Posts tagged ‘celebrity retouching’

December 15, 2010

Prince William and Kate Middleton’s Official Engagement Portraits With “Minimal” Retouching

According to Associated Press, the official engagement photos of Prince William and Kate Middleton got retouched.

“William’s office says the couple’s two official portraits underwent “minimal” retouching before they were released. The palace said Tuesday that the couple’s appearance was not altered, but adjustments made were to light balance and contrast because “the final portraits are works of art,” like the painted portraits made of previous royal generations.”

Still it looks like some flash glare should have been removed.

link to the AP report

Share this post on Tweeter

Bookmark and Share

Enhanced by Zemanta
Advertisements
December 12, 2010

Photo Retouching: Feel Beautiful Because You Are

Looking good is not important, it’s everything! At least it must be to two thirds of women, as the Hewlett Packard survey showed, who are “deeply embarrassed” by many of their photos. The same research shows that if you are a man under 35, you are probably happy with every photo of yourself, including the ones that should appear embarrassing.

Why women hate their photos? Because we want our photos to present us the way we’d like to be and they usually don’t. We want our true self to be captured in a flattering light, from a favorable angle and preferably by a genius from Photography. This doesn’t happen often and this is why we delete our photos before anyone had a chance to see them and plead with our friends to remove our photos from their Facebook galleries. Even those women who are majorly satisfied with their reflection in the mirror can and do develop photophobia.

Professional models are never happy with their photos till they have been edited. PhotoHand artists know this because we work with models.

Your photo might be far from perfect, but with the help of the photoshop retouching service, you can make any picture perfect and outstanding.

Suppose someone snapped a decent photo of you that you decided to use a your professional photo (a.k.a. “executive portrait”) on your marketing materials. With a little help from Photoshop, your casual amateur photo will be turned into a “studio portrait”.

Another lucky shot doctored with the glamorizing effects will give your image a touch of Hollywood turning it into a photo gift to your loved ones.

Boudoir photography is a growing trend. Brides are looking for something unique and sexy to give their husbands as a wedding gift. But ladies in their 30’s, 40’s and even 50’s are wanting boudoir photo shoots even more. When asked about their motivations, the general response is that they are still feeling young at heart and want to capture themselves in some beautiful sensual images.
Needless to say, boudoir photography always needs a hand from photo retouchers. We also recommend applying various art effect like soft focus, Rembrandt-like light and shade contrast, Hollywood affects, etc. Then your photo will be poetry. Plus, that the experience of having a make-over and photo session can give women a feeling of liberation and empowerment. Now beauty salons started hosting boudoir photo sessions for groups of women.


From 1991, when pregnant Demi Moore appeared nude on the cover of Vanity Fair, pregnancy stopped being something to be hidden, but something to be celebrated in all its glory. Maternity photos are always a challenge but with skillful retouching they become a celebrated memento in moving forward. We at PhotoHand are noticing a growing trend of sending our pregnancy announcement photo cards just like it is with baby arrival cards.

Wedding photos have been family treasures since the beginning of photography. They must be perfect, especially the bride’s gala portrait shot before the wedding. All the tiny photo flaws must be fixed. But what if you don’t even have that portrait. Well, it can be created in all its splendor.

A less than perfect photos shouldn’t bring you down. First, not everybody is a model – it’s natural to get uncomfortable in front of the camera. And that hair gets out of control because there is no stylist around to assist you. And the makeup artist is not on hand to fix the smudges. Remember, all these annoying flaws can be easily fixed after the image capture.

Share this post on Tweeter

Bookmark and Share

Enhanced by Zemanta
December 3, 2010

Bringing Glamour to the Masses – This Holiday Season & Always

Share this post on Tweeter

Bookmark and Share

November 16, 2010

A New Twist on the Season’s Greetings Tradition from PhotoHand.com

Tired of the same cookie-cutter greeting cards? Looking for new gift ideas? This holiday season check out the new generation of highly personalized greeting card design launched by PhotoHand! There are no two cards alike – PhotoHand takes your favorite photo and integrates it with a unique graphic design to create a montage. As an option, have your child’s photo combined with the photo of her drawing as the background.

Orders can be placed online and this will cost you only $11.95 while you get a very special keepsake unlike the mundane prefabricated options offered by other companies. PhotoHand can also facilitate printing at a reasonable cost for you if you don’t have a favorite printer.

PhotoHand photo card offering extends to personal events, like birthdays, bachelorette parties, bar mitzvahs, baby showers… You can order a creative collage of several photos at $5.95 per image. Such gifts are fun, original and as personable as they get.

