Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Britain bans HORRIBLY air-brushed ad featuring Julia Roberts

Reply
Thread Tools

Britain bans HORRIBLY air-brushed ad featuring Julia Roberts

 
 
reilloc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On 7/29/2011 7:31 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-07-29 16:51:22 -0700, Nervous Nick <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> On Jul 28, 11:56 pm, reilloc <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 7/28/2011 10:16 PM, Rich wrote:
>>>
>>>> trotsky<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>>>
>>>>> On 7/28/11 9:15 AM, RichA wrote:
>>>>>> Disgusting (the photo work).
>>>
>>>>> Can you show us some real good photo work, then?
>>>
>>>> "real good?" What English is that?
>>>
>>> More than good enough that it's clear you're begging the question,
>>> dopey.

>>
>> If you mean, "bringing up the question" then why don't you say just
>> that, instead of misusing the term "begging the question?"
>>
>> Begging the question does not mean to bring up the question. Begging
>> the question is a term of logic. It refers to presenting as true a
>> premise that requires proof; i.e., assuming that a conclusion is true
>> before it is proved--or assuming in the premises of your argument what
>> is supposed to be proved in the conclusion.

>
> Yup! "Begging the question" is an element of circular logic/argument. It
> is not a replacement for "Raises the question".
>


So, you boys are saying that it's this "bringing up/raising the
question" thing because what dopey did instead of answering the question
asked is seem to ask another question? Well, maybe you're right but
isn't what he did by failing to provide examples of "real good photo
work" the same as reasserting what he represented to be real bad photo
work? The "it's bad because I'm not able to show you anything better but
will divert attention to your grammar" argument looks awfully
question-begging to me; however, I'm not disputing that you may desire
so much rigidly to adhere to the Wikipedia entry that you view it
differently.

LNC
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:01:16 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2011-07-28 07:15:49 -0700, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> Disgusting (the photo work). WAY more than just airbrushing wrinkles
>> was done. Does this product get rid of bad face lifts, congenitally-
>> malformed lips and does it alter the jaw-line??!!
>>
>> From CNN:
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/136780854
>>
>> http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe...an/index.html?

>
>It
>>

>makes one wonder how this UK company can stay in business regarding
>domestic sales for their particular product.
>< http://www.digitalheavens.co.uk/?page_id=2433 >


I know you're making a joke of sorts, but the L'Oreal ad was banned
because it misrepresents what the product does, not because it
misrepresents what Julia Roberts looks like.

There is nothing illegal about misrepresenting what people look like
unless a claim is made about a product that made them look that way.

It doesn't even have to be the same person. Body doubles in movies
have been used for years.

Delta Burke was in my office when she was starring in "Designing
Women" on television. She is from Orlando and went to school
(Colonial High School) with an employee of mine. A very nice and
personable lady, but her television close-ups must have been shot with
a vaseline-coated lens. I have seen smoother gravel roads than her
complexion.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:02:54 -0500, reilloc <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: On 7/29/2011 7:31 PM, Savageduck wrote:
: > On 2011-07-29 16:51:22 -0700, Nervous Nick <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
: >
: >> On Jul 28, 11:56 pm, reilloc <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >>> On 7/28/2011 10:16 PM, Rich wrote:
: >>>
: >>>> trotsky<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
: >>>> news:(E-Mail Removed):
: >>>
: >>>>> On 7/28/11 9:15 AM, RichA wrote:
: >>>>>> Disgusting (the photo work).
: >>>
: >>>>> Can you show us some real good photo work, then?
: >>>
: >>>> "real good?" What English is that?
: >>>
: >>> More than good enough that it's clear you're begging the question,
: >>> dopey.
: >>
: >> If you mean, "bringing up the question" then why don't you say just
: >> that, instead of misusing the term "begging the question?"
: >>
: >> Begging the question does not mean to bring up the question. Begging
: >> the question is a term of logic. It refers to presenting as true a
: >> premise that requires proof; i.e., assuming that a conclusion is true
: >> before it is proved--or assuming in the premises of your argument what
: >> is supposed to be proved in the conclusion.
: >
: > Yup! "Begging the question" is an element of circular logic/argument. It
: > is not a replacement for "Raises the question".
: >
:
: So, you boys are saying that it's this "bringing up/raising the
: question" thing because what dopey did instead of answering the question
: asked is seem to ask another question? Well, maybe you're right but
: isn't what he did by failing to provide examples of "real good photo
: work" the same as reasserting what he represented to be real bad photo
: work? The "it's bad because I'm not able to show you anything better but
: will divert attention to your grammar" argument looks awfully
: question-begging to me; however, I'm not disputing that you may desire
: so much rigidly to adhere to the Wikipedia entry that you view it
: differently.

Shifting smartly out of this linguistic quagmire and into an arguably similar
point ...

I'm surprised to see the quaint old term "airbrushed" being thrown about. In
modern parlance, hasn't that word been almost totally supplanted by
"Photoshopped"? How many among us even remember what an airbrush is/was? And
did any of us ever actually use one?

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
John A.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:06:41 -0400, tony cooper
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:01:16 -0700, Savageduck
><savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2011-07-28 07:15:49 -0700, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>
>>> Disgusting (the photo work). WAY more than just airbrushing wrinkles
>>> was done. Does this product get rid of bad face lifts, congenitally-
>>> malformed lips and does it alter the jaw-line??!!
>>>
>>> From CNN:
>>>
>>> http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/136780854
>>>
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe...an/index.html?

