High-definition TV... The makeup industry is strategizing
FC
By Aaron Sands
The Ottawa Citizen
May 30, 2003
Stop the presses -- Cameron Diaz has skin problems, according to
high-definition television, which is threatening to expose the
previously invisible "flaws" of the world's most physically beautiful
people.
As HDTV spreads its digital clarity into homes worldwide, Hollywood is
sounding the alarm. The stars are running for cover, warts and all, only
to find the most advanced makeup wizardry to date failing to save
perfect face.
Plastic surgeons are drooling. The makeup industry is strategizing. As
the ugly truth reveals itself to an ever-expanding digital audience,
some of the beautiful people have come clean.
Faced with the horror of a sudden acne attack, Ms. Diaz reportedly
skipped a premiere showing of Gangs of New York.
"I want girls to realize that nobody looks like the women in the glossy
photos without the help of a load of talented people," she recently
confessed to Glamour magazine.
Those talented people, who make up the "Hollywood glamour machine," are
looking for new answers, television industry columnist Phillip Swann
explained in Television Week.
On Ms. Diaz, a regular on People magazine's list of the world's most
beautiful, Mr. Swann writes, "the magazine's editors -- and most of the
Western world -- do not have high-definition TV. If they did, they would
see that Diaz's face is spotted with small pockmarks, the unfortunate
consequence of a longtime acne problem.
"When seen on film," Mr. Swann says, "Diaz's skin imperfections are not
noticeable, thanks to Hollywood's talented makeup artists. However, with
HDTV, the picture is so precise that the acne damage cannot be hidden.
In a high-def broadcast of Charlie's Angels on HBO, Diaz looks like a
different person. She's still very pretty. But to be frank, I doubt that
she would make People's most beautiful list."
A revolution in makeup, still in its infancy, is underway to cover the
blemishes broadcast by HDTV. The art of airbrush makeup, a thin
water-based liquid spray-painted onto face and body, is still being
perfected.
"Airbrush is absolutely the wave of the future," said Amy Coffman, an
airbrush artist with The Airbrush Shoppe, Etc. in Kansas City. "With
high-definition TV, you can see every single flaw. And the only way to
really disguise those flaws is to use the airbrush. It's still a really
new thing; there are not a lot of people that actually have the skills.
"The airbrush comes out in such a finely atomized spray --in such a
light coat that you can't even tell that it's there," said Ms. Coffman,
whose company has applied makeup for Playboy, Mardi Gras, the Winter
Olympics and the Super Bowl. "It does the job and it's the only option
with HDTV. It's catching a lot of attention" in Hollywood and out.
Sarah
cares if Cameron Diaz has a few? I don't.
Jpoijhgwedfg M. Gtgiokjhderfg Jr.
undeserving film) shows Gwineth to have a small to medium blemish problem.
HDTV, however, can only do so much with the source material.
-Joe in SoFla
"They're such beautiful shirts. It makes me sad because I've never seen such -
such beautiful shirts before." Daisy Buchanan in F. Scott Fitzgerald's _The
Great Gatsby_ (or Trilby, at 29 Newbury...I forget)
Blushun
"Sarah" wrote
> I don't think even airbrushing can hide pock marks from acne.
It won't. Unless Ms. Diaz is lit flat all the time, shadows will highlight
the pock marks.
Blushun
--
What a strange illusion it is to suppose that beauty is goodness.
--Leo Tolstoy
EatWelBWel
makes stars look flawless? Or is it the camera lens?
Sandra in PA
Blushun
"EatWelBWel" wrote
> I'm curious. What's special about "movie" make-up that hides imperfections
and
> makes stars look flawless? Or is it the camera lens?
Its a combination of both actually.
Linda
the current system (low definition?) has some type of mechanism to detect flesh
tones and 'haze' them slightly, thus disguising any imperfections in the skin.
This technology isn't feasible in high definition, which has some actors in a
tizzy since their imperfections will be evident in high definition.
Linda
Lyn
> I don't think even airbrushing can hide pock marks from acne. Who
> cares if Cameron Diaz has a few? I don't.
Sounds like someone wanted to do a trash piece on Cameron Diaz.
