself for every image if its photoshopped or not and ruining the experience.
                                      It's like going to your favorite restaurant and ordering your favorite dish while the restaurant changes the recipe occasionally and don't tell you when. This is the stuff that ruins that restaurant for me

                                      Comment


                                        #49
                                        Personally, I have to vote for No.

                                        As Greenest and others stated above, we need to push back harder against the narrow view of beauty we have allowed society to shape, instead of further conforming to it. All women are beautiful exactly as they are. I am constantly trying to explain this to my best friend, who was displeased that the final photo I took of her (and because I'm a ninny, the only one of both of us from the whole trip) was without makeup. She does not and never has needed it, but society has shaped her to want to cover some of what makes her the beautiful lovable wonder she is.

                                        It's the same here with the models. I'm all for the covering of things the model does not want shown to the public, be it a blemish, a tattoo, or a scar they are self-concious about; but do it on the day with clothing, angles or something else. What we see in the pictures should always be what took place on the day, never what someone cooked up after the fact.

                                        As for models not shooting due to these "imperfections" (and btw I despise the use of that term in this entire thread because it implies that any of these things are wrong to be on a human body) seems baffling to me. These things are natural parts of life and we should be celebrating them instead of shying away from them. I'm not saying go out of your way to highlight them. But some of my all-time favourite shoots on here have these little things in them.

                                        A slight bruise on Sue-ann's leg that brings a degree of wonder; how did you get that? A bandaid on Rose D's knee. A tiny pimple on barely even noticeable beside Liandra's glowing smile. A scar on Rachel S's breast that for the longest time thought was an issue with my monitor, because despite my love of the natural form, I am subject to the same brainwashing as the rest of the world about the beauty of nature.

                                        All these moments are things I recall and often treasure from the AW shoots. A moment of time, a fact of life trapped in amber for eternity. To photoshop them away would be tantamount to altering the memories of your life because you're embarrassed. Now it might seem bad, but in the end you oft look back on them as some of the most powerful times in your life and directly responsible for where you are now. These things happened, they are part of your history and covering them for the sake of a social construct seems downright foolish.

                                        If we are to enforce a style of appearance, it should always be reality over anything and everything. The internet and the world at large are drowning in modified representation of idealised beauty. Let us keep our bastion of reality, our safe haven in a world gone mad.

                                        Please.

                                        Comment


                                          #50
                                          Great site great natural looks great models proper organic and orgasmic stuff don"t mess with it please

                                          Comment


                                            #51
                                            I see little point in editing stills and leaving vids untouched anyway, that will just lead to discussions nobody wants. Think about it; what can you edit in stills that wouldn't be visible in vids either way? It's not much.

                                            AW is in the business of offering shoots with models that look natural, that is what sells it to members I believe. The tricky bit is that a 'natural look' is different to different members. What this thread seems to indicate is that members wouldn't mind seeing a pimple occasionally. Maybe the grooming guidelines are overly strict? If members don't mind such pics, there's no need to edit them.. problem solved

                                            It's a bit of triangle; member/model/picture , change one of them and you're done (member there is 'member desires as perceived by staff').

                                            Comment


                                              #52
                                              What image processing is already in place that affects the whole picture? The images on the website are certainly not the jpg-files that come out of the camera. So there will some steps from the RAW file until in the image conforms to the style usually seen on the website with a well defined standard.

                                              Comment


                                                #53
                                                Originally posted by vollunsinn View Post
                                                What image processing is already in place that affects the whole picture? The images on the website are certainly not the jpg-files that come out of the camera. So there will some steps from the RAW file until in the image conforms to the style usually seen on the website with a well defined standard.
                                                See post by Garion above: http://forums.abbywinters.com/vbulle...l=1#post423028

                                                Comment


                                                  #54
                                                  I voted "small amounts" thinking about a shoot I saw recently where the model had a minor "personal cleanliness" issue (not a big deal as a viewer but if I were the model I'd probably die of embarrassment) but after reading Masie's first post in the thread i think she won me over.

                                                  The downsides of "keeping it real" don't seem worth the (small) risk of losing what makes AW special. You can ALWAYS identify an AW image posted in the wilds of the internet, even if some creep has cropped out the watermark. That's a great (and valuable) thing.