Share this post on Tweeter

Bookmark and Share

April 16, 2008

Doctored cover photos add up to controversy

Doctored cover photos add up to controversy
By Donna Freydkin, special for USA TODAY

NEW YORK — If you noticed that Julia Roberts’ head is slapped on the wrong body on the cover of the new Redbook, you’ve got a sharp set of eyes.

In fact, Roberts and other Hollywood A-listers are fuming over altered magazine covers that look bizarre at best and disproportionately freakish at worst.

It’s known as airbrushing, or digital manipulation. At magazines, it’s standard practice to zap a zit, or brighten those baby blues. It’s even de rigueur for a supermodel like Tyra Banks, whose flawless printed perfection is at odds with her actual persona, and comes at a price.

“I disappoint people who meet me in person because I don’t look like me,” she says. “But the public is really hard on people in the industry and your image has to be perfect, and I openly admit that I have cellulite and I get that touched off.”

But, as those who do the tweaking point out, there’s a huge difference between eradicating stretch marks and cutting body parts from two separate photos and fusing them together into a composite shot, as Redbook did with Roberts in its July issue and a clipped-together Jennifer Aniston in June. Magazines run such doctored shots to give their covers an air of exclusivity and originality, even when celebs don’t grant the magazine an interview or sit for a photo shoot, as was the case with Aniston.

“It’s not immoral to retouch people, and everyone does it,” says Rolling Stone art director Andy Cowles. “The difficulty is when you mess with the truth, when it’s distorted and done to the point where you can see it and the person doesn’t look real.”

A spate of recent cover scandals proves his point.

The cover: On Redbook’s July cover, Roberts’ head comes from a paparazzi shot taken at the 2002 People’s Choice awards. Her body, meanwhile, is from the Notting Hill movie premiere four years ago.

The commotion: Although this cover was put to bed before the Aniston issue hit stands, it doesn’t bode well for a magazine that, like its competitors, relies on celebs such as Aniston, Roberts and Gwyneth Paltrow to move major copies.

The conclusion: Publisher Hearst admits its mistake: “In an effort to make a cover that would pop on the newsstand, we combined two different shots of Julia Roberts. We acknowledge that we may have gone too far and hope that Ms. Roberts will accept our apology.” Roberts’ publicist, Marcy Engelman, simply says that “it’s a shame they didn’t use the body that went with the head, because it was a great Giorgio Armani pantsuit (that she wore to the People’s Choice awards).”

The cover: Redbook’s June issue promised the real scoop on Aniston’s relationship with hubby Brad Pitt. But the article was a clip job and the oddly flat cover photo’s exact origins still mystify Aniston’s publicist Stephen Huvane. He says he declined a Redbook cover because Aniston had a commitment to Harper’s Bazaar. Redbook informed him eight weeks before the cover hit that she’d be on it anyway.

The commotion: “It’s a combination of three pictures,” says Huvane of the photo. “If you’re going to do it, then at least match her head up to her body, and make the neck look like it belongs to her. I still can’t figure out which exact picture the face came from.” A Redbook spokeswoman refutes his statements: “The only things that were altered in the cover photo were the color of her shirt and the length of her hair, very slightly, in order to reflect her current length.”

The conclusion: Huvane says Aniston is mulling legal action. “She’s doesn’t like the blatant manipulation of her image,” he says.

The cover:Seventeen’s May issue featured Sarah Michelle Gellar, who granted the magazine an interview but not a photo shoot. So the magazine purchased a retouched photo from a syndication house, changed Gellar’s shirt color (from black to purple) — a standard practice at most magazines, including Rolling Stone— and somehow made her left hand look unnaturally long and misshapen.

The commotion: Gellar’s camp was displeased, stating that she looked like a paper cutout, not a real three-dimensional person, and that the printing job was poor quality.

The conclusion: The magazine sent Gellar a nice thank-you gift, and the furor has since died down.

The cover: When the February issue of British GQ hit stands, Kate Winslet’s legs looked stunningly slim. And no, the actress, who has publicly railed against Hollywood’s obsession with skinniness, hadn’t gone on a crash diet.

The commotion: Winslet said her gams had been thinned down by a third. “I was pretty proud of how my legs actually looked in the real picture,” said Winslet at the time. “I have Polaroids from the shoot and I thought I looked fine.”

The conclusion: Editor in chief Dylan Baker admitted that the photo had been altered, but said it was with Winslet’s approval. The actress is not outraged, but says she spoke out because “it just was important to me to let people know that digital retouching happens all the time. It’s probably happened to just about every other well-known actress on the face of the planet.”

Bookmark and Share