Honestly, I think she's one of the better new actresses, seems
down-to-earth in interviews, and generally isn't as much of a B*tch as
many of them come off. I couldn't care less if she had boils on her
face...
As for HD TV showing all of their "flaws" - it is only going to show
what is recorded. If the film quality isn't superb, it isn't going to
record the flaws....and I highly doubt that the film quality is good
enough to undo what a hollywood top-of the line of make-up artist is
able to cover up...
-L.
Charlie Perrin
>I read an article about high defintion tv a couple of years ago that was
>saying the current system (low definition?) has some type of mechanism
>to detect flesh tones and 'haze' them slightly, thus disguising any
>imperfections in the skin.
Color reproduction in the NTSC system (good old American TV: black and
white designed before World War II and color capabilities added about
the time of the Korean War) is EXTREMELY low-resolution.
The fine details are all in the brightness/darkness.
Some TVs do tend to move "near flesh tones" colors to flesh tones, as
those are the hues that stick out like a sore thumb [sic] when they
are out-of-whack.
>This technology isn't feasible in high definition
It wouldn't be high-definition if you blurred all the colors together.
>which has some actors in a tizzy since their imperfections will be evident
>in high definition.
Way back when, some of them probably wanted to stick with radio drama
as their imperfections would be evident in NTSC.
I'd say they're big boys and girls, and they make lots of money: they
can afford to pay for the facelifts and psychotherapy. <grin/duck>
Stevie
enhancement. I have seen my SO work on clients and help one lose about 25
pounds plus reduce her hair length and correct the blemishes, and circles
she had.
also he did another client and showed her the before/after (she's got her
own successful glitter line) and he made her thinner, cleaned up her circles
from partying the night before, removed the pouches below her eyes and
cleaned up all booboos on her face. He also straightened out her nose a bit
and removed all flyaways from her hair
The stars were never flawless without the use of make-up but the digital
photography made the retouching all that much easier so those *perfect*
stars that you see on covers don't really look like that in real life!
Stevie
"
Linda
Are you talking about retouching images for TV or for magazine stills?
Linda
ami kio
"Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> "Sarah" wrote
>> I don't think even airbrushing can hide pock marks from acne.
>
> It won't. Unless Ms. Diaz is lit flat all the time, shadows will highlight
> the pock marks.
>
> Blushun
DH, who works at an A/V store, confirms that many stars look
not-as-impressive in HDTV. What will be interesting is what will happen
when they start showing sitcoms on HDTV. Either sitcom stars will need
absolutely perfect skin, or we're going to see stars who have an
unconventional beauty.
ami
[ from Elke ] Von Freudenberg Enterprises
Elke
___________________________________________
E. Von Freudenberg, Editor
The Beauty Newsletter
"It's Beauty in Your Email."
http://www.beautynewsletter.gq.nu
mailto:BeautyNewslet...@yahoogroups.com
From: "Stevie" <priv...@charter1.net>
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Reply-To: "Stevie" <remove one from the email address>
Newsgroups: alt.fashion
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:38:20 -0700
Subject: Re: High-definition TV... The makeup industry is strategizing
John Grabowski
> Color reproduction in the NTSC system (good old American TV: black and
> white designed before World War II and color capabilities added about
> the time of the Korean War) is EXTREMELY low-resolution.
But why don't we see these imperfections in movies. 35mm and 70mm film
supposedly is even higher def tha HDTV.
John
--
Inuring us to lies lays the groundwork for many other evils. --Thomas Paine
Stevie
unless you are prepared to spend serious time and money.... the one for
magazines takes time but it's a single image!
Stevie
Stevie
seen her work LIVE and she is FABULOUSLY meticulous...... Thank goodness she
does my brows!