                                                  Comment


                                                    #55
                                                    No No and No

                                                    You state in your statement about the site you do not Photoshop or change the model you shoot the blemish and all so why change, your statement or just because one or two people don't like a mark on a model.
                                                    You say you try keep it natural, so please keep the status quo.
                                                    I have seen Television programs on how they change things with Photoshop and can make the model look a near completely different person.
                                                    Why change the model when in this day and age their is so much talk about body image with women being told that stick thin is the way to look.

                                                    Comment


                                                      #56
                                                      This is a really difficult topic to address. I do not like photoshopped images of people. However, to forbid the use of photoshop is extreme. Photography is a technical art and taking intimate shots of naked people is a delicate and challenging business. Things can go wrong and both the photographer and the model should be allowed access to technical resources to help them achieve a happy result.

                                                      A problem comes because models and art editors are often not the best judges of beauty. If they try to improve on nature they will most often fail. Yet they will go on trying, seduced by their power over nature. We have seen the disastrous consequences of this in the mass media. Art editors need to be reined in.

                                                      Abbywinters is in a completely different category from the vast majority of erotic sites. We come to it because we love to see women as they are, not how the mass media want them to be. We also love to see happy women who enjoy being themselves in front of a camera. And the women who are bold enough to get in front of the camera seem to be enriched by the experience because they know we enjoy seeing them exactly like that.

                                                      Introducing photoshop to the post-production process could destroy the very essence of what makes Abbywinters so special.

                                                      However, so long as the spirit of the site is honoured and the photoshopping is done in collaboration with the model, I think its occasional use can be justified. I do not see a problem with discreetly removing snot or poo, which generally do not enhance a woman's dignity. (Although I would prefer this was done with a tissue, or cotton wool and water, or even a hygienic wipe -- preferably one that has been dermatologically tested and does not contain harsh chemicals).

                                                      Pimples, bruises and other blemishes need very careful judgement. Though temporary and unwanted, they can be erotic.

                                                      Then again, so can make-up.

                                                      Ultimately I think you have to let the site's models, photographers and artistic directors use their best judgement to do the best they can to present themselves and their work in the way in which they are most comfortable. Photoshop is a technical tool, like a camera or a parabolic reflector. Even if you did use photoshop sometimes, Misha should have no reason to fear for the integrity of her work. Her models should still be able to express delight at the prospect of presenting an untouched image to the world. And everyone involved should continue to take pride in the site and feel proud to be a part of it.
                                                      Last edited by mudhide; 18 December 2014, 02:28 PM. Reason: Cosmetic and aesthetic.

                                                      Comment


                                                        #57
                                                        Photos are secondary only. How do you want to edit the movies? This is very expensive, I think!

                                                        Comment


                                                          #58
                                                          Originally posted by Lebojan View Post
                                                          Photos are secondary only. How do you want to edit the movies? This is very expensive, I think!
                                                          You are correct. What we talk about with images is pretty much impossible for video - every frame has to be edited (it's done sometimes in big movie production), but with the volume of content we produce, there's no way we'd have the time, resources or budget to do it. However, as I mentioned in the first post on this thread:

                                                          Originally posted by Garion
                                                          Of course, "Photoshop" is not possible at all on video shoots, so then we're stuck with stills and video shoots looking different, but the resolution is lower on video shoots, so we can "get away" with more than we can on stills shoots.

                                                          Comment


                                                            #59
                                                            A customer just emailed us to say:

                                                            Originally posted by an anonymous customer
                                                            > re: photoshop since there's no clear way to vote i just
                                                            > wanted to say that the reason your website is different because you
                                                            > employ regular women who ACT like regular women and don't act like
                                                            > sluts..... please continue the way you do. if it's not broken ---
                                                            > don't fix it ))) please forward !
                                                            We asked him to post on the boards and vote, but in case he chooses not to...

                                                            Comment


                                                              #60
                                                              I have made my living using Photoshop as a retoucher and finisher in the entertainment industry, manipulating images and creating scenes for nearly 20 years. But my vote is keep Abby Winters the way it is. To me, that is one of the reasons you folks are so great.

                                                              Comment

                                                              Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter

                                                               
                                                              Sign up for the abby newsletter. Don't worry, we'll NEVER share your email address with anyone.
                                                              Working...
                                                              X