>>
>>It
>>>

>>makes one wonder how this UK company can stay in business regarding
>>domestic sales for their particular product.
>>< http://www.digitalheavens.co.uk/?page_id=2433 >

>
>I know you're making a joke of sorts, but the L'Oreal ad was banned
>because it misrepresents what the product does, not because it
>misrepresents what Julia Roberts looks like.
>
>There is nothing illegal about misrepresenting what people look like
>unless a claim is made about a product that made them look that way.
>
>It doesn't even have to be the same person. Body doubles in movies
>have been used for years.
>
>Delta Burke was in my office when she was starring in "Designing
>Women" on television. She is from Orlando and went to school
>(Colonial High School) with an employee of mine. A very nice and
>personable lady, but her television close-ups must have been shot with
>a vaseline-coated lens. I have seen smoother gravel roads than her
>complexion.


Hmmm...

Had a small celebrity crush on her during her 1st and 10 days. Her
Designing Women character kinda spoiled that for me.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On 7/30/2011 11:32 AM, Allen wrote:
> On 7/30/2011 6:25 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:02:54 -0500, reilloc<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> : On 7/29/2011 7:31 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>> :> On 2011-07-29 16:51:22 -0700, Nervous Nick<(E-Mail Removed)>
>> said:
>> :>
>> :>> On Jul 28, 11:56 pm, reilloc<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> :>>> On 7/28/2011 10:16 PM, Rich wrote:
>> :>>>
>> :>>>> trotsky<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> :>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>> :>>>
>> :>>>>> On 7/28/11 9:15 AM, RichA wrote:
>> :>>>>>> Disgusting (the photo work).
>> :>>>
>> :>>>>> Can you show us some real good photo work, then?
>> :>>>
>> :>>>> "real good?" What English is that?
>> :>>>
>> :>>> More than good enough that it's clear you're begging the question,
>> :>>> dopey.
>> :>>
>> :>> If you mean, "bringing up the question" then why don't you say just
>> :>> that, instead of misusing the term "begging the question?"
>> :>>
>> :>> Begging the question does not mean to bring up the question. Begging
>> :>> the question is a term of logic. It refers to presenting as true a
>> :>> premise that requires proof; i.e., assuming that a conclusion is true
>> :>> before it is proved--or assuming in the premises of your argument
>> what
>> :>> is supposed to be proved in the conclusion.
>> :>
>> :> Yup! "Begging the question" is an element of circular
>> logic/argument. It
>> :> is not a replacement for "Raises the question".
>> :>
>> :
>> : So, you boys are saying that it's this "bringing up/raising the
>> : question" thing because what dopey did instead of answering the
>> question
>> : asked is seem to ask another question? Well, maybe you're right but
>> : isn't what he did by failing to provide examples of "real good photo
>> : work" the same as reasserting what he represented to be real bad photo
>> : work? The "it's bad because I'm not able to show you anything better
>> but
>> : will divert attention to your grammar" argument looks awfully
>> : question-begging to me; however, I'm not disputing that you may desire
>> : so much rigidly to adhere to the Wikipedia entry that you view it
>> : differently.
>>
>> Shifting smartly out of this linguistic quagmire and into an arguably
>> similar
>> point ...
>>
>> I'm surprised to see the quaint old term "airbrushed" being thrown
>> about. In
>> modern parlance, hasn't that word been almost totally supplanted by
>> "Photoshopped"? How many among us even remember what an airbrush
>> is/was? And
>> did any of us ever actually use one?
>>
>> Bob

> I remember. Disclaimer: it helps to have been born in the last days of
> the Coolidge administration. As to using one--no way!
> Allen


I did, once.

--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-31-2011
On 7/30/11 4:25 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
>
> Shifting smartly out of this linguistic quagmire and into an arguably similar
> point ...
>
> I'm surprised to see the quaint old term "airbrushed" being thrown about. In
> modern parlance, hasn't that word been almost totally supplanted by
> "Photoshopped"? How many among us even remember what an airbrush is/was? And
> did any of us ever actually use one?


You are quite right. Airbrushing is what the Playboy editors did in the
pubic region of women in the 60's.
I don't have CS 5, but somewhat recent versions of PS "have" an
"airbrush". Nonetheless, a lot more was done to those photos than using
just the airbrush tool.

OTOH, I still catch myself saying I've videotaped a TV show...
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Turco
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2011
RichA wrote:
>
> Disgusting (the photo work). WAY more than just airbrushing wrinkles
> was done. Does this product get rid of bad face lifts, congenitally-
> malformed lips and does it alter the jaw-line??!!
>
> From CNN:


<edited to prevent trauma>

Their finest hour, surely.

--
Cordially,
John Turco <(E-Mail Removed)>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kevin McMurtrie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
John Turco <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> RichA wrote:
> >
> > Disgusting (the photo work). WAY more than just airbrushing wrinkles
> > was done. Does this product get rid of bad face lifts, congenitally-
> > malformed lips and does it alter the jaw-line??!!
> >
> > From CNN:

>
> <edited to prevent trauma>
>
> Their finest hour, surely.


Gahhh! It's like a corpse with a crushed skull wearing seductive
make-up. It would give people nightmares.
--
I will not see posts from Google because I must filter them as spam
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yahoo email SUX!!! horribly dh@. Computer Information 4 10-01-2010 03:43 PM
"gem install mysql" failing horribly on OS X leaopard Doug Livesey Ruby 2 11-16-2009 09:17 AM
Julia Roberts Is Not Pretty ronnstuart@gmail.com DVD Video 7 04-09-2009 11:06 AM
Horribly noobful string question SeNTry Python 4 12-15-2005 01:23 AM
horribly impossible debugging task Ara.T.Howard Ruby 11 09-22-2004 06:19 PM



Advertisments