8-)
Truly Elke's work is extraordinary
Stevie
"[
Blushun
Elke
[ from Elke ] Von Freudenberg Enterprises
elke
--
Elke Von Freudenberg
Makeup . Hair . Grooming
For Photography
http://www.portfolio.gq.nu
BOOKINGS:
LA | 323 525 1429
NY | 917 453 3699
REP:
Punch Artists
NY | 212 788 5318
From: "Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca>
Organization: Bell Sympatico
Reply-To: "Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.fashion
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:36:37 -0400
Subject: Re: High-definition TV... The makeup industry is strategizing
Canadian artists in general are known for their clean work. I did very well in Europe because of it. 'Round here, we don't have the budgets to retouch every single image. I guess my clients realize that if you spend the money on quality, you won't have to spend even more money in post. Unless it's a cover or close up beauty shot, what you see is what you get.
However, I have taught myself Photoshop to be competitive as I believe it is the way of the future. Where once I only had to do makeup, now I do hair as well. This is just another step in the evolution and it takes skill and talent just a slightly different kind.
Blushun
--
What a strange illusion it is to suppose that beauty is goodness.
Rebecca
> As for HD TV showing all of their "flaws" - it is only going to show
> what is recorded. If the film quality isn't superb, it isn't going to
> record the flaws....and I highly doubt that the film quality is good
> enough to undo what a hollywood top-of the line of make-up artist is
> able to cover up...
>
> -L.
Actually, this is not true. I have a Toshiba projection TV that is
HD-ready, and have an HDTV box. I can see a very clear difference in
clarity and detail between regular cable and HDTV. Another comparison
- when viewing a DVD vs VHS (which I long ago retired), DVD quality is
far and above that of VHS even though it is the same "recording". The
first time I watched Star Wars on DVD on this TV I was blown away by
the quality.
Rebecca
Blushun
Charlie Perrin
wrote:
>Charlie Perrin wrote:
>> Color reproduction in the NTSC system (good old American TV: black and
>> white designed before World War II and color capabilities added about
>> the time of the Korean War) is EXTREMELY low-resolution.
>But why don't we see these imperfections in movies.
Probably because they spend a lot of time on makeup for movies they
don't do now in TV.
>35mm and 70mm film supposedly is even higher def tha HDTV.
I wouldn't be surprised to find 16mm film higher res than HDTV....
HDTV is only 1080 lines and that's MPEG compressed.
Jpoijhgwedfg M. Gtgiokjhderfg Jr.
calibration of your TV set will immediately turn off.
In films the stars' flaws will not be so readily apparent because the
shooting/projection during closeups will beslightly off focus and the lighting
will be somewhat flatter. In theory, the resolution of film will be far higher
but you have to have a pristine image (on film) to begin with, and the
overwhelming majority are not.
Lyn
> Pri...@user.kingsnake.com (Lyn) wrote in message news:<4077c591.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > As for HD TV showing all of their "flaws" - it is only going to show
> > what is recorded. If the film quality isn't superb, it isn't going to
> > record the flaws....and I highly doubt that the film quality is good
> > enough to undo what a hollywood top-of the line of make-up artist is
> > able to cover up...
> >
> > -L.
>
> Actually, this is not true. I have a Toshiba projection TV that is
> HD-ready, and have an HDTV box. I can see a very clear difference in
> clarity and detail between regular cable
The term for that is "analog" signal.
> and HDTV.
Well, of course, but that's not what I'm referring to. The difference
between those two types of media are what puts food on my table...
What I'm referencing is this concept: "shit in, shit
out"....regardless how good the capability of the output is, the input
is what dictates the image (for the most part (read on)--->). While
the chips can enhance the image, they are not going to change what is
recorded. If the recording doesn't pick up the acne, for example, the
chip in the HDTV media isn't going to "magically" make it appear.
There might be recorded differences in the surface of an item recorded
(like skin), and those *will* be more noticable in the HDTV output,
but it's not like Cameron is going to go from being zit-free to being
pizza face....to the point where it is going to be majorly noticable,
as was inimated in the article. If the original film (analog input)
doesn't show the acne, it's not likely to appear in digital output.
Another comparison
> - when viewing a DVD vs VHS (which I long ago retired), DVD quality is
> far and above that of VHS even though it is the same "recording".
That's not a valid comparison - it's not the "same recording". It's
recorded through a different process, on a different type of media.
The movie may be the same, but the input (signal), as well as the
output, is different.
-L.
