The old wives tale that Playboy "airbrushed" the heck out of their models

[d2creative]

Originally Posted by dmora

To the same token... i dont think you're understanding the extent of the make-up they use in conjunction with the lighting. Sure lighting can make things look like that but its not an issue of being lazy and envious of the equipment. Most people dont have a budget to hire professional make up artists, make-up airbrushing equipment including the paint and makeup... on top all the lighting equipment. Why spend all that money when i can get the EXACT same look in Photoshop. You said your self you cant tell a difference. I think thats more of a negative than a positive.

The other point... at least one that i always take issue with is that i hate the "Playboy" look thats come about in the last 20 years. Its not real and its not what people look like.

That's all fine and dandy, but none of it is the point of this thread.
Running a filter in photoshop is easy. If the same look can be achieved with lighting, that's impressive. Even if you're an amateur and don't have the funding to hire a proper make-up artist, if the lighting alone can get you that much closer to the final look, that's less work you have to do in post.

[Dobick]

I can think of two examples (not a centerfold) that was airbrushed all to heck.

About four or five years ago there was a USAF Sgt or SSgt that did a spread for playboy, and there were a host of non-playboy shots that also were posted. There is no way on this earth that lighting alone would have been able to cover up the "experience" that this woman displayed in her body to get the perfectly smooth skin and scar free belly that was printed in the magazine. It can lessen the effect, but in no way can eliminate it entirely.

One other example that I can think of off the top of my head is the pictorial of Ronald Reagan's daughter that came out about eight or ten years ago. Same issue.

Both were attractive women, but their bodies and skin had the normal affects that age and life has on a body, and those were completely absent in the pictorials.

I am not saying anything that Arny has ever shot has been airbrushed, but these two certainly were

[C!LLY]

I dont know what playboy did with Lt. Frederica Spilman, but that chick is fugly in person.

just sayin...

[Dobick]

Originally Posted by DEMDeepEllumMusic

Found out that it is just that, they softened the shots by proper use of lights and the lenses that they had available and if you use the right tools you can get the same look yourself even in portrait shots without having to PS the poo out of your image.

Think-beauty dishes/softboxes/ringlights all used together along with whatever background lights and not shooting with the lens at it's tac sharpest-yeah you want tac sharp at the eyes but the rest can fall off just a bit.

BTW they shoot all 35mm digital now, no MF (film or digital)or LF for a couple years now
even for the centerfold! They still have the LF and Has MF digital bodies there but they set on the shelves. (won't say what camera that they do use to not throw that into the discussion).

I heard this from a guy who shoots at the Playboy shooting studio and knows the guy who has done the centerfold shoots for over 30 years now.

In fact if you ever get a chance to go there the photographer can show you the sheet film that was shot and he will dare you to show him where they airbrushed the photo in post.

IT IS IN Knowing HOW TO Light your SUBJECT plain and simple.

I just went back and read this -- and I see where you are talking about playboy studios, which would imply to me that you are talking about anything that playboy produces

NSFW link
Playboy Babe Christina Vlahakis Nude Gallery 009

You are gonna try to tell me that somehow proper lighting made the stairs behind her butt in the linked shot somehow just kind of bend. Last time I checked, no amount of light placement could make a wooden stair step warp.

[Kalrog]

Originally Posted by Dobick

You are gonna try to tell me that somehow proper lighting made the stairs behind her butt in the linked shot somehow just kind of bend. Last time I checked, no amount of light placement could make a wooden stair step warp.

Sorry - somebody has to say it... P0WNED!

[kimberley]

I can see how this is true...there are certain time when I pose a certain way and the light it just right that I have to do less PS on..plus most of those models are beautiful and makeup out the wazooo...so heck yeah I totally think think this is true

[iCe]

Originally Posted by thejakestir

Sorry, but I do believe they do a lot of post work on the skin in a lot of their photos.
I'm sure the Playboy photographers claim otherwise, but I call BS.

I agree but I'm thinking that their bios are real

[toverman]

My wife subscribes to "Self" magazine, which aims to encourage women to be themselves and strive to improve in that way. But the cover photos? So blatantly airbrushed that people even with famously good skin (such as Carrie Underwood) are distorted beyond recognition.

Haven't seen a copy of Playboy created since the dawning of the digital age. I used to read the mag for the cartoons (and, uh, the "articles").

[pbyd]

“I heard this from a guy who shoots at the Playboy shooting studio and knows the guy who has done the centerfold shoots for over 30 years now”
This seems to be the way most “Tells” start, I know someone that talked to someone that knew what happened. I am not trying to be disagreeable and I have no idea how Playboy does anything now, as I have not seen a Playboy in over 30 years, yes I am old. I did see a TV interview with Hugh Hefner back in the 70”s and at that time the center fold was always shot on large format (8x10) and had a very large amount of Air Brush work, find magazines from 1970’s and earlier and you can see the air brush work. I have done negative retouching and have seen air brush work being done and it is not hard to pick out. This is just an option of the magazine from my youth, and I am saying nothing about the last 20 years.
Just saying,
Wayne
Photography by Design

[pbyd]

“I heard this from a guy who shoots at the Playboy shooting studio and knows the guy who has done the centerfold shoots for over 30 years now”
This seems to be the way most “Tells” start, I know someone that talked to someone that knew what happened. I am not trying to be disagreeable and I have no idea how Playboy does anything now, as I have not seen a Playboy in over 30 years, yes I am old. I did see a TV interview with Hugh Hefner back in the 70”s and at that time the center fold was always shot on large format (8x10) and had a very large amount of Air Brush work, find magazines from 1970’s and earlier and you can see the air brush work. I have done negative retouching and have seen air brush work being done and it is not hard to pick out. This is just an option of the magazine from my youth, and I am saying nothing about the last 20 years.
Just saying,
Wayne
Photography by Design

[Joe_Lorenzini]

There was a photo floating around a number of years ago showing a typical lighting setup for a Playboy shoot. It had numbers on all the lights with a legend explaining what each light was and where it was directed.

If I remember correctly, there were approximately 35 lights used for a single shot.

I tried to find the image but with no luck.

Joe

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

This "guy" who is also a member here, is a respected photographer in his own right and he said that the principle shooter for Playboy's Centerfolds for many years now who knows how to light the models correctly will pull old large format film negs and defy you to show him how and where they were airburshed.

Yes PB until just a few years ago shot the centerfolds only with a large format set up but it took a lot of time to process the film, get the prints to the headquarters for review and approval or reshoot and then have the artwork done for press and the quality of the digital cameras have improved so much they shoot the centerfolds now on 35mm full frame bodies and then send the files over electronically and can have approval in a matter of hours instead of days.

As to the light set up for the principle lights on the "model" he showed us a shot showing them at a recent shoot and he did say that there were many other lights on the rest of the scene and background.