Drool removed from mouth...

July 31, 2007 6:29 PM

Baby snapshots not cute enough for you? Get your kid's photos airbrushed by Pageant Photo Retouching. Some particularly noteworthy examples.
posted by gaspode (123 comments total)

This is a hoax? Right?
posted by speug at 6:32 PM on July 31, 2007

Evilevilevilevilevilevilevilevilevilevilevilevilevil.

Ok, I'm better now.

Whatever, to each his or her own, etc.
posted by mediareport at 6:37 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

(But mostly, it's evil.)
posted by mediareport at 6:38 PM on July 31, 2007

Ohmygodinheaven. Plastic babies. Now where's my jet pack? It's like entering the uncanny valley from the wrong side.

Any parent who wants their children to look like that in photos probably should have just stuck with dolls.
posted by davejay at 6:38 PM on July 31, 2007 [2 favorites]

Gotta be a hoax. You email them for an order form...
posted by melt away at 6:39 PM on July 31, 2007

Maybe.
posted by melt away at 6:39 PM on July 31, 2007

Holy shit. The first example isn't that bad, I suppose. There are only two blatant parts of it, the removal of the rings under the eyes, and the addition of eyelashes, the rest are basically color correction and blemish removal.

But the second two are absolutely horrible. One thing is what they're doing with the poor kids, whose photos end up looking nothing like them, and more like some horrid plastic doll, but almost equally offensive, at least to me, as someone who does computer visuals for a living, is the shoddy quality and total lack of talent on display.

The "hair replacement" in the third photo looks like someone just cut and pasted hair from a magazine. The ear in the same photo looks like it's from a different person (it likely is).

And in the second photo, the whole face is flattened so much that it looks like the kid's wearing a printed paper mask in front of her face. The contrast in general in that photo is totally shot, actually.

So yeah, offensive on so many levels.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 6:39 PM on July 31, 2007

You seem to have forgotten the batshitinsane tag.
posted by cerebus19 at 6:41 PM on July 31, 2007

SomethingAwful had an interaction with this website back in 2006, which sadly makes the site out to be somewhat real.
But seriously. Photoshop was never meant to push things this much. It's just creepy.
posted by Meagan at 6:43 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

Dear Pageant Photo Retouching People: Please make it look like my son has no association whatsoever with cake, and is at the same time actually made of the wax from the very candles of said cake. Thanks!
posted by davejay at 6:44 PM on July 31, 2007 [3 favorites]

OMG THE MASTER TURNED MY BABIES INTO AUTONS!!
posted by Pastabagel at 6:46 PM on July 31, 2007 [7 favorites]

one more, because I'm a proud papa
posted by davejay at 6:46 PM on July 31, 2007

This Enhancement Includes:

*Hair replaced
*Jewels added to dress
*Skin Blended
*Dark circles removed
*Facial powder added
*Blush added
*Lipstick added
*Eye Shadow added
*"Doll- Eyes" added
*Lashes added
*Earring replaced
*Background custom designed
*Photo zoomed, cropped, and sharpened
* Uncanny valley traversed
posted by googly at 6:48 PM on July 31, 2007 [9 favorites]

Oh dear lord, that's the ookiest thing. Are there people who really want the finished result? *shudder*
posted by dejah420 at 7:00 PM on July 31, 2007

And here I was just wondering where I could find someone to turn my neice into a raving insane, coal-eyed, soulless kewpie doll that eats cockroaches.
posted by The Straightener at 7:02 PM on July 31, 2007 [6 favorites]

I've seen this before.

And as I said at the time:

OH MY GOD MY EYES

KILL IT

KILL IT WITH FIRE
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 7:06 PM on July 31, 2007 [4 favorites]

What. The. Hell.
posted by DU at 7:07 PM on July 31, 2007

Ick.

Apparently, I missed out on winning a couple of cute-baby photo contests when I was little: one, because there was a can of beer behind me in the photo (not mine! I swear!), and one because at the time the photo was taken, I was standing next to the toilet, splashing in the water. This was waaaaaaaay back in the day, before photoshop or any of this fancypants retouching.

Parents. What can you do?
posted by rtha at 7:08 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

You know, some people pay for thousands of dollars in plastic surgery to look like that.
posted by dirigibleman at 7:10 PM on July 31, 2007

DO NOT WANT
posted by mr_roboto at 7:11 PM on July 31, 2007

I'm pretty sure we've done this before. I can't find the old thread though.
posted by fungible at 7:13 PM on July 31, 2007

Gah!
posted by delmoi at 7:18 PM on July 31, 2007

I've got your glamour shot right here., because kids should look like kids not autons or mini real dolls. YUCK, that is beyond creepy.
posted by pywacket at 7:18 PM on July 31, 2007

That's really disturbing. Not those particular images so much as the general arc we are on. I think my childhood spent happily digging in dirt and not giving a damn how much of it I was covered in is fast becoming a historical relic for many kids. I think I'd be a profoundly different person if my mom had been posing me and primping me up (and then paying to have my near-perfect image altered) instead of telling me to go outside.

