- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: With CGI, Photoshop, animation, etc., why are Supermodels still needed?
Posted on 1/3/17 at 10:49 am to Salmon
Posted on 1/3/17 at 10:49 am to Salmon
I am specifically talking about Supermodels that are highly paid.
The low paid models will still be needed for live events.
If you are going to Photoshop the actual person, why pay them millions? You can take a regular woman and photoshop her to look like you want.
The low paid models will still be needed for live events.
If you are going to Photoshop the actual person, why pay them millions? You can take a regular woman and photoshop her to look like you want.
4
Posted on 1/3/17 at 10:51 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
If you are going to Photoshop the actual person, why pay them millions? You can take a regular woman and photoshop her to look like you want.
well I'm pretty certain the top 1% do a ton of live promotions
people are probably going to expect them to look somewhat close to what they look like in some magazine
removing a mole or adding skin color or slightly more cleavage isn't the same as taking a regular chick and changing her completely
This post was edited on 1/3/17 at 10:52 am
Posted on 1/3/17 at 11:08 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I am specifically talking about Supermodels that are highly paid.
You are right that the SuperModel might die, but it won't be because women start taking fashion advice from a virtual SuperModel or a digitally enhanced normal model, it will be because many consumers have already turned away from the SuperModels and towards the social media models.
My wife loves watching the makeup tutorials on YouTube. She's bought a ton of new product she discovered because of it. These are mostly amateur/homemade productions, and while a few of them might be OT 10s, most of them aren't. They have more in common with Home Shopping hosts than Cindy Crawford. I'm not saying they're ugly, just that their personality, the usefulness of their tips, and the trust they are able to build with an audience is what's important, not how extraordinarily pretty they are.
This post was edited on 1/3/17 at 11:10 am
Posted on 1/3/17 at 11:24 am to Bjorn Cyborg
5'10'' 80 lb women don't grow on trees. They are paid a lot because they are a rare breed. No amount of photoshop can recreate that.
Posted on 1/3/17 at 11:25 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
If you are going to Photoshop the actual person, why pay them millions? You can take a regular woman and photoshop her to look like you want.
I believe it's because they are paying a premium for the rare physical attributes needed.
Runway models need to be very tall (although I'm not exactly sure why). A 5'10" woman is in like the 95th percentile in terms of female height. And not only do they need to be in the 95th percentile for height. They also need to be in the 95th percentile for attractiveness.
If some fashion house doesn't pay them a million bucks, another one will.
This post was edited on 1/3/17 at 11:26 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News