we are under such a powerful spell. now technocracy has taken the place of religion to convince the beautifully perfectly designed human that she/he is FLAWED and their filter/altar will save your ugly ass. but our species has been assaulted and fragmented for so long it takes a strong family container with potent adult loving hearts to grow a self loving sturdy child.
Well said! These trends and developments are not for our benefit, yet they keep marching forward. As in the movie "War Games," the only way to win is not to play.
Amazing what the most coddled and over promoted / protected class of people resort to as proof they're "oppressed" and can continue to satiate their ongoing need for righteous indignation.
as they say in "church" amen bruther! Bein' of the thes-bean persuasion an' lovin' FACES, REAL FACES! (they had faces then...) I'm bored ta tears with all these look-alike beauties (both the fellas an' the gals)... I'll share a few of the "real" I find far more interestin' & appealin' than the plastic surgery set (ho hum)--some'a my fav-o-rite "stars!"
1. Carole King who told us ta get up every mornin' with a smile on our faces ta show the world all the love in our hearts reminded us that yer "as Beautiful as ya feel..." -- an' don't she look fantastic with her very real face an' all it's original attributes? I think so!
I gots 2 daughters an' both've 'em have had weak moments absurdly askin' fer all kinda "alterations" as if they wuz pants--facial, dental, ya name it, I've heard it an' my answer is the same NIX, hold the eyeroll... (this in SPITE of no social mee-dia & ltd. 'puter access an' NO TEEVEE!) Even if we had the Do-Re-Mi fer such absurditties I'd say NIX. We wartch all the old good stuff--I make it a pernt ta point out REAL TEETH (rare as hen's teeth now!) an' REAL FACES (like Bette Davis's!)...uphill battle fer us parents today tho'... pressures like none I'd seen as a kiddo... I think
those dang "zoom" filters over covid also did a number on 'em... this is dastardly tech fer sure!
Faces are wonderful things; "erases" of faces ain't!
(let's have "The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly!"--hat tip ta Sergio Leone who knew a good face & how ta "shoot it" ha ha--more 'n most!)
Ginger too...cute but no Venus! Ann Miller also near-made the list, Liza & Judy...
I have much admiration fer the talents in "hollyweird" that made even plain Janes inta beauties an' could make leadin' men outta the likes of William Powell (lol). Troo tributes ta the talents of the Westmores, the Heads, & Hurrels etc ;)--that team effort created glamor in regular folks but we KNEW 'bout all them plastic elements... We could see simple faces under all the artistry an' we knew where makeup ended--there was real talent--in spades!
All that wuz far less seamless as today's super-charged photoshop (I showed more egregious examples than the tame one ye picked ta my girls years ago...)
I velly much admire those that created an aura or illusion of beauty in manner, gesture, "style"--today all that "character" is sorely lackin'--you'd never have Marlene Dietrich onna marquee today... Sad it is too. I hate the "sameness" of today's "stars" (influencers etc) An' they all have the same dang TEETH.
Clearly I'mma a fan of all the "old stuff" I like real faces, real teeth, an' real human beans warts & all... I fear fer these newer generations that only have had these "altered / airbrushed" fictions ta look at. 'Til things change (might they?) I think we need ta simply MARINATE our children in the GREAT FACES of YORE (in ahrt too--Rembrandt's a good place ta start ;-)--gotta preclude their seekin' out friends & romances based on arty-fish-all looks as character is the far more important feature an' usually it duz not wither with age!
ps if we fergit America there's even more great "punims"--lookit Serge Gainsbourg! Jean Gabin Anouk Aimée too many ta list! ;-)
lol, bein' in thee-ate-er I kin state with soitenty that she was even back in the day! (fergit these LGBTQ idiots who have no clue who she is/wuz today)... She didn't so much cross dress as "wear the pants" an' well--a trend she didn't quite start but boy golly she made it popular! Those suits were tailored ta fit her like a glove an' accentuate the positive while not revealin' too much. An' yet even as an old broad she wuz famous fer that "nudie" evenin' gown. IMHO she never looked anythin' but "all woman" tho'--but what style! (she was "bi" fwiw but 'specially loved her men folks--a favorite quote is when she first saw John Wayne an' said "Now, I know vhat I vant for breakfast!"
