interesting -- history of retouching celeb pix

[xpt626]

Quote:

"One way to tell if a photo has been retouched is to look at necks: "Most people have two lines, where your neck folds," said DeLillo. "Also, if there's no shadow on the inside or outside of the eyes, it's been retouched." EVEN BEFORE digital airbrushing made it easier to thin thighs, she said, people found ways: Mae West had special corsets made for her dresses that could be rephotographed later with a tighter midriff and superimposed on her photo. Or photographers used wide- angle lenses vertically. "It's gotten easier to do on the computer," DeLillo said."

"DeLillo" is Helene DeLillo, president of New York's Dancing Icon, a digital imaging and digital photography company, and a specialist in digital retouching.

link to the entire article: tinyurl.com/2pzgm

[JoJo]

Interesting link Xpt, thanks. I ordered this book a couple of days ago, don't know if it will be of any help here, but it's gotta be interesting. An ex CIA man wrote it:

search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=mHu1XssQCP&isbn=1574881663&itm=1

[Doc]

This is precisely why I think you can't really use photographs in a law court to deal with identity issues. The entertainment business has a STANDARD of retouching that is accepted and unquestioned.
As one friend of mine quipped (and not in reference to PID at all) "Public relation photos are the one situation in the world where not only is it is legal to lie, but totally expected!!!' I paraphrase. And he was a drummer. Well, so much for my sources. But you gotta see his point.

If Sun King (or whomever) carted a wheelbarrel full of Paul/Bill pics into court, the defence team would cart in two wheelbarrels full Of MANY stars. The point being made that one could prove that nearly EVERYBODY in show business has been replaced and had a "nose bob."
Two hours later after convening, down comes the gavel as in "dismissed' and lunch is STILL two hours away for the hungry spectators. Leaving Sun King, or whomever, with court costs. The reason? ALL the pictures are deemed "fake."

The judge's new policy on photgraphs is "allowable for property or injury settlements only." And maybe....only Poloroids allowed.........with a Poloroid-------you got what you shot. If that pics been messed with, its discernable.