Fantastic darling
Original is here. Thanks to Robert!
Photoshopaholics
Subscribe
Posts
Comments
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Victoria's Secret: TIMBERRRRR!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Comments
52 comments:
Are we talking about the leaning or the somewhat missing leg?
Waaahh!! A one-legged hot babe.
SV has so many entries in this site. Perhaps we should give it our own category?
Victoria-Not-Secret?
Any suggestions?
VS*
Maybe "stretch viscos" describes her yoga/levitation move?
wv: pities, as in "I pities the designers"
Agreed with softbones. You'd think VS would get it after how may prior posts!
Love it.
http://confessions-of-a-waitress.blogspot.com/
This isn't a disaster. All of her weight is on the leg behind the front one. It's a pose that works.
Yeah, Amy - you try that pose...
uroca!
I'm mostly wondering what a user named "Robert" is doing perusing VS ...in a non-lingerie section.
that is one sexy amputee!!! Uhhh.... yeah, that's all I got!
Unreal.
Nice work gang.
Passport Foodie
That is not possible.
That's her left leg visible to the right of her right leg, just below the hem.
This pose is not possible standing still, but it is possible walking towards the camera.
Sorry.
And this has what to do with Photoshop?
Just tried this in the mirror... put weight fully on back leg with it crossed behind you at a strong angle and cut the photo off slightly above the knee... you get this pose exactly. Not impossible, not even improbable.
And certainly not a photoshop issue in any way. Maybe an awkward pose, but this isn't awkwardposes.com, is it?
You can see a little bit of the photoshopped-out leg poking out from behind the remaining leg. It's definitely 'shopped. Even if you can replicate this pose, that's not what the model was actually doing when the photo was taken.
Anyone who says they can do this needs to back away from the crack pipe!
If you draw out the possible line of her back leg, then draw a line straight up from the spot where her foot would be, you see that her center of mass is way too far to the left of her foot and there is now way that she is not falling over.
take a look
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1138/leanproof.jpg
She must be using Michael Jackon's patented shoes from Smooth Criminal...
It's a disaster because she looks like a tulip, growing diagonally into the page. I don't know for sure that it is a PSD, but there seems to be an extreme distance between her waist and her knee. I assume this is typically about the same as from the navel to the chin (mine is), which should put her knee where we see instead her thigh, just below the skirt. I'm not sure what they have altered, but the purportions looks off and that skirt looks almost as though she is holding it in front of herself, rather than wearing it, as it might if it were 'shopped in.
She's doing a Michael Jackson impression, dammit!
Well, all I see is another ad that basically conveys what it's supposed to and wouldn't get a 2nd glance from most consumers. Woah, she's standing at an odd angle, her clothes must be hideous and uncomfortable! Yeah, whatever.
Ah.... you can see a little bit of her other leg right at the bottom of her skirt.
Is it wrong to think that this would have been a more exciting picture if she really were an amputee?
If her legs did, indeed, end where the image ends then she would certainly fall over but if those of us blessed with common sense (and sporting girlfriend) can imagine the rest of her left leg by following the angle of her thigh then we are quickly relieved to find that it is supporting her weight with no infringement whatsover of the laws of physics.
There is no missing leg and no disaster, unless bad cropping and composition constitutes a disaster.
Zaphod, you may want to extend those lines considerably and also use the correct angle.
That's a real bender of a photo!
I don't think this is a disaster. Anyone who has done serious fashion photography knows that the model is nearly constantly in some sort of motion. I'm sure she's got her weight on the left (our right) leg and was probably in transition to another pose.
wv: chcli
I have to disagree, You can CLEARY see a part of her leg behind the other, in a direction that would give her some equilibrium. At least to take the picture.
I do not even see photoshop being used to distorce something. Sorry, can't agree with this one.
Another thing to consider is that the entire image was rotated to make her torso upright, which would explain why the skirt seems to defy gravity on our right where even a stiff skirt would naturally fall against the thigh at least a little bit. If her left leg was really supporting her, I think you would be able to see it on the other side of her other leg before the bottom of the picture.
That being said, I think its more of an awkward crop and composition than a PsD...
Hey! I know that girl! Her name is Eileen.....get it? Ei...leen? heheheh
When my wife was younger she could do the leg behind the leg lean trick, but that's when she was my girlfriend. ;)
It's a weird crop that makes her lean look odd, but my bet is that she's actually got her hidden leg at an angle that supports her weight. You can't see it both because it's behind her front leg and then cropped out below that, but her legs are probably actually crossed.
I think the leg and a half was PSed in entirely. There's no shadow of the skirt on the leg, which would have to mean the skirt was flush against her leg, but there's no distortion, wrap-around. or shadows of a skirt up against her thigh. They definitely rotated the entire picture because she would have fallen down standing or even walking at that angle.
Actually I think that Victoria's Secret tried to use Michael Jackson's anti-gravity lean in their photo shoot and that her leg merely disintegrated in the middle of the shot due to patent infringement...I could be wrong though.
I think it's more like a one of the Michael Jackson's moves... =)
I don't know what's more entertaining; this disaster of a picture or all the home schooled kids going on about how it's possible.
I think all the photoshop professionals in the house should raise their hands. OH wait, i guess everyone here does it for a living.
valess
This looks PAIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNFFFFFFFUUUUUUUULLLLLLL
This is my work site, you are welcome hereoil painting,
It's got to be either rotated or a PS disaster - her skirt would be falling towards the left if this was natural. Instead, it's clinging to her leg and falling to the right.
thanks for this blog
and i'll take a copy for me please
مجموعة البورصة المصرية
منتديات البورصة المصرية
http://www.borsaegypt.com
http://www.borsaegypt.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7
The Sophisticate's Diary
The angle is correct, my line touches the outside of her hip and the outside of the little piece of her leg you can see by her knee.
So the angle is absolutely correct.
And I see no problem with the length if you are assuming the bottom of the knee is the bottom of the image.
But, reguardless of the fact that the angle is right based on what we can see of her back leg, I took your advice and extended the lines a bit more to the point where her body mass was centered over her foot to see if it looked better and sure enough it does work.
see here.
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/8793/proof2q.jpg
I appreciate the effort, ZaphodQB, but knees bend. Try this pose yourself. You can easily bend the back leg at the knee at a side angle and significantly alter the way the center of mass is supported.
So, Mrs Spigot, you say that your husband once auditioned to play Tarzan?
Ironically, her name is Ilene.
@ZaphodQB
human body has joints, did you know that? and more, they actually bend...
totally possible to do her pose, but i don't disagree of the rotating picture theory...
I actually think she was leaning against something that was later removed
I actually think she was originally leaning against something with her elbow and thats what was removed
oh my god! hahahahaha!
you can totally see a bit of her left leg. you guys are dumb, its just behind her other leg. awkward pose.
NOT photoshopped out
Post a Comment