THESTUFFLIZLEELIKES @stufflizleelikes - Tumblr Blog

lower-the-volume

9.10 Road Trip

stufflizleelikes

And then they told us they were straight 🤣😂😂🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

I never thought I would be siding with the pope’s involvement in politics and cheering him on. I will say that.

byjove

thisfeebleheart

I have this problem...

stufflizleelikes

The babies 🥹

#heated rivalry #hollanov #heated rivarly spoilers

radiobarf

An Artemis plush being in the NASA Mission Control Room during Artemis II's journey is the sweetest thing and it makes me very weepy 💖

neo--queen--serenity

someone call our man an ambulance

conversation16

hey so it’s march now aka the beginning of endometriosis awareness month and i feel obligated to remind you that debilitatingly painful periods are not normal. if you or someone you know is ending up sick or bedridden every month, you are not crazy and deserve medical attention from someone who will take you seriously

conversation16

hey it’s march again let’s get this post circulating again

mypeopleskillzarerusty

I found this on Pinterest and died 💀🤣

stufflizleelikes

S'why I'm a heller for life

#destiel

sirfrogsworth

The dangers of being photographed by a photographer who doesn't like your fascist bullshit.

There is a crazy story by Vanity Fair about Trump staffers.

And some of the photography was... interesting.

Including these wild facial close ups.

There is ZERO retouching done on these. Which is very unusual for photos taken this close up. The expressions chosen are very odd. The lighting is a ring flash very far away (probably to create a catchlight in the eyes) and then another diffused light source from the side. The ring flash was placed below their eye line, so you get a tiny bit of that creepy uplighting like in a Frankenstein movie. And neither light source was placed very close so the harder light really shows every pore and wrinkle and lip filler injection site. (See: why hard light is bad for porn.)

Basically, he used the opposite of every technique one would employ to create a flattering photo.

But the reason I think this photographer twisted the knife to make these photos look worse was his use of white balance on Karoline Leavitt and Susie Wiles.

If you want to make someone look sickly and demonic, you make their skin tone less warm and add green. When I corrected the white balance on the photos, I discovered the photographer reduced warmth by about 15% and increased green by about 45%.

This is not a camera setting oopsie.

This is not artistic color grading.

This is a photographer thinking, "I'm gonna make these bitches green."

And when you see the photos adjusted to a neutral white balance, this act of photographic sabotage becomes clear.

The only other explanation would be that this photographer is incompetent. But when you look at his other portraits of them, they are quite well done and properly color graded.

So... yeah, he made them bitches green.

thefrogman

The photographer, Christopher Anderson, has spoken about these photos since they were released.

His book was called "Stump" and he extensively used this close up style of photo with no retouching and unflattering light.

His photo of Hillary was... intense.

Everyone is talking about the extreme, crunchy detail but no one is talking about the green. I have searched a great deal of his portfolio and I could not find a single example of him making people green.

I think his book gave him the precedent to say, "This is just my thing!" But I do think there is subtext where he is like, "I made these fascist bitches green."

His quote about Steven Miller was very telling.