Forum Saradas
Female BodyBuilding & Fitness & Figure - Members Area => Tastes and opinions of Saradas members => Topic started by: femcepsfan on February 23, 2017, 12:02:55 pm
-
This vid of bios3training on youtube brings up what I have been thinking about quite often:
(http://thumbnails117.imagebam.com/53428/80fe74534275757.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/80fe74534275757)
He addresses particularly male athletes in this clip, but I highly assume that this is also the case with females:
(http://i67.tinypic.com/2mettm0.jpg)
-
might want to include a link to the actual video ;)
-
might want to include a link to the actual video ;)
As far as I know, unless youtube-links are not posted in the "Flash Muscle & Fitness Videos - Auctions & Gossip"-section of this forum, they will get deleted very soon.
Just copy paste:
bios3training My View on Devin Physique!
on youtube ;)
-
Here we have a very obvious example for a manipulated photo. One forum member mentioned that this also could have been done with a "fish eye" camera lense. I am not sure about this since the manipulation occurs as far as I can see it only in the bottom right corner, but I think there are certainly analogue ways to achieve the desired results without using software.
(http://thumbnails116.imagebam.com/51674/fde57b516736287.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/fde57b516736287)
There are photo apps for editing pictures specifically on Inst@gram to make manipulations even handier, but I don't speak from experience.
-
I really hate all the "touching up" to pictures that has become all to common now. Making the muscles look more defined than they actually are, blurring the skin to cover imperfections, etc. Personally, I want to see the imperfections. I understand why people do it, but I don't like it. And yes, I do see the irony in this coming from someone who likes to morph pictures! That's one reason why I've always put a logo on my morphs. I'm not trying to fool anyone.
-
Sorry for being repetitive, since I already mentioned this in other threads, but head shrinking is a very common practice, rampaging in publications and studio pics: it makes the model look much taller, and by comparison, her whole body (and muscles) look bigger. Many female muscle athletes are short, and appear like amazons.
Regarding your issue with blurring, M7, not only I agree, but I'll quote another member: "Some methods of muscle building and HD pictures don't get along".
-
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think using fake weights is also a form of manipulating photo and video material.
Damn, there seems to exist a whole business branch dedicated to bullshitting people in the fitness industry:
http://www.fakeweights.com
Well I don't claim to know the truth, but when I see for example 5'2 tall "Inst@gram-girls with let's say 130 pounds body weight, quite muscular but with relatively low body fat percentage, benching 220 pounds for 6 reps like nothing, something seems a bit fishy to me.
-
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think using fake weights is also a form of manipulating photo and video material.
Damn, there seems to exist a whole business branch dedicated to bullshitting people in the fitness industry:
http://www.fakeweights.com
Well I don't claim to know the truth, but when I see for example 5'2 tall "Inst@gram-girls with let's say 130 pounds body weight, quite muscular but with relatively low body fat percentage, benching 220 pounds for 6 reps like nothing, something seems a bit fishy to me.
I wouldn't call it "manipulation"...it's a visual trick, of course, but the photo remains untouched. Otherwise, even the slightest color correction would be perceived as "fooling the public".
If that's the case, same could be said about taking pictures from below, to make the women appear much taller than they really are. What I always find funny is when they take "candids" in their homes and, by comparing them with surrounding objects, you can deduct how short many of them are (f.e., I remember seeing one whose pecs were almost at the same level of the door handle).
-
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think using fake weights is also a form of manipulating photo and video material.
Damn, there seems to exist a whole business branch dedicated to bullshitting people in the fitness industry:
http://www.fakeweights.com
Well I don't claim to know the truth, but when I see for example 5'2 tall "Inst@gram-girls with let's say 130 pounds body weight, quite muscular but with relatively low body fat percentage, benching 220 pounds for 6 reps like nothing, something seems a bit fishy to me.
I wouldn't call it "manipulation"...it's a visual trick, of course, but the photo remains untouched. Otherwise, even the slightest color correction would be perceived as "fooling the public".
If that's the case, same could be said about taking pictures from below, to make the women appear much taller than they really are. What I always find funny is when they take "candids" in their homes and, by comparing them with surrounding objects, you can deduct how short many of them are (f.e., I remember seeing one whose pecs were almost at the same level of the door handle).
Haha, could you post the pic of the "door handle pecs" please? :)
-
I can't remember the athlete's name, so I cannot even search her...but anyway, I consider this thread not exactly fit to post examples, as any other that criticises visuals...may offend some fans.
But you don't have to do an extensive search to find examples...Jodi Boam has said on her IG something like: "I know I look huge on stage pics, but I'm actually pretty tiny!".