But she wuz not "woke" an' she was brilliant--a friend of Orson Welles who didn't tolerate fools well (includin', sadly, Rita who wuz JUST lovely ta look at an' talented but not too much upstairs). Marlene wuz a good egg in my book havin' fought tooth & nail against the nazis via her own efforts WAY beyond the Hollywood Canteen .She offered ta go Mata Hari fer the allies & KILL Hitler herself!--She was QUITE a force ta reckon with (an' ye know she owes her "image" to brilliant jooish director Josef von Sternberg who transformed her slightly zaftig not technically beautiful at all looks inta an ICON... But again, I brought her up as she wuz so much more than the sum of her parts (an' "interestin' " AN' imperfect face https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4f/04/34/4f043483650917101fc37e0be9861334.jpg even in stardom https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTZhZjZkOTktNmY4ZS00MGFlLWIwZTQtNDkwNDVlMzdiNmFjXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTk5NzQ5Ng@@._V1_.jpg)
I don’t know about women, not being one, but for most men, there is a huge difference between pictures on a page or on the other side of one of these slabs of glass, and a real live woman. They are almost 2 different species.
You can see this with men at the gym. Guys will spend a half hour doing bench presses, situps, and bicep curls.
I haven't verified this, but I read that if you look at the movie "Woodstock" with all its nude scenes, the kids' bodies are WAY less cut and toned than kids nowadays.
Absolutely. Body dysmorphia in boys and men has skyrocketed over the last few years. Look at the Marvel movies, where actors who used to look normal (like Chris Pratt) were transformed into muscle-rippling superheroes through intensive training (and, more often than not, a heaping dose of pharmaceutical enhancements). Those standards are just as unrealistic and difficult to attain as the measurements of a Victoria's Secret model are for women.
It's not just the hippies in "Woodstock" ... If you look at movies from any era prior to the 1980s, you can see actors - male and female - that are slim by contemporary standards, but not muscular. Look at all the swimsuited actors in "Beach Blanket Bingo" for example. Not one of these would get past a casting director today.
Well, after these past 5 years, I am leaning towards machines over most people especially the multitudes still wearing masks. That said, it seems to me that this is part of a larger problem; that natural anything is bad. Natural birth, natural death, natural food, natural remedies are all long time victims of modern life. Using and certainly selling many of these as service or products can get one arrested, often even when there is no law prohibiting it. Now we add natural beauty and even real live people. OH, pets too!
Yes, that's another problem: already, AI is more helpful and pleasant than most humans. In the war for humanity, we are not doing ourselves any favors by treating each other like garbage.
That is interesting! It's neat to see how forensic image analysis can find evidence of tampering. It's worth noting that some companies like Aerie try to buck this trend with a "no Photoshopping" rule on their promotional images, but I wonder exactly what that rule prohibits.
Seems like it would be very difficult to enforce except in the most obvious cases. The kind of enhancements that went on in the Victoria Secret image would take work to discern. He does have a link to a photo-forensics website on his page, I noticed. You can upload images and it will analyze them for you. He played around with it in one of his blogs and said it was good at some things but missed others. But it's probably a work in progress. Or an arms race.
I've worked in digital media and marketing for over 20 years, so I'm very familiar with this. I think there's a big difference between aesthetic retouching - removing distracting background elements, lighting issues, or obvious skin blemishes - and deceptive editing, which involves changing the contours or shape of people's bodies. Removing a handbag, as in the VS photo you linked to, is a big change, but it doesn't contribute to making a 12-year-old girl hate her body because she doesn't look like the lady in the photo. I'm more concerned about that - and the way AI imagery is contributing to it.
we are under such a powerful spell. now technocracy has taken the place of religion to convince the beautifully perfectly designed human that she/he is FLAWED and their filter/altar will save your ugly ass. but our species has been assaulted and fragmented for so long it takes a strong family container with potent adult loving hearts to grow a self loving sturdy child.
Well said! These trends and developments are not for our benefit, yet they keep marching forward. As in the movie "War Games," the only way to win is not to play.
Amazing what the most coddled and over promoted / protected class of people resort to as proof they're "oppressed" and can continue to satiate their ongoing need for righteous indignation.
as they say in "church" amen bruther! Bein' of the thes-bean persuasion an' lovin' FACES, REAL FACES! (they had faces then...) I'm bored ta tears with all these look-alike beauties (both the fellas an' the gals)... I'll share a few of the "real" I find far more interestin' & appealin' than the plastic surgery set (ho hum)--some'a my fav-o-rite "stars!"
