On Aug 3, 8:55*pm, JimH wrote:
On Aug 3, 8:52*pm, DK wrote:





Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:

hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...

I suppose it is for photographers not interested in life as it is,
or for photographers whose composition and exposure skills are minimal.

I like life as it is. I like to take photos that look as close to
what I saw as possible.

We recently came across an old, forgotten box of family photos. *One
was my high school graduation "glamour" shot ..... you know, the ones
that were airbrushed back at the studio to remove a few pimples, add
a tinge of ruddy red to the cheeks and enhance the color of the eyes.

In my case, I am kinda glad the photographer didn't simply reproduce
what he saw. *It wasn't pretty.

Eisboch

Did you have a flattop?

Here's a photo of someone's 14-year-old granddaughter.
Do you think it has been photoshopped?

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...eous/diana.jpg

Actually it was photoshoped, using CS3. *If you look at the exif data
you actually made 25 adjustments in photoshop.

I think she is a beautiful young woman, but the lighting is not
complementary to her or her skin tone. *The photo looks flat like you
had the light directly behind you when you took the photo.

It was conveniently deleted. *WAFA caught in *another* lie.

Ping Richard: * I rest my case #4.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

man, you are a whiney little bitch..