"Everything Old Was Once New

and until explored unfamiliar and dangerous..."
(Sir Terry Pratchett)



Cheeky & Geeky Se Moi;

Vision, Faith & Attitude!

Nie Hao, Gaat ie, Fawakka?


DISCLAIMER: I do not own the photos published here, unless stated.

photo

Swimsuit models with flawless bodies are apparently not picture perfect enough to help sell garments on H&M websites.

The global retailer from Sweden ignited some controversy this week when Swedish newspaper, Aftonbladet, reported the trendy fashion company was using virtual computer-generated human figures on its site to model lingerie and swimsuits.
The virtual figures had real models’ heads digitally attached in post-production which gave the image a very realistic human appearance. The giveaway clue that these models were not entirely flesh and blood was the robotic identical hand position on their hips.
A national advertising watchdog was quick to denounce the company for “creating unrealistic physical ideals,” and demanded the company “find someone with both body and face that can sell their bikinis.”
H&M defended this practice in a statement sent out to all their offices around the globe, including Toronto, stating that these virtual mannequin pictures are not the only images used on their e-commerce site but real life models and still life pictures are also used.
A section on the site called the Dressing Room allows customers to select a garment and have it modelled on one of these virtual mannequins. It should be noted, in a nod to racial diversity, one of these non-human models is black.
Extreme Photoshopping in advertising is increasingly becoming controversial, recently forcing companies like Nordstrom’s and Ann Taylor to acknowledge their over-enthusiastic retouching of images on their websites.

But some fashion companies like Canadian retailer Jacob recently announced they hope “to reverse the trend in digital photo manipulation that has become excessive in our industry.” The Montreal-based company no longer retouches the model’s body in their ads for clothing and lingerie.
H&M acknowledged that the real models whose heads they used were “well aware of how we are using them to show our items.” But how will this affect the modelling industry if more retailers adopt this kind of virtual reality?
“From an agent’s and a model’s point of view, it could mean less revenue,” says Brandon Hall, an agent at Toronto agency Sutherland Models.
If only a model’s head is being shot, it cuts down on the booking time, and there are no lengthy wardrobe, hair and makeup changes which can increase a model’s hourly rate, he says. Also, since the model’s facial expression never changes, the same image can be used over and over without additional fees.
But Hall doubts H&M, a global retailer with deep pockets, is using this practice for budget reasons.
Since the retailer is known for a rapid turnover — new merchandise arrives daily — this process could just mean cutting down on lengthy photo shoots and speeding up the production process of getting images up faster on the site, says Hall.
“They have essentially created a template.”

Swimsuit models with flawless bodies are apparently not picture perfect enough to help sell garments on H&M websites.

The global retailer from Sweden ignited some controversy this week when Swedish newspaper, Aftonbladet, reported the trendy fashion company was using virtual computer-generated human figures on its site to model lingerie and swimsuits.

The virtual figures had real models’ heads digitally attached in post-production which gave the image a very realistic human appearance. The giveaway clue that these models were not entirely flesh and blood was the robotic identical hand position on their hips.

A national advertising watchdog was quick to denounce the company for “creating unrealistic physical ideals,” and demanded the company “find someone with both body and face that can sell their bikinis.”

H&M defended this practice in a statement sent out to all their offices around the globe, including Toronto, stating that these virtual mannequin pictures are not the only images used on their e-commerce site but real life models and still life pictures are also used.

A section on the site called the Dressing Room allows customers to select a garment and have it modelled on one of these virtual mannequins. It should be noted, in a nod to racial diversity, one of these non-human models is black.

Extreme Photoshopping in advertising is increasingly becoming controversial, recently forcing companies like Nordstrom’s and Ann Taylor to acknowledge their over-enthusiastic retouching of images on their websites.

But some fashion companies like Canadian retailer Jacob recently announced they hope “to reverse the trend in digital photo manipulation that has become excessive in our industry.” The Montreal-based company no longer retouches the model’s body in their ads for clothing and lingerie.

H&M acknowledged that the real models whose heads they used were “well aware of how we are using them to show our items.” But how will this affect the modelling industry if more retailers adopt this kind of virtual reality?

