vile pictures like that really do make me want to shout "ban this sick filth now", nice work all round.
Mock them, and mock them hard, and maybe throw in some pooh poohing into the bargain.
Ralph Lauren may or may not have a knack for fashion. But we can safely say the American clothing giant needs a little help with Photoshop. And the DMCA. And the Streisand Effect. Late last month, the always amusing PhotoshopDisasters blog spotlighted this disaster of a Ralph Lauren ad: Ralph Lauren Photoshop Disaster …
What kind of screwed-up headspace would you need to be in to look at that hacked-together image and think it sets your designs off in a good light?
I like the nourishing soup and sandwiches idea; delightful piece of whimsy. Sadly, the model here would seem to be beyond the help of soup...
Now I know the fashion world sets up ludicriously impossible standards to drive the not quite perfect to drepression and eating disorders because they can't look as good as the photoshopped pap on magazines but who in their right mind let that image get used in the first place, who thinks that's attractive?? I really wanna try what they were smoking!!!!
Bring the mockery, bring the flames, bring soup and sarnies!
Head, hands and shoulders. Not just head.
The photoshopping is from there downwards. You can clearly see that there is no way for a spine to continue naturally from the head to the body. In fact if (note the if) the body is natural the spine ends up at least 5+cm to the right (from viewers perspective) from where the spine in the neck is supposed to enter the body.
So the girl either has some seriously bad scoliosis or it is indeed badly photoshopped - head, hands and shoulders grafted onto a (most likely scaled down) picture of the body.
If you look at this picture laid flat on the table, from about a 5 degree angle, it actually looks right.
So all I can assume is the advertising jerk responsible looked at the preview from this same perspective when he approved it.
Now what could he have been doing with his nose right against the top of his desk? :-/
"Surely it's the Ocado effect not the Streisand effect?"
Well, since the Streisand effect was coined 6 years ago, is recognised, and even has it's own Wikipedia page (ooooh!) - and most importantly refers to an effect that is closely replicated in the story (i.e. creating more attention to something you are trying to hide, by using copyright for stuff copyright doesn't cover).... and the "Ocado effect" is something you've made up just now, has never been used by anyone else, and is a totally different (as it "uses fear as a marketing exercise") case than the story, where they aren't using fear as a marketing exercise....;
So, no. It's not.
This just goes to show that the US Constitution often isn't worth the paper that it's written on, or so to speak. The Washington may not be taking away your right ot free speech directly, but it's certainly making the laws that allow private companies to walk all over the people's right to reply.
Let it be know that thanks to the DMCA Canadians have more right to free speech than Americans when it comes to standing up to big business.
I dated a girl that thin for a very long time. She ate like a bloody horse but was stuck forever at 5'4" and 84 pounds. There wasn't anything physically wrong with her, she was just really skinny. (she ran marathons and had no STD's so I assume she was moderately healthy)
She was a lot of fun too! My hands could actually encompass her entire waist and that combined with her overall tiny build my my willy look HUGE.
Some people really are that skinny, just like I'm abnormally tall, but we are who we are. The problem arises when people starve themselves or do drugs in order to be that skinny. I don't know the bird in the picture personally so I can't say if her slightness is natural or due to drugs or starvation, but I can guarantee she would make my willy look porn worthy.
In all seriousness, if you really look at the picture she's standing in a very unnatural, twisted, manner, which depending on the focal length of the camera lens, and the distance from the camera to the model, could easily distort her apparent waist size.
"And the "Ocado effect" is something you've made up just now, has never been used by anyone else, and is a totally different (as it "uses fear as a marketing exercise") case than the story, where they aren't using fear as a marketing exercise....;"
And yet when I follow the link, we have a piece of PR created by Ocado, which can be reinterpreted in a negative light (fake Ocado drivers preying on victims) and they want to control the story so that it is only interpreted in their positive light (caring for security).
Sort of like how Ralph Lauren created a piece of PR which was designed to emphasize slim sveltness, but can also be seen in a negative light, and now they want to control how it's interpreted to be only in their positive light.
Not so much like the Streisand effect, because *she* didn't create the PR in that case, (paparrazi photos) it wasn't that she wanted to present a positive PR story, and it wasn't a negative interpretation /positive interpretation thing, it was a privacy thing.
Ahh, I remember when Ocado announced that they would tell people the license plate number of the van that would deliver their food, because it feared fake Ocado vans were gaining entry to peoples home. And how we hypothesized at all the evil things these fake Ocado drivers could do to the poor home owner foolish enough to open their doors and let an Ocado delivery man arrive on their property.... I don't ever recall them catching these fake van drivers or fake vans either, so they must still be out there!!! OMG! Be afraid of anything with Ocado on it, just incase.
Ironically this is the Streisand effect. I created the item (Ocado effect), you wanted me to shut up, and that's only made me build on it and pull forward the problem into this new comment.
See the difference?
IMHO, to sum up:
Streisand effect, you want to keep something quiet and your actions in trying to suppress something cause it to gain more attention.
Ocado effect, you want to present a positive interpretation of something, but I point out the negative interpretation. The more you deny the negative, the more it dominates the narrative.
Oh yes it is. Model is Filippa Hamilton-Palmstierna and she's even been used in PRL ads before, but never looking quite like that. So either she's been on a crash weight loss and radical surgery programme (possibly in a swedish forest) before doing that ad, or it's a photoshop abomination.
Anyways, PRL's possibly fessed up and apologised after media sites started piling on.
Yes they have:
"For over 42 years we have built a brand based on quality and integrity. After further investigation, we have learned that we are responsible for the poor imaging and retouching that resulted in a very distorted image of a woman's body. We have addressed the problem and going forward will take every precaution to ensure that the caliber of our artwork represents our brand appropriately."
"Model is Filippa Hamilton-Palmstierna and she's even been used in PRL ads before, but never looking quite like that."
Googling up a few images of her shows her to actually have tits and hips (her arms are a bit stick-ish, though), and the place where they went missing must be the ad agency's bit bucket.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020