1. Carole King who told us ta get up every mornin' with a smile on our faces ta show the world all the love in our hearts reminded us that yer "as Beautiful as ya feel..." -- an' don't she look fantastic with her very real face an' all it's original attributes? I think so!
https://assets1.cbsnewsstatic.com/hub/i/r/2019/01/13/26a75809-79e3-4c9f-9a77-8202ef54d107/thumbnail/1200x630/acb57d55cbf6c228d71030833722a1d1/carole-king-on-stage-in-broadway-musical-beautiful-cbs-news-promo.jpg
2. Gene Wilder & Zero Mostel (from the Producers)
https://goldfm.lk/life/otherup/1625048696_776475146878510_goldstyles.jpg
3. Sid Caesar, Carl Reiner, Imogene Coca
https://goldfm.lk/life/otherup/1625048696_776475146878510_goldstyles.jpg
4. Edward G Robinson
https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/edward-g-robinson--album.jpg
5. Cagney & Bogey--that's sum set 'a "mugs" ;-)
https://i.pinimg.com/474x/05/07/b6/0507b6e9e7e41bb6a8e368a385e2b12a--old-hollywood-classic-hollywood.jpg
6. Louis Armstrong!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Louis_Armstrong_(1955).jpg
7. Ruby Keeler!
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-yQRsyKbk93Q%2FWLNCtu1YhLI%2FAAAAAAAAiSk%2FeWv4zCzmkoY0cGCAYEYogfsb5ud-kF1EgCLcB%2Fs1600%2FRuby%252BKeeler.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=95afdd3ee33d821fb5de1ffa2dfdc44d9a71b538fbc9eef00e7824e39849e298&ipo=images
8. Barbara Stanwyck
https://ilarge.lisimg.com/image/5012560/1001full-barbara-stanwyck.jpg
9. Oliver Reed
https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/dWfotc1X71wNCGyPO9hXpv8U9Gw.jpg
10. an' of COURSE Gloria Swanson (who had a face THEN an' always!)
https://images.findagrave.com/photos/2017/177/6542_1498583709.jpg
I gots 2 daughters an' both've 'em have had weak moments absurdly askin' fer all kinda "alterations" as if they wuz pants--facial, dental, ya name it, I've heard it an' my answer is the same NIX, hold the eyeroll... (this in SPITE of no social mee-dia & ltd. 'puter access an' NO TEEVEE!) Even if we had the Do-Re-Mi fer such absurditties I'd say NIX. We wartch all the old good stuff--I make it a pernt ta point out REAL TEETH (rare as hen's teeth now!) an' REAL FACES (like Bette Davis's!)...uphill battle fer us parents today tho'... pressures like none I'd seen as a kiddo... I think
those dang "zoom" filters over covid also did a number on 'em... this is dastardly tech fer sure!
Faces are wonderful things; "erases" of faces ain't!
(let's have "The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly!"--hat tip ta Sergio Leone who knew a good face & how ta "shoot it" ha ha--more 'n most!)
Great examples! I'd throw Fred Astaire in there too. Someone or other once described his face as "grotesque but appealing." 😆
I HAD Fred in there... I gotta long list! This wuz the one I'd selected! ("Grotesque" is too unkind by half tho')
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fred+astair&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Flastfm.freetls.fastly.net%2Fi%2Fu%2Far0%2F3d3e19aa1e6d4a61a81f219be1daad60.jpg
Ginger too...cute but no Venus! Ann Miller also near-made the list, Liza & Judy...
I have much admiration fer the talents in "hollyweird" that made even plain Janes inta beauties an' could make leadin' men outta the likes of William Powell (lol). Troo tributes ta the talents of the Westmores, the Heads, & Hurrels etc ;)--that team effort created glamor in regular folks but we KNEW 'bout all them plastic elements... We could see simple faces under all the artistry an' we knew where makeup ended--there was real talent--in spades!
All that wuz far less seamless as today's super-charged photoshop (I showed more egregious examples than the tame one ye picked ta my girls years ago...)
I velly much admire those that created an aura or illusion of beauty in manner, gesture, "style"--today all that "character" is sorely lackin'--you'd never have Marlene Dietrich onna marquee today... Sad it is too. I hate the "sameness" of today's "stars" (influencers etc) An' they all have the same dang TEETH.
Clearly I'mma a fan of all the "old stuff" I like real faces, real teeth, an' real human beans warts & all... I fear fer these newer generations that only have had these "altered / airbrushed" fictions ta look at. 'Til things change (might they?) I think we need ta simply MARINATE our children in the GREAT FACES of YORE (in ahrt too--Rembrandt's a good place ta start ;-)--gotta preclude their seekin' out friends & romances based on arty-fish-all looks as character is the far more important feature an' usually it duz not wither with age!
ps if we fergit America there's even more great "punims"--lookit Serge Gainsbourg! Jean Gabin Anouk Aimée too many ta list! ;-)
It's occurred to me in the past that cross-dressing Marlene was way ahead of her time. Today, she'd be an LGBTQ icon.
lol, bein' in thee-ate-er I kin state with soitenty that she was even back in the day! (fergit these LGBTQ idiots who have no clue who she is/wuz today)... She didn't so much cross dress as "wear the pants" an' well--a trend she didn't quite start but boy golly she made it popular! Those suits were tailored ta fit her like a glove an' accentuate the positive while not revealin' too much. An' yet even as an old broad she wuz famous fer that "nudie" evenin' gown. IMHO she never looked anythin' but "all woman" tho'--but what style! (she was "bi" fwiw but 'specially loved her men folks--a favorite quote is when she first saw John Wayne an' said "Now, I know vhat I vant for breakfast!"
