Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: why some gals are more photogenic?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    2,156

    Red face why some gals are more photogenic?

    I would like to ask why some gals look good on photo but not real person and vice versa.

    is it bcos of lens distortion?

    if it is due to the photographer's skill, which area of his skill that cause the photo and real person to look DIFFERENT? (color? skin tone? distortion? posing? lighting?)

    i thought camera is WYSIWYG?

    ( pardon me if I sounded ignorant )

  2. #2

    Default

    its supposed to be WYSIWYG

    technique can help less pretty girls look better on the captured image

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Astin Studio
    Posts
    4,736

    Default

    A photograph is 2D while a person face is 3D.
    Its the same issue for taking scenery or insect, imo.

  4. #4
    Moderator ortega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    23,686
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    I would like to ask why some gals look good on photo but not real person and vice versa.

    is it bcos of lens distortion?

    if it is due to the photographer's skill, which area of his skill that cause the photo and real person to look DIFFERENT? (color? skin tone? distortion? posing? lighting?)

    i thought camera is WYSIWYG?

    ( pardon me if I sounded ignorant )
    The photographer's skill is actually to make full use of the different factors to make the image look good. Understanding the medium and the tools that are used to create the image. All these factors come together and make or break the final image.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    2,156

    Default

    hi hi, other than the 2D photo and 3D real person explanation, anyone got any explanation why a real person seen with our eyes may look different from a photo?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    2,156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ortega
    The photographer's skill is actually to make full use of the different factors to make the image look good. Understanding the medium and the tools that are used to create the image. All these factors come together and make or break the final image.
    this refer to lighting and other issues right?

    actually, what i mean is why the person in photo is DIFFERENT from the person in real life loh?

    bcos one of my frenz said that she look fat in photo but in real life, we dun think she is fat loh.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Astin Studio
    Posts
    4,736

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    hi hi, other than the 2D photo and 3D real person explanation, anyone got any explanation why a real person seen with our eyes may look different from a photo?
    Sometimes your eyes play tricks on you lah.
    Example, your eyes can auto-focus instantly, your eyes adjust brightness differently, your eyes adjust white balance differently too.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    bcos one of my frenz said that she look fat in photo but in real life, we dun think she is fat loh.
    Simple...
    Just tell her she's fat lor.
    If she thinks she's fat, then tell her what she wants to hear. No point telling otherwise...

  9. #9

    Default

    lenses play a part too..


    there's a difference between taking a subject with a 20mm lens and 50 and 85..

    portraiture working range.. usually people like to use 85-135mm.. why ? reason is that it more or less provides the real WYSIWYG. there will be compressions and distortions on other lenses.

    you can read about this in some photography books.



    as for normal digicams.. please remember that in reality, they're like 9mm-35mm lenses and the sensor has a crop of 4x or something.. if you know what i'm saying... (as opposed to dslr crop of 1.6...)
    Last edited by sequitur; 14th March 2005 at 04:21 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Sion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    新天地
    Posts
    4,768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    I would like to ask why some gals look good on photo but not real person and vice versa.
    On the photos she might be photographed at 50 years ago and in the real person she might be 50 years later?

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Some equitorial, tropical isle
    Posts
    2,398

    Default

    A persons face under different lighting and at different angles has subtle differences. So its possible that a person looks good at a certain angle only and with some light to help hide/show some features. Lens plays a part as perspective distorts a face to a certain extent. Photographer plays a part to look out for good features to enhance and others to hide.... A good makeup artist also helps to do that.

    Ever met a gal in a club and then see her in daylight... yeah... basically you get the picture. Looks different under different lighting (excluding the beer of course ). Its quite different in different lighting.

    A 50mm approximates a WYSIWYG.....

    Another example... models in model shoots ads look nice...but taken by different photogs and posted in portrait... either look even nicer or not as nice...

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Northen part of Sing a pore
    Posts
    2,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Astin
    A photograph is 2D while a person face is 3D.
    .
    got to do with lighting.

    i am ugly, photos made me uglier

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    I would like to ask why some gals look good on photo but not real person and vice versa.

    is it bcos of lens distortion?

    if it is due to the photographer's skill, which area of his skill that cause the photo and real person to look DIFFERENT? (color? skin tone? distortion? posing? lighting?)

    i thought camera is WYSIWYG?

    ( pardon me if I sounded ignorant )
    Might be due to Karma?!

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX Boy
    Might be due to Karma?!
    Nonono, it's the Qi...

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    have also seen the opposite where pretty girls didn't turn out nice in pics.

  16. #16

    Default

    The true inner soul is captured and reflected LOL

    Seriously:

    1) Lighting (eg afternoon sun/direct flash = uglier
    2) Prespective: 80 - 135 mm lens (in 35mm film format) compresses foreground and background a little and the depth is shallower (more pleasing hair/skintones) Low angle or high angle can shorten or lengthen body esp with wide angle.
    4) Some people stiffen up just before a shot while others relax
    5) Some people have the left side and right side of their faces more similar -- more pleasing to the eye. While others have a better side.

    Imp note - it's not just gals but people animals etc
    Last edited by magicdragon; 20th March 2005 at 12:21 AM.

  17. #17

    Default

    I think beauty is also perceived in other ways besides looks. For example Miss A may have a pretty face but does not know how to carry herself well in front of the camera...(she picked her nose when you click your camera)
    & Miss B average facial feature but carry herself well, is confident in her pose, does the right thing for the camera & photographer & has a certain "air" / "aura" around her...so the picture turn out nicer loh...

  18. #18

    Default

    Maybe really got something to do with the "Qi"...
    Can you imagine the photographer telling the models.."c'mon gals give me more "Qi" here..I need a little more "Qi" on your right..that right "Qi" baby "Qi"!!

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    In my own world
    Posts
    1,314

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Yeo
    I would like to ask why some gals look good on photo but not real person and vice versa.

    is it bcos of lens distortion?

    if it is due to the photographer's skill, which area of his skill that cause the photo and real person to look DIFFERENT? (color? skin tone? distortion? posing? lighting?)

    i thought camera is WYSIWYG?

    ( pardon me if I sounded ignorant )
    bcos they came from different factory...

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Central
    Posts
    181

    Default

    Our eyes do play tricks on us.

    cos the human eyes are too much of a variable, while the film (or CCD or CMOS) shows us the "LIGHT", no bias. so WYS is not WTF (what the film) sees.

    I suppose colour plays an important part here. Colour seen thru the eye is different from colour captured on film.

    Our perception of physical beauty is affected by many factors which cannot be captured on film. How well we know the person plays an important part, and of course the person's reaction to a camera and/or the cameraman.

    Actually its not just about girls. Even pictures of places which look good on a tourist magazine dont look as fantastic once u r there yourself.

    But cockroaches look equally unphotogenic to me at any pose, angle, lighting conditions, makeup or no makeup, dead or alive, leg hair shaved or unshaved, whatever.

    Prove me wrong by showing me a photogenic roach.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •