Lucy Pinder Photo Gallery Lucy Pinder Videos Index Lucy Pinder Television Website on Facebook LucyPinderNews and LPinderOfficial twitter feeds
Lucy Pinder Television Website Forum Index Facebook button Lucy Pinder Television Website Forum
Lucy Pinder - Pictures, News, Videos - The One-Stop Shop
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister (Problems? See here)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Twitter button Lucy Pinder Videos Index

Picture Edits

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lucy Pinder Television Website Forum Index -> Site News and Queries
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:34 pm    Subject: Picture Edits Reply with quote


I chose not to clog the Calendar thread so hopefully this topic doesnt get overlooked in this section. Maybe im one of the few but Id like to hear other opinions on this. If im the only one then Ill try not to mention it again in the future, cant make any promises though Wink

Which do you guys prefer?
Original

or
Edited


This isnt any personal jab at you Pigeon, sometimes though I cant understand why editing the picture is necessary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Contributions: 6640

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:21 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


linkweed wrote:
This isnt any personal jab at you Pigeon, sometimes though I cant understand why editing the picture is necessary.


Necessary in this case because the "original" had been completely ruined by some kind of Instagram-type filter Smile Lucy is bright red/orange and looks like Jodie Marsh on a really bad day, the background has an overall mucky grey/green cast and goes blue in the darker bits, and there is a dark band round the edge of the picture. Basically, it looks terrible Smile So I edited it to try and reverse the effect of the filter and restore the natural colours. Which is extremely difficult and I won't claim the result is anywhere near perfect... but it's still a flipping sight better than it was before editing Smile

The other BTS calendar shoot pic was also edited to remove the effect of a filter - in this case a filter which made it look as if the picture was being viewed through a very dirty sheet of glass - it looked like the way things look when my specs are in truly dire need of cleaning Hehe

(I do most strongly hope that such filters will not have been applied to the final calendar versions of the pics... in their natural state, or as close as I can see them to their natural state, they are lovely, but if the calendar is "Instagrammed" it won't be worth buying... Wry)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Lucy Pinder
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:54 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


Pigeon wrote:

Necessary in this case because the "original" had been completely ruined by some kind of Instagram-type filter Smile Lucy is bright red/orange and looks like Jodie Marsh on a really bad day, the background has an overall mucky grey/green cast and goes blue in the darker bits, and there is a dark band round the edge of the picture. Basically, it looks terrible Smile
In your opinion it looks terrible. I actually prefer the original as she has great bright lips and you can actually see some of the slight creases in her back/fingers. We always moan about the overt photoshopping in her Nuts shoots and yet here her skin looks blurred and unnatural. And now as a result her brunette hair(and jeans and space between fingers) have purple, blue highlights. IMO its one of those instances where the pic is best left as is.

And Jodie Marsh on a really bad day...Amazing how much a filter can drastically change a woman's appearance. Roll Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Contributions: 6640

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:06 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


linkweed wrote:
I actually prefer the original as she has great bright lips


She hasn't really, that's just the filter making all the "flesh" components bright orange/red...

linkweed wrote:
and you can actually see some of the slight creases in her back/fingers. We always moan about the overt photoshopping in her Nuts shoots and yet here her skin looks blurred and unnatural.


...whereas in the filtered version her skin is covered in noise and blotches from the filter, as well as being completely unnatural in colour. Lack of bit depth also makes it worse because information has been lost in the process of filtering, which results in quantisation artefacts appearing when the colour is put back to normal. It's not realistically possible to recreate the skin texture - particularly as the filtered version doesn't have real skin texture, it's already been obliterated by noise at that point - so essentially there's little more that can be done than blurring the artefacts out. I'm not really able to do any better from such a poor starting point - it took me three hours as it is Smile

linkweed wrote:
And now as a result her brunette hair(and jeans and space between fingers) have purple, blue highlights.


Those areas look uniformly dark to me... but then I don't have my monitor turned up to eyeball-searing brightness Smile I do often wonder if a contributing factor to the number of bright orange scans that go round the net is monitor manufacturers' marketing strategies. Monitors are supplied set up so as to try and compete with other monitors in the shop by looking superficially brighter and sharper - which means both the intensity and the colour temperature are set to values appropriate to the surface of Rigel. People then leave them like that because the step change when you adjust the settings to more sensible values makes them look dull by comparison - but it is a flawed comparison, because if you go away and leave them for a bit then come back, they don't look dull, they look more realistic. And are also a heck of a sight easier on the eye if you spend all day looking at them Smile

linkweed wrote:
IMO its one of those instances where the pic is best left as is.


Exactly Big Grin It should never have had the silly filter applied to it in the first place Big Grin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Lucy Pinder
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:21 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


Pigeon wrote:
It's not realistically possible to recreate the skin texture - particularly as the filtered version doesn't have real skin texture, it's already been obliterated by noise at that point - so essentially there's little more that can be done than blurring the artefacts out.
And again, I cant understand why editing is necessary. If its obvious to you that you can't make it any better and the only solution is to blur her skin it seems unnecessary to me.

Pigeon wrote:
Exactly It should never have had the silly filter applied to it in the first place

Or several more filters added to make it more "natural" Shrug

Clearly we're going to go round in circles. Hopefully in due time other members can weigh in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Contributions: 6640

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:37 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


linkweed wrote:
And again, I cant understand why editing is necessary. If its obvious to you that you can't make it any better and the only solution is to blur her skin it seems unnecessary to me.


