Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by ash92, Apr 4, 2009.
Did IMG get her this?
it's lindsay ?
This is Harper's Bazaar Taiwan
And you need to provide a valid image credit for this - thanks.
I see more Photoshop than I do Lindsay
& on the cover is says 'April 2008'
^Accoring to the font, it's Lindsay. very poor choice of cover I must say
Oops, sorry. Couldn't read it. How do I change the title?
photoshop. but it's a nice cover though.
These pics were also used in Arena Singapore July 2008
Lindsay looks stunning, even though its too much photoshop.
She's looking very young Ann Margaret here.
Definitely too much photoshop, colors are ugly too...
Wow, her face's overly retouched, head awkward and
the body looks superimposed...terribly bad choice for a cover photo
she looks very weird...and too much airbrushed!!
That looks like a wax figure on a cover in 1995.
that seems the face of a robot, terrible photoshop
Lindsay looks old, weird, horrible, the lipstick is awful. She doesn't even look like a human being.
Someone went apesh*t with the blur tool.. her skin definitely needs it.
too much photoshop
omg is this a joke? she looks like a sim
I'd rather see Lindsay's freckles (and fake tan) than 'photoshop porcelain paleness' because she doesn't look human anymore in that ensemble piece of computer surgery.
I can see what they were trying to achieve, but that look isn't very Lindsay - not when you need to alter her appearance digitally - and to mess up the face of someone whose saving grace is their photogenicity is to squander the entire point of using her at all.
Overall, the design of the cover is fine, the pose is fine, even the idea of the styling is fine IF they'd used someone suitable for it, like Dita Von Teese, who has skin of pale perfection and can do her own eyeliner and lipstick.
But to use someone and then digitally alter them to look awful, is a waste of that celebrity and a waste of that cover.