Kemara wrote:
In my opinion, its all how the model poses. Some of mine look like I'm skinnier, but some looks heavier.

That's a big part of it. It's also VERY dependent upon whomever is behind the camera. In the wrong hands, a camera can make any subject look heavier, shorter, or any other unflattering adjective. Lighting, posing, lens choices, relative positions, etc. can work for you. Or against you.

nyx wrote:
From personal experience, I've never had a photo make me look much heavier, but I've found that some definitely accentuate curves, especially muscles, which could lead to that effect.

What you said is probably a much better description of what I see with the model I mentioned (Christine for those that want to check).  Her curves are more accentuated rather than her looking bigger.  She's very tiny and even for my camera, she's still very slim.  5'5" and 102 lbs.

Peter Yamasaki wrote:

That's a big part of it. It's also VERY dependent upon whomever is behind the camera. In the wrong hands, a camera can make any subject look heavier, shorter, or any other unflattering adjective. Lighting, posing, lens choices, relative positions, etc. can work for you. Or against you.

well said

i'd say the camera adds 10 pounds and the video camera adds 20

Peter Yamasaki wrote:

That's a big part of it. It's also VERY dependent upon whomever is behind the camera. In the wrong hands, a camera can make any subject look heavier, shorter, or any other unflattering adjective. Lighting, posing, lens choices, relative positions, etc. can work for you. Or against you.

well said

i'd say the camera adds 10 pounds and the video camera adds 20... models who look "fashion perfect" on screen look like a refugee victim in person

io wrote:
Sometimes I've also wondered if it depends on the camera as well, if some are more prone to distorting the images.  I've had shots taken on the same day but w/different cameras and in a set taken w/one of the cameras I will look distinctly smaller.  Thanks for the feedback!

Now that I've thought about it more, I've also been told focal length can play a part as wide angle focal lengths can have some distortion which may make someone appear wider than they are.

io wrote:
I swear, sometimes I look at images of myself and KNOW I look larger in many (though not all) of them than I really am, or so I think.  In your experience, does the camera really add 10 lbs?  Is it because you are flattened or what?

It's been my experience that the models that bitch about the camera putting weight on them just didn't realize that they were carrying around that extra 10 or 20 lbs until they saw the pix.

Belair wrote:

It's been my experience that the models that bitch about the camera putting weight on them just didn't realize that they were carrying around that extra 10 or 20 lbs until they saw the pix.

Rest-assured, I know I don't gain 10-20lbs from camera to camera in the course of an evening.  What caused me to question this is NOT any extra weight I've noticed in my pro shoots, but the fact that at a recent event where I was very heavily photographed there are some photos that make me look larger than 120lbs, and some which make me look just right.  I noticed this even if the image was taken at the same angle and distance, it just seems to vary w/each camera.  People who saw the "larger" images even commented that they made me look heavier.  My skin is also very white so any light is reflected off it and it drowns out the shadows...I think that may have something to do with it as well in photos that rely on flash.

io wrote:

Rest-assured, I know I don't gain 10-20lbs from camera to camera in the course of an evening.  What caused me to question this is NOT any extra weight I've noticed in my pro shoots, but the fact that at a recent event where I was very heavily photographed there are some photos that make me look larger than 120lbs, and some which make me look just right.  I noticed this even if the image was taken at the same angle and distance, it just seems to vary w/each camera.  People who saw the "larger" images even commented that they made me look heavier.  My skin is also very white so any light is reflected off it and it drowns out the shadows...I think that may have something to do with it as well in photos that rely on flash.

I wasn't commenting on you, per se.  Actually, your size is very satisfactory.

Correct lighting and angles will help reduce the effect.

Photoshop liquify filter does it better.

I see a lot of images that have been stretched vertically or horizontally, or where the model has been liquify'd front to back or whatever. It's kinda scary 'cuz I can't like tell the difference unless I get a chance to see the model in person and I'm like "yuk! this girl is covered in tattoos and weighs 30lbs more than she looks like"!