But she wuz not "woke" an' she was brilliant--a friend of Orson Welles who didn't tolerate fools well (includin', sadly, Rita who wuz JUST lovely ta look at an' talented but not too much upstairs). Marlene wuz a good egg in my book havin' fought tooth & nail against the nazis via her own efforts WAY beyond the Hollywood Canteen .She offered ta go Mata Hari fer the allies & KILL Hitler herself!--She was QUITE a force ta reckon with (an' ye know she owes her "image" to brilliant jooish director Josef von Sternberg who transformed her slightly zaftig not technically beautiful at all looks inta an ICON... But again, I brought her up as she wuz so much more than the sum of her parts (an' "interestin' " AN' imperfect face https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4f/04/34/4f043483650917101fc37e0be9861334.jpg even in stardom https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTZhZjZkOTktNmY4ZS00MGFlLWIwZTQtNDkwNDVlMzdiNmFjXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTk5NzQ5Ng@@._V1_.jpg)
Fascinating! I did not know ANY of that about Marlene. Love it.
I don’t know about women, not being one, but for most men, there is a huge difference between pictures on a page or on the other side of one of these slabs of glass, and a real live woman. They are almost 2 different species.
Indeed.
AI is retarded
You can see this with men at the gym. Guys will spend a half hour doing bench presses, situps, and bicep curls.
I haven't verified this, but I read that if you look at the movie "Woodstock" with all its nude scenes, the kids' bodies are WAY less cut and toned than kids nowadays.
Absolutely. Body dysmorphia in boys and men has skyrocketed over the last few years. Look at the Marvel movies, where actors who used to look normal (like Chris Pratt) were transformed into muscle-rippling superheroes through intensive training (and, more often than not, a heaping dose of pharmaceutical enhancements). Those standards are just as unrealistic and difficult to attain as the measurements of a Victoria's Secret model are for women.
It's not just the hippies in "Woodstock" ... If you look at movies from any era prior to the 1980s, you can see actors - male and female - that are slim by contemporary standards, but not muscular. Look at all the swimsuited actors in "Beach Blanket Bingo" for example. Not one of these would get past a casting director today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbFUyhFG2vY
Well, after these past 5 years, I am leaning towards machines over most people especially the multitudes still wearing masks. That said, it seems to me that this is part of a larger problem; that natural anything is bad. Natural birth, natural death, natural food, natural remedies are all long time victims of modern life. Using and certainly selling many of these as service or products can get one arrested, often even when there is no law prohibiting it. Now we add natural beauty and even real live people. OH, pets too!
Yes, that's another problem: already, AI is more helpful and pleasant than most humans. In the war for humanity, we are not doing ourselves any favors by treating each other like garbage.
Sadly, that is often the case.
Actually there are some of us where the last five years have taught us the converse is true.
That there is beauty in imperfection. That even the ugliest face is far more beautiful than the most well-designed mask.
That’s a great perspective. Now that you mention it, I have noticed that the COVID era opened a lot of eyes.
I ran across a substack article by a guy - an academic - who has been studying how one detects image tampering. It's a great article with detailed examples. Given the subject of this article, I think you will find this interesting: https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/322-Body-By-Victoria.html
That is interesting! It's neat to see how forensic image analysis can find evidence of tampering. It's worth noting that some companies like Aerie try to buck this trend with a "no Photoshopping" rule on their promotional images, but I wonder exactly what that rule prohibits.
Seems like it would be very difficult to enforce except in the most obvious cases. The kind of enhancements that went on in the Victoria Secret image would take work to discern. He does have a link to a photo-forensics website on his page, I noticed. You can upload images and it will analyze them for you. He played around with it in one of his blogs and said it was good at some things but missed others. But it's probably a work in progress. Or an arms race.
I've worked in digital media and marketing for over 20 years, so I'm very familiar with this. I think there's a big difference between aesthetic retouching - removing distracting background elements, lighting issues, or obvious skin blemishes - and deceptive editing, which involves changing the contours or shape of people's bodies. Removing a handbag, as in the VS photo you linked to, is a big change, but it doesn't contribute to making a 12-year-old girl hate her body because she doesn't look like the lady in the photo. I'm more concerned about that - and the way AI imagery is contributing to it.
Thought-provoking.