Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
I don't understand why they would self-morph their images. All it does is make me not trust any of their images, so I don't look at them at all.
None of them, imo. Slippery slope. Eun Hee Kang shouldn't have been blacklisted/soft blacklisted in the first place. But that's just my relatively worthless two cents.
I agree. These girls are taking it a bit further but thinking that many of the pics on here aren't adjusted and morphed in some way is like thinking that all the girls on here are natural and got huge from lots of whey protein and creatine. Sounds good, but in no way rooted in reality.
I can tell you with 100% confidence that doing things like narrowing waists, making muscle bellies bigger, smoothing skin, and covering blemishes is standard for professional photographers. I'm okay with that... they are selling an image and they don't owe us anything.
Videos are harder to alter, but not impossible. If you want to see how someone really looks, watch their videos.
I guess I wonder why people really care? This is a site that's designed to turn us on, and if people like those photos, then why deny them.
Well, the slippery slope is actually not banning them. Who decides what amount of manipulation is allowed, where do you draw the line? Might as well allow AI altered imagery then.
Also:
I can tell you with 100% confidence that doing things like narrowing waists, making muscle bellies bigger, smoothing skin, and covering blemishes is standard for professional photographers. I'm okay with that... they are selling an image and they don't owe us anything.
They owe honesty, and not just us, but other girls who look at them as role models. They owe them not lying to them about how they actually look.
The fact that most professional photographers do those kinds of things is true, and that does not make the bad thing OK. It is the reason I despise the bodycaptures shoots of Lena Ramstainer.
Instead of creating a new thread, here's someone who should be off the black list: Emma Lawson. She's apparently been 18 for a while.
Emma's infamous in CrossFit circles and has been on gear since she was, like, 13. Not hard to believe that she looks way older than she actually is.
How the hell was that allowed to happen??? That's child abuse..
I see she's cutting back but I wonder if she'll ever be able to reproduce, her parents should be ashamed of themselves they're evil.
I am - like some other opinions here state - convinced that it's not really possible to find a healthy line between the fotographers standard editing (and they will most likely push some bodyshapes to better proportions or make a curve curvier and enhance and retouch skin etc) and what's morphing to a degree that doesn't show the real person anymore.
I agree: Pics (or even models) that are extensionally morphed shouldn't be here. But that's imho often not the content of the model itself but the work of some wilde photoshop-enthuisiats who use a photo to make a crazy huge looking morph or whatever. This won't be the place to post that stuff.
An example: People keep insinsting on that Taneth Montero https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/images/?name=... should be soft-blacklisted for enhancing her currrrves. BUT when I open up her video clips I can see there is NOT much editing. There always is editing, yes, but she IS that curved in a live-clip aswell. So that wouldn't be a blacklist-candidate for me.
If you find someone that you would see a huuuuge difference between photographers edits and the real look in a videoclip, I'm all in for blacklisting that. I think this isn't a site to use raw unedited material only or make a law which typical photographers work is too much and what is allowed. We all don't want to find an agreement which of the single methods a photographer uses would be allowed and which not! I mean: It's even a huge HUGE difference if someone is zooming in at a model at 100+ mm focal length or making a wide angled shot with 20mm - really - with no morphing and editing in photoshop you can make a model seem thicker or smaller! Let's not make a witchhunt for it xD
Recently Irina Pimenova seems to have acquired an uncannily thin waist. Look at recent pics in her gallery. Just looks shopped to me.
No, not a morph. She's always had a super tiny waist. The pic you posted here is just the angle making it look even smaller
I honestly just don't understand this crusade against super subtle morphs like head-shrinking, etc.
Everyone edits their photos to a degree. Is it worth the effort?
As you may be aware, Eun Hee Kang is soft-blacklisted due to self-morphing her images, meaning that her pics don't show up anywhere on the site other than when you directly search for her name as in that link.
I originally developed this feature for her images specifically because there was some drama around it at the time due to there being a mix of a lot of probable morphs and some legit images in her pics. On the staff, we didn't want to be faced with a flood of reports for all of her pics, but a good number of people thought that banning all her images was unfair, and so we arrived at this compromise.
Then I kind of forgot about this feature.
I was reminded of it again today because I saw that the current GotW video was reported for head shrinking, and the report seems to be right. In fact, she seems like a decent candidate for soft-blacklisting.
So: Who else should be put on the soft blacklist? The main criteria is that a good amount of their images have to be morphs such that they cast doubt on the veracity of all their media.