Um. Besides "ick" to the concept, those particular photos? i um can't really tell the difference. is it just me?

I can't see any differnce either.

Yeah, sure, that's OK I guess, but with Photoshop you can get the Ultra-Slimming effect.

This one *is* just a slight aspect ratio change.

i agree that it doesn't seem to do much except make her look weird, but it's the idea of it i find so gross.

Actually, I lied. I took a closer look at the site and discovered that it's an aspect ratio change on the center of the frame, and then a graduated stretch of the remainder of the frame, so the total aspect ratio of the image doesn't change.

Just to play devil's advocate, and speaking as a person who for some reason always looks significantly heavier in photographs than I do in a mirror, I might actually go for a camera with a feature like this. Presumably it would allow me to reverse the illusion created by the camera in the first place, and result in a photo that's actually closer to reality than the original image. Which would of course be preferable to showing my friends and family a picture that makes them think I gained 30-50lbs overnight, and crushes my self-esteem into a fine powder...

If they really want to create a controversy they might try producing a 'bust' enhancing effect.

And while they are at it, a "place a smiling Bill Clinton in the back ground effect".

(Please note, this is posted tongue in cheek - it just joking).

Just like Vervain, I've been wondering if it's really a slimming effect or just a countering of the "bloating" effect of conventional cameras. Most people, unless they're very tall or very skinny, tend to look several pounds heavier in pictures. So, in that respect, I find it pretty nice.

Hell yeah! Pre-Freshman 15 weight, here I come!

Forget the human in the shot, look what the slimming effect did for the trees! Finally some foliage I can respect!

HP forgot to include the clincher: The customer testimonial.

"Before HP Photography I used to look like a fat bedraggled whore. Now I look desirable and fuckworthy. I can't wait until HP releases their next feature: Ovu-Enhancement. It gives your face a flushed appearance, which will subtly but firmly signal male viewers that you're ready to conceive their offspring. Thanks, HP!"

Oh, and here's the Ultra-Ultra-ULTRA slimming effect.

Say what you will, but she looks much happier with John's Ultra-Ultra-ULTRA slimming effect.

Happiness is just a stick figure away!

A slimming effect? So magazine adds, commercials, and television programs all portraying what a woman should look like isn't enough? Now we need to be shown ideal body image by a camera? Who cares if you look like you've got perhaps two or three inches less around the waiste and now have a oddly more oval-shaped head?! Body image may equal confidence, and confidence is always good, but why can't you be just as confident looking, God forbid, five pounds heavier? Love your body already, people!


I can't wait 'til they come out with the crotch-enhancing effect for men. Enhance your package, no Photoshopping necessary! Create extra bulge where there may be none!

If I'm buying anything, it's got to be the ultra slimming effect or the ultra-ultra-ULTRA slimming effect! Now that's what I call sexy!

The chick on the right is way hotter. I think a little more 'slimming' is in order however. Bonne job HP!

A sweet 86-year-old woman took a photo of me last year that made me look like I'd literally gained 50 pounds overnight, so I can appreciate why one might like this technology in theory. In practice...yeah, the skinniness-worship in this culture is depressing as hell.

Cheers,

TH

Does anyone's self-esteem seriously rely on whether or not they look skinny in photos? How sad.

Tom:

By chance, do you know what kind of camera/lens it was? I'm curious, because I've never actually seen that effect on anything other than ultra-wide-angle lenses (

(Repost because the first one included a less-than sign which broke the second half of the post. Admins, please feel free to delete the first version. Other posters be warned that even if you use < it will get converted into a destructive less-than if you preview your message before posting and don't change it back.)

Tom:

By chance, do you know what kind of camera/lens it was? I'm curious, because I've never actually seen that effect on anything other than ultra-wide-angle lenses (<= 20mm focal length on a 35mm system), which is somewhat unusual equipment for a clueless granny.

drumgirl:

My personal experience has been that a great many people (in fact, the majority of those I have met) have a good amount of self-esteem tied up in how they look to others, including in photographs, which tend to hang around forever.

I have mixed feelings on this... I can see both sides. Yes, people shouldn't have self-esteem tied into a few extra "pounds" in a picture. But as someone else stated, pictures do tend to hang around forever. As a former ballet dancer who had to send in pictures to schools before getting accepted, a few extra pounds (whether they're real or not) can make a huge difference. I guess there are just different reasons on why someone would want to use or not use something like this.

And body dymorphism was a problem before. Man. Think of the changes to photo albums. This is amazingly scary, thanks so much for sharing!