[ from Elke ] Von Freudenberg Enterprises
Elke
___________________________________________
E. Von Freudenberg, Editor
The Beauty Newsletter
"It's Beauty in Your Email."
http://www.beautynewsletter.gq.nu
mailto:BeautyNewslet...@yahoogroups.com
Organization: Bell Sympatico
Reply-To: "Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.fashion
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:49:10 -0400
Subject: Re: High-definition TV... The makeup industry is strategizing
Kate
hard. Shooting in HD and then seeing the program on HD is amazing, but
only nature and little babies look great. For most people, every flaw
is shown. We're not shooting anything tighter than head and shoulders
for interviews.
Most TV isn't shot in extreme closeup, as movies are, so the actors
look lovely, not heavliy made-up. If you've seen the new Matrix, you
might notice how tight the closeoups are and how everyone's skin
looks.
Cameron Diaz is lovely, but she has scars. It's not a big secret. She
doesn't look like Tommie Lee Jones, but she's got 'em.
Kate
"Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<WnvCa.1553$V77....@news20.bellglobal.com>...
> Re: High-definition TV... The makeup industry is strategizing Elke wrote
Jpoijhgwedfg M. Gtgiokjhderfg Jr.
>I'm producing a series for Discovery HD Theatre now and it's very
>hard.
This is my FAVE channel on HD. Kudos! (Maybe one day Food Network will be on HD
and I'll finally get my cooking show...)
Blushun
from Elke wrote
His statement was that you can't add lipstick or makeup per say to a makeup free face,but you can change what makeup is already there.... by color, or taking off,etc. That was years ago though.. so maybe now, they can actually apply a complete makeup job on some model's bare face.....
JennP
"Blushun" <blu...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:CzUCa.2158$V77.2...@news20.bellglobal.com...
It's a little frightening actually. For instance, have a look at this months Good Housekeeping Magazine which features Jennifer Aniston on the cover. She never posed for that cover. GH took and an old shot of her previously used in another one of their stories, changed her hair length, makeup, even her shirt so that it looked fresh and new.
Eeeew. That's downright creepy.
--
JennP."I base my fashion on what doesn't itch" Gilda Radner
kpr
> Yup...ya can and if ya don't like the face to begin with, you can
> change that too.
> It's a little frightening actually. For instance, have a look at
> this months Good Housekeeping Magazine which features Jennifer Aniston
> on the cover. She never posed for that cover. GH took and an old
> shot of her previously used in another one of their stories, changed
> her hair length, makeup, even her shirt so that it looked fresh and new.
> Years ago, Miribella Magazine 'created a non-existing model out of
> other models best features. It can and has been done for quite some time.
Remember the "Oprah TV Guide Cover Scandal?" They supposedly put her
head on Raquel Welch's body. It was a long time ago and the details escape
me. But it was the first time I remember reading for the first time
just how far
magazines would go to alter their models' photos to more closesly
resemble that
of perfection. kpr
Celia
> His statement was that you can't add lipstick or makeup per say to a
> makeup free face,but you can change what makeup is already there.... by
> color, or taking off,etc. That was years ago though.. so maybe now,
> they can actually apply a complete makeup job on some model's bare
> face.....
>
>
> Yup...ya can and if ya don't like the face to begin with, you can change
> that too.
Considering they can make an actor look like he's dying by tinting his
face grayish-white w/CGI (Boromir in LotR) and create whole CGI
characters interacting w/real people in a believable manner (Gollum
from LotR), I'd say it's very doable.
> It's a little frightening actually. For instance, have a look at this
> months Good Housekeeping Magazine which features Jennifer Aniston on the
> cover. She never posed for that cover. GH took and an old shot of her
> previously used in another one of their stories, changed her hair
> length, makeup, even her shirt so that it looked fresh and new.
> Years ago, Miribella Magazine 'created a non-existing model out of other
> models best features. It can and has been done for quite some time.
>
>
> Blushun
That is truly an awful, awful cover.
Celia
MKUPMAVEN
>
>It won't. Unless Ms. Diaz is lit flat all the time, shadows will highlight
>the pock marks.
>
One word. Spackle.
Barb