I'm getting confused now... This is a serious question, so please don't take offence at it - are you colour-blind? When I first saw the pic my instant thought was "W... t... F has happened to the colour?" The totally weird colours hit me like a slap in the face. Whereas you don't seem to notice that at all. So I'm puzzled as to how it is that you don't notice it Smile

I edited it because the colour was completely screwed, and I can make that a lot better Smile It may be at the expense of some other aspects, but to me those aspects are not anything like so obvious (OK, so this is partly because I'm short-sighted and I don't like to wear my specs for looking at computer screens Hehe but it's still the case when I get right up close to the screen) and in any case the main one you're talking about - skin "texture" - isn't real in the first place, it's a filter artefact too - added noise - so it doesn't matter if it isn't there any more. Does that explain my reasoning better? Smile

Anyway, I've had another go at it - readjusted my settings to make those "highlights" you mentioned visible, then took them off - try reloading the image if it still looks the same to you Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Lucy Pinder
eazy_g



Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Contributions: 400

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:43 pm    Subject: Picture Edits Reply with quote


All photoshoots are edited some how. Even if it's simple contrast/brightness. You will never find a picture of anything that is not touched some how, it may even be the simple move of color to black and white.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sexybeast



Joined: 16 Jan 2010
Contributions: 755

Picture EditsPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:51 pm    Subject: Picture Edits Reply with quote


I prefer the original...it's grainy, dark and not great quality...but the cleaned up version looks kinda made-up and undefined:( ...Pigeon does a great job cleaning up the Nuts, Daily star, water-marked pics Thumb Up! ...and for that we can never thank him enough Smile ...but as u might remember there was a major debate just a few weeks back when Pigeon altered the shape of Lucy's lips..some things should be just left alone...and may i also add that sometimes its important to include the original picture along with the cleaned up version to let the fans make up their own mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:43 am    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


Pigeon wrote:
I'm getting confused now... This is a serious question, so please don't take offence at it - are you colour-blind? When I first saw the pic my instant thought was "W... t... F has happened to the colour?" The totally weird colours hit me like a slap in the face. Whereas you don't seem to notice that at all. So I'm puzzled as to how it is that you don't notice it Smile

Not colour blind. I never said that I didnt notice the effects/filters already put on the pic. I did however notice your attempt to cancel out/remove those filters and how it did not make it look any better imo.

Quote:
in any case the main one you're talking about - skin "texture" - isn't real in the first place, it's a filter artefact too - added noise - so it doesn't matter if it isn't there any more.
I didnt use the word "texture", the slight wrinkles and ripples in her fingers and around her ribs in the original seemed removed in the edited version. Which to me make her look less lifelike. Same goes with the new edits, now her hair looks like a plastic mould Wry

Like sexybeast suggested posting both versions would be welcome or at least linking to the original so people could decide for themselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Contributions: 6640

Picture EditsPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:26 am    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


linkweed wrote:
now her hair looks like a plastic mould


I'm amazed you can see any detail in her hair at all - to me it just looks like a dark mass. I have to wind up the intensity to extreme levels before I can see anything other than that, and even then it's hard to make anything out.

However maybe I am beginning to understand now... when you look at the edit, does (a) Lucy's skin look tanned and golden and the sofa sort of yellowy-beige, or (b) does Lucy look very pink and pale and the sofa a very pale yellow?

To me it looks like (a). However, when I wind things up so bright I can see detail in Lucy's hair, it makes it look like (b). And that same adjustment applied to the filtered version makes the gruesome colours much paler and far less objectionable. So would I be right in thinking that you're seeing something more like (b), and that's why you aren't so bothered about the instagrammism?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Lucy Pinder
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:52 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


Pigeon wrote:

However maybe I am beginning to understand now... when you look at the edit, does (a) Lucy's skin look tanned and golden and the sofa sort of yellowy-beige, or (b) does Lucy look very pink and pale and the sofa a very pale yellow?
It looks like a). And I said it looked like a plastic mould because I couldnt see any detail in her hair, rather it was all black with no detail at all. In my eyes whatever you added to her skin stands out far more than the filters on the original.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pigeon
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Contributions: 6640

Picture EditsPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:50 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


linkweed wrote:
It looks like a). And I said it looked like a plastic mould because I couldnt see any detail in her hair, rather it was all black with no detail at all. In my eyes whatever you added to her skin stands out far more than the filters on the original.


Oh... Wry I can't see any detail in Lucy's hair in the filtered version in the first place, so I rated that as a bit of "no change there"...

Sometimes there are pics of Lucy in Nuts or wherever that are column-headers or something rather than part of a feature, so they're only about two inches square and when I scan them they come out more screening dots than picture. So I descreen them anyway, making the best of a bad job - the result isn't very good, since the process the pic has undergone before I got hold of it has removed too much of the information, but it's some improvement, as in at least it isn't a mass of dots any more...

I see this as exactly the same sort of thing - trying to recover a degraded image as best I can given it lacks too much information - only difference is it's a silly filter rather than a printing process that has degraded it, which technically isn't really any different Smile

Anyway, since you've demolished my theory I am now even more confused than before so maybe it's best just to agree to mutually not understand each other Hehe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Lucy Pinder
linkweed



Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Contributions: 1132

Picture EditsPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:57 pm    Subject: Re: Picture Edits Reply with quote


Pigeon wrote:
Anyway, since you've demolished my theory I am now even more confused than before so maybe it's best just to agree to mutually not understand each other Hehe
Might as well. Though I appreciate sexybeasts reply this thread is useless without others input. Maybe im one of the few to be bothered by this at times, which is fine. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lucy Pinder Television Website Forum Index -> Site News and Queries All times are GMT

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Lucy Pinder News on Twitter Lucy Pinder TV on Facebook Lucy Pinder herself on Twitter


Powered by phpBB 2.0.23+repack-4 (Debian) © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
phpBB SEO