The camera adds 10 lbs, photoshop liquify takes off 20, so the net loss is -10lbs. Girls you'll look THINNER but with bigger boobies by the time the shoot is over!

GWC!

io wrote:
at a recent event where I was very heavily photographed there are some photos that make me look larger than 120lbs,

There you go... no wonder you've gained the weight during that ONE photosession... you were "very heavily" photographed as you say yourself... not wonder... ;-)

Sorry... just feeling silly...

Udo R Photography wrote:

There you go... no wonder you've gained the weight during that ONE photosession... you were "very heavily" photographed as you say yourself... not wonder... ;-)

Sorry... just feeling silly...

Is this why you'd rather only take 20 photos?

io wrote:
I swear, sometimes I look at images of myself and KNOW I look larger in many (though not all) of them than I really am, or so I think.

When do you girls NOT think you look fat?

Seriously you could look like Cindy Crawford (circa 1990) & still ask us if you look fat in that dress.

* ducks to avoid thrown sharp object, headed in my direction *

Brian Diaz wrote:
Is this why you'd rather only take 20 photos?

LMAO...

Nice!

Actually... the 17/20 situation with me is a ratio... ;-)

Well done Brian... well done... lol

Farenell Photography wrote:
When do you girls NOT think you look fat?

Seriously you could look like Cindy Crawford (circa 1990) & still ask us if you look fat in that dress.

* ducks to avoid thrown sharp object, headed in my direction *

Actually... you are right and nobody should throw anything at you...   %&#&$ OUCH!!!!!!! *holding back of my head, looking around* where the hell did THIS come from... &$^#$$##

:-(

In my opinion, its all how the model poses. Some of mine look like I'm skinnier, but some looks heavier.

it depends on the angle of the camera and the pose of the model

Exactly.

Farenell Photography wrote:

When do you girls NOT think you look fat?

Seriously you could look like Cindy Crawford (circa 1990) & still ask us if you look fat in that dress.

* ducks to avoid thrown sharp object, headed in my direction *

I happen to think I look too skinny most of the time. Other people have agreed with me that most of my pictures make me look heavier, whatever the pose or the outfit. But even so, I'm sure it is a combination of the two if not one thing.

Lora wrote:
Other people have agreed with me that most of my pictures make me look heavier, whatever the pose or the outfit. But even so, I'm sure it is a combination of the two if not one thing.

It has to do with the focal length of the lens and the angle at which the photo was taken. Because the glass in lenses is curved, a lens will always distort reality to some degree. That's why a lot of fashion photography is done with a short telephoto lens - there is less curvature, thus, the product being shown looks more true to life.

In the case of glamour photography, the photographer needs to consider the proportions of the model; whether she has a long torso or long legs, relative to each other. In Lora's case, she is short and has a long torso. Most photographers are going to be taller than she is. If Lora is shot from above, her torso is going to be closer to the camera and look larger. Hence, she will look heavier, overall. But if the photographer shoots from slightly below center, Lora's legs look longer and her overall figure appears more ideal.

Here's an example of Lora shot from slightly below center:

Dark Matter Zone wrote:

It has to do with the focal length of the lens and the angle at which the photo was taken. Because the glass in lenses is curved, a lens will always distort reality to some degree. That's why a lot of fashion photography is done with a short telephoto lens - there is less curvature, thus, the product being shown looks more true to life.

In the case of glamour photography, the photographer needs to consider the proportions of the model; whether she has a long torso or long legs, relative to each other. In Lora's case, she is short and has a long torso. Most photographers are going to be taller than she is. If Lora is shot from above, her torso is going to be closer to the camera and look larger. Hence, she will look heavier, overall. But if the photographer shoots from slightly below center, Lora's legs look longer and her overall figure appears more ideal.

Wow - Can I work with you now?!? So glad to see that some photographers still think about each specific models figure and it hasn't become a standard shoot for every model.

Lindsay Jolly wrote:
Wow - Can I work with you now?!?

Any time, Lindsay!