“From an agent’s and a model’s point of view, it could mean less revenue,” says Brandon Hall, an agent at Toronto agency Sutherland Models.

If only a model’s head is being shot, it cuts down on the booking time, and there are no lengthy wardrobe, hair and makeup changes which can increase a model’s hourly rate, he says. Also, since the model’s facial expression never changes, the same image can be used over and over without additional fees.

But Hall doubts H&M, a global retailer with deep pockets, is using this practice for budget reasons.

Since the retailer is known for a rapid turnover — new merchandise arrives daily — this process could just mean cutting down on lengthy photo shoots and speeding up the production process of getting images up faster on the site, says Hall.

“They have essentially created a template.”

video

First They Came For SpongeBob Now Fox News Has Attacked Sesame Street

Fox News’ Eric Bolling is claiming because Sesame Street has introduced a Muppet in poverty it is only a matter of time until they introduce an evil Republican Muppet to attack the tea party.

Here is the video from Media Matters:

Bolling said accused Sesame Street of getting pretty political, Juan Williams told Bolling that he was over the top, and he asked, “I get it, and boy, take this in the right way here, but are we singling out a poverty stricken little girl? Does my son need to see that? My little boy need to see that’s going on. You don’t single out other groups. You don’t single out the little gay Muppet, or the little black Muppet, or the little Hispanic Muppet do you? No, there are intertwined in the ensemble.” Williams pointed out that the hungry child serves a real purpose. The new Muppet talks about the reality for millions of children in America who go hungry every day.

Bolling then brought in Republican strategist Cheri Jacobus and said, “I’m waiting for them to come out and have like this evil Republican or tea partier that they are going to blame Lily’s poverty on.” Jacobus said, “Well, I think so, and if you don’t speak out against their political agenda that’s probably what will happen. Look, it is up to the parents to explain some of the more difficult aspects of life to their children when they feel the time is appropriate, and one of things we do as taxpayer to make sure we don’t have children who go hungry is we have the school lunch program, the school breakfast program, and in some cases the after school snack that we do. We have a lot of programs, so that while it’s not always a great situation we do have some protections in place, and I think it’s not appropriate for PBS and Sesame Street to take it upon themselves to give these more difficult lessons of life to little children.”

Without a hint of irony, Bolling and company held this discussion about Sesame Street’s political agenda on a Fox Business show called Follow The Money, a program which is more about pushing far right ideology than business or money.

Fox News has some big issues with cartoon characters. In early August of this year, Fox News declared war on SpongeBob because the foremost resident of Bikini Bottom starred in a short about global warming. Fox has also attacked Superman for renouncing his US citizenship and Spiderman for daring not to be white.

This attack on Sesame Street is especially insidious because it ties in to the right wing war’s on PBS. Even worse, Bolling and Fox completely ignored the good work that the supposedly liberal children’s show does. Sesame Street produced an outreach DVD for military families that is designed to help the hundreds of thousands of preschool age children who are dealing with losing a parent to military deployment.

Here is a video clip:

Those dirty commies at Sesame Street are supporting the troops.

Bolling and company got the point of the new Muppet character wrong. Sesame Street isn’t about spreading a political agenda to children. The new character is designed show the millions of children who don’t have enough to eat that they are not alone. The Sesame Street prime time special is focused on the problem of hunger in America, but with poverty at a new high, I can’t think of a better time than now to discuss the issue.

Fox News is attacking Sesame Street for daring to discuss the problem of hunger. Be criticizing those who talk about it, FNC is reinforcing the stigma and shame associated with hunger. Some on the right believe that any admission that there are people in this country, who by no fault of their own, do not have enough to eat, makes America weaker. Their answer is to deny the problem. They pretend like it doesn’t exist.

The truth is that the Muppets on Sesame Street do a better job of addressing reality than the on air talent at Fox News, and the average child who watches Sesame Street understands more about real American values that the faux patriot Fox News viewers ever will.


text

The Google Logo

fuckyeahlogoaddict:

When quality of services and popularity compensate for lack of taste. 

Update, July 10:

Drop the emboss, get rid of the shadow and use more vivid shades for each of your letters. No emboss=better black & white version. As I started writing this post I really hated the typeface (Catull Regular), but now I think there’s something almost endearing about it.