Ok, at least Madonna likes Photoshop
Source: Iconique
Forum Post: Iconique Joost
Thread title: Madonna: pre-photoshopped
We all know that virtually every ad in every magazine goes through Photoshop. Sometimes the retouching is good, sometimes, not so good (see: Kate doesn’t like Photoshop – Digital Ethics).
But this is a case where the retouching was, well, shall we say “useful”?
The original poster, Iconique Joost, presumed to be Joost van Gorsel, Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Iconique said: Shots before they were airbrushed etc etc…
I thought it was nice to see how the industry manipulates images (including I at Iconique).
He posted the following photos…
The final retouched ad…
An un-retouched outtake.
Detail.
To be fair to Madonna (and the original photographer), the appearance of the outtake here looks pretty bad. It’s overly contrasty and out of color balance-it looks like a bad scan from a Polaroid. It’s also tough to comment on the photograph and the makeup, but clearly at the age of 46 (her birthay is August 16th, 1958) Madonna probably doesn’t mind a bit of “good” Photoshop work.
August 9th, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Even without Photoshop, she can put her shoes under my bed anytime. Not bad for 46…
August 9th, 2005 at 6:16 pm
I’d prefer to have a long and passionate rendezvous with her marketing and business skills.
August 10th, 2005 at 5:08 pm
I miss the fun, sassy Madonna of yore. She’s ruining her once gorgeous skin with too much clean living and exercise. I’ve never seen her look so gaunt and scraggly.
Celebs ought to pay a percentage of their income to the creators of Photoshop.
August 12th, 2005 at 4:40 am
As an experienced retoucher I must inform people that this is in no way fair to Madonna…The “before-images” here can’t even be raw polaroid-scans. Someone have must have played with the images in photoshop before publishing them to make the difference bigger(worse).
Anyway, in my opinion the most beautiful thing about Madonna isn’t her looks, but her stunning personality.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:47 am
Even after extensive (and expensive) hair and makeup, this what she looks like before being retouched? Wow! The before and after photos remind me of Oscar Wilde’ “The Story of Dorain Grey” but in reverse. Even for 46 she looks pretty scary! In Texas we have a saying about horses that look this rough: “Rode hard and put up wet
November 7th, 2005 at 9:53 pm
Get a Life! I would love to take a picture of all of you guys, Maybe then we could all have a real laugh!
February 17th, 2006 at 3:36 am
I’m with Johann: there’s no way this is a fair ‘before-and-after’ comparison. The angles and lighting are obviously very different, and I agree that the quality of the ‘before’ image is *suspiciously* poor.
March 1st, 2006 at 12:48 pm
NRT, this is not a before and after photo retouch. You are looking at entirely different photos. The poor photos may have been taken to test lighting and pose. No one retouched these test shots to get the final ad shot. This article is pointing out that a lot of work had to be done to make the final shot look good based on the difference in the preliminary outtake shots. The author did not claim that the outtakes were retouched to make the final ad.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:02 am
Wow… wow… wow…
ok madonna it´s scraching the 50 ok , y she claims no *knife* on her . but
I dont know if somebody here lern to take pictures … you dont need to do all in photshop (focus , distance an light) plus a excelent hair and make up.remenber that is a produc shoot for Max factor (they have great makeup artist,remenber they invent de concept of make up for movies and taked to nex level in the early days) so she have se same amount of re-touch than a cover of vogue or a ad for Bud ice
pleace