What is Digg?Sponsored by Norton 2010
80’s metal band Dokken vs. a chicken. Who would win? view!
everyclickmatters.com - It’s raw head-banging talent against raw meat. See the showdown. Seriously.
77 Comments
- damack, on 09/03/2008, -1/+60Alternatively titled: Why not to trust girls online with photoshop
- inactive, on 09/04/2008, -0/+47Why does that baby have a black eye???
- acis1, on 09/04/2008, -0/+28Mirrors are what caused women to start this ***** in the first place.
- DeskFlyer, on 09/04/2008, -5/+31This is why women feel compelled to wear tons of makeup when they don't need it.
- Aslan72, on 09/04/2008, -0/+25How about "Photoshop tutorials by people who don't use photoshop"...seriously, some of their 'afters' look like D or F material.
- Stuart750, on 09/04/2008, -0/+21"Improving The Face Using Symmetry"; for those of you who drop toddlers on their faces.
- netgeek06, on 09/03/2008, -0/+10This one includes few tutorials from the one you have mentioned doesn't mean it is a rip off.
- jpowlus, on 09/04/2008, -0/+10No kidding... Those are some of the laziest, sloppiest tuts I've seen. For the "remove lovehandles" one, they basically just drew a path and deleted the fat roll. No patching the shading, nothing. Looks fake as hell.
- saltydawkins, on 09/04/2008, -3/+12Alternatively titled: How to destroy an entire generation's self esteem
- fatabbot, on 09/04/2008, -0/+9That site is pure content theft.
All articles on there are literal copies from other websites and he even makes money from it. - physicalzero, on 09/04/2008, -0/+8AKA "Covering up your child abuse with Photoshop"
- jbeardsl, on 09/04/2008, -1/+9Can someone photoshop some bigger tubes on to this website? Sigh...
- court2408, on 09/04/2008, -0/+7Alternate Title: What not to do if you want a career in graphic design.
Seriously... The after images are horrible. - arjie, on 09/04/2008, -0/+7That's Dilbert's secret kid: http://dilbert.com/fast/2008-08-15/
- TrevorBelmont, on 09/04/2008, -1/+7Photos are always better when you can get rid of all that irritating human individuality.
- Stealer, on 09/04/2008, -1/+6should be called: how to make your creepy photos look simply ugly.
- physicalzero, on 09/04/2008, -0/+5It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
- whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -0/+5http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/12/03/
Gabe did it. - solemnraven, on 09/04/2008, -1/+6Re-Titled: How to destroy an entire web server in minutes.
- MaddieCakes, on 09/04/2008, -0/+4I don't think any of the ones with picture examples looked very good... The goal of photo enhancement isn't to airbrush things into oblivion, it's supposed to look natural. A lot of those didn't look natural at all.
- CosmicJustice, on 09/04/2008, -1/+5Really, this is why? Girls didn't wear makeup before Photoshop?
- Groggie, on 09/04/2008, -0/+4That is the most fake looking stubble ever. And that baby looks like an alien after the retouching- the eyes are different distances from the nose!
- HackerThatsme, on 09/04/2008, -8/+12all girls suck at it anyway...
- AssShanks, on 09/04/2008, -2/+5Great, cuz I have 50+ things about me I'd like to fix.
- malechite, on 09/04/2008, -0/+3Down already. Mirror?
- 7aji, on 09/04/2008, -0/+3funny, I do retouching for living and yesterday I had a picture where a woman wanted her boobs look bigger (no kidding) I felt bad for her because she is feeling this way. I'm with with a light retouching, but totally changing your look reflects some insecurities inside the preson.
- kurupttek, on 09/04/2008, -1/+4What do you tell a women with two black eyes?
Nothing she was already told twice!
http://www.instantrimshot.com/ - LilRabbitFooFoo, on 09/04/2008, -0/+3Some women do need to.
- dacheetah, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2What about "6 minute abs"?
