That’s Odd: Kate Winslet in Parade Magazine - Before and After Photoshop?
Hmm… I wonder how come no one noticed that these 2 pictures of Kate in Parade Magazine were very different, in a “Before and After Photoshop”-sort of way. The differences?
1. Kate’s overall skin: Freckles on the left, immaculate, translucent skin on the right.
2. Kate’s beauty mole above her upper lip. Present on the left, disappeared on the right!
3. The black area under the left eye (whatever it is: smeared makeup, dark circles). Visible on the left, invisible on the right!
And I’m not counting the hair and light-related differences.
As for the full-body picture, even though Kate is very verbal about her “NO to Photoshop!” mission, I can’t help noticing that Kate is not that slim in real life (and no, I’m not saying she should be).
Your thoughts?
“As for the full-body picture, even though Kate is very verbal about her “NOto Photoshop!” mission, I can’t help noticing that Kate is not that slim in real life (and no, I’m not saying she should be).”
She just has a nice skirt that fits her body type.It`s not a Photoshop-her skin,maybe,but not and her body.
Even if she says no to photoshop,it’s not in her hands..they will still airbrush and adjust..it’s like an addiction.lol
She looks great with AND without photoshop. Like Barbie said, it is out of her hands. She can request no photoshopping, however they might tell her they will do a minimal amount or retouching. She sees the final product as we all do. On stands.
she looks great in that full body pic - i’d be happy with a bod like that!!!
but in the first photo she’s looking like LiLo. all red tingy and freckly (but invisible to us due to photoshop)
not class A hot