- dacheetah, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2Good tweaking of brightness and contrast, and removing glare or reflections can help make a photo look more like what you would see in real life, cameras and eyes are different, and don't capture quite the same information (particularly if a flash is used leaving an unwanted refelction or a lens flare is created.)
- KSUdesigner, on 09/04/2008, -1/+3What? Why would you have to enhance a real photo to convey reality? A real photo is just a snapshot of reality. Altering a photo does not convey reality.
- solemnraven, on 09/04/2008, -0/+215 comments, and i need a dugmirror already? seriously??
- dacheetah, on 09/04/2008, -1/+3Not nearly as many...
- Ghstfce, on 09/04/2008, -1/+3Like the after effect is any better! Looks like a young Sloth from the Goonies! Ever hear about placement of the eyes in correlation to the bridge of the nose? That child looks like an alien... Better yet still, looks like the singer Brandy. Don't agree? Check it out:
http://www.missxpose.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/1 ...
Look at how far apart her eyes are, it's unnatural! - hobo343, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2after you beat your child senseless, you can remove any trace of bruising with the magic of photoshop!
http://designreviver.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/0 ... - OwdenBowden, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2Who cares. 10 minute abs, 7 minute abs, it is all the same
- TheKingInYellow, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2unless you want your work to be seen on photoshopdisasters.com. i can't believe people actually get paid to screw up that bad when people like me with an actual design degree can't find a real design job.
- ryusen, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1you always want to fix things a little bit, but in many cases it's the imperfections that add character.
- proficient, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1Noice.
- mattdxy, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1I hear you. We do weddings and personally, since I think a woman's beauty is amplified by her bridal attire, all brides are beautiful. It's really is sad to hear that some of our clients don't mind at all if we shrink them from a size 10 to a size 4. We don't do anything this drastic though. We try to preserve memories and people in it as they really are--just a tad prettier.
With magazines and fashion however, I totally agree with making it look as perfect as possible, however, there still has to be a line drawn between doing it just right and overkill. Otherwise too perfect makes it unbelievable and unrelatable. - ryusen, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1wait.. isn't that desirable?
- eon42, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1lol... body enhancement....
- faatbuddha, on 09/09/2008, -0/+1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U
- inactive, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1Hmm. That was quite disappointing. Those 'after' pictures are amateur at best. Buried for being generic and low quality
- Shenaniganz08, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Those are pretty ***** results
- iwasnevy, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1This is a great collection of just about the worst tutorials I've ever seen! There's much better ways to do just about each thing in these tutorials.
- GawtMilk, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Thanks to the author this website, who let me know one of my tutorials was stolen.
[fyi, I wrote these two tutorials linked from the site].
http://onlinephototutorials.com/2008/07/25/whiten- ...
http://onlinephototutorials.com/2008/07/25/removin ...
However, this tutorial links to "mrmalique.com" who just copied the content from my website:
http://www.mrmalique.com/index.php/tutorial-how-to ...
EDIT: It appears that we just used the same stock image [I link to it in my article] and the same technique. Sorry. Glad to see it's not just a case of theivery, it really pisses me off when people steal other people's articles.
Anyway.
If anyone has a Photoshop tutorial they'd like me to write, that is NOT to do with those ***** "awesome button effect" 'design' tutorials, let me know - either on Digg, email, or using the 'request' form on my website. - faatbuddha, on 09/09/2008, -0/+1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U
that ***** is not ok. - carve, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1A photo is not a snapshot of reality. It is data (or oxidized chemicals). Dacheetah nailed it. Cameras don't see the same as an eye. Eyes automatically adjust for color balance, have a wider dynamic range, know if the interest is in the highlights or the shadows, aren't cropped, don't have a flat, washed out look if the settings aren't right, and see in 3-D. Very few photos are as good as they can be straight out of the camera. What you're looking that then is the settings that WHOEVER PROGRAMMED THE CAMERA thought would most closely convey reality, on average, over all conditions.
- KSUdesigner, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Well you're both right, but I don't think those were the type of things that he was implying.
-
Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