"Uncanny valley" is now added to my personal vocabulary, googly. Thanks for that.

And now, for the inevitable...

OMG ZOMBIE BABIES!!!!!
posted by Tehanu at 7:18 PM on July 31, 2007

At least there isn't a bullet point with the words "thicken and add vein to cock" next to it.

That's about all that I can say that is good about this.
posted by BrotherCaine at 7:23 PM on July 31, 2007 [2 favorites]

I've seen these before so I'm not all that freaked out by them. What I wonder is if they're deliberately blurring the before pictures. Is it actually possible to take a totally blurry before and turn it into a supersharp after without completely making up the details? That seems like the stuff of TV detective shows 'Just zoom in on the license plate and sharpen!'
posted by jacquilynne at 7:24 PM on July 31, 2007

Meh. I'll see your airbrushing and raise you one billion.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:30 PM on July 31, 2007 [13 favorites]

Well, UbuRoivas, you can just rock me to sleep tonight.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:33 PM on July 31, 2007

Forget "batshitinsane", this needs a "jonbenet".
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:34 PM on July 31, 2007 [5 favorites]

so.. parents look at these samples... and WANT their kids to look like this?

As if I didn't have enough reason to find kid beauty pageant parents creepy.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 7:35 PM on July 31, 2007

@Pastabagel <3 AUTONS!!!

and ubuRoivas I think I threw up in someone else's mouth after that selection of pictures.

Good Lord why can't kids look like kids ? Where's the mud and goo and glee?
posted by pywacket at 7:38 PM on July 31, 2007

Who in the right minds want their infant children to look like Michael friggin' Jackson?!

UbuRoivas - your link gave me an aneurism. I wonder, though, what those toddlers will end up looking like at, say, 17... and how many of them will have already had children of their own by that age?

_{LOLPAGENTPARENTS}
posted by porpoise at 7:42 PM on July 31, 2007

Metafilter: thicken and add vein to cock
posted by Roman Graves at 7:45 PM on July 31, 2007

Those lashes are freaky-deaky!

Those kids look totally fake, especially floating-doll-head-that's-too-big-for-the-body-girl (number three for those of you playing along at home).

And I'm just going to tell myself that UbuRoivas posted the secret link for Mattel's next doll launch. I think it will make the pain go away.
posted by ml98tu at 7:46 PM on July 31, 2007

I was halfway down Uburoivas' link before I realized that these were not in fact 38-year-old soccer moms done up for their big glamorphoto shoot at Sears.

Holy. Shit.
posted by thehmsbeagle at 7:46 PM on July 31, 2007

Cool. I've been looking for that dang Simpsonize Me site.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 7:47 PM on July 31, 2007

Hmmm, maybe giving kids dolls to play with isn't such a good idea after all. They grow up and treat their children the same way. Creepy.
posted by itchylick at 7:51 PM on July 31, 2007

Reminds me of this. (Previously)

It's the eyes that get me. They add these upper and lower highlights that just make their eyes look so dead and freaky. Especially in UbuRoivas' link. Yikes!

It also creeped me out that they offer a service where they'll create a recent age progressed photo of your child from old photos... just in case she didn't want to sit for it. So what happens when the kid walks into the interview looking NOTHING like the zombie she was presented to be? Is that a disappointment?

My other thought is that... for all of the obvious over-retouching they do? They're frigging cheap. You know they must really convince the parents to buy a lot more stuff and add a lot more charges at once because I don't see how they can stay in business at $40 for one basic retouch.
posted by miss lynnster at 7:55 PM on July 31, 2007

Why do they all have the same eyes?! In most of those photos, the child's personality is GONE. All have been assimilated.

Maybe the retoucher is the Borg?
posted by divabat at 8:00 PM on July 31, 2007

Yikes. I think I'm going to go wake up my son and give him a hug, just to make sure he's still real.
posted by Devils Rancher at 8:13 PM on July 31, 2007

Cadaveriffic!
posted by gallois at 8:19 PM on July 31, 2007

My first thought after looking at the examples was, "what is this, the Awful Link of the Day"?
::shiver::

Why would anyone want to take a perfectly good photo of their child and make them look like a tarted-up corpse? I think I was more grossed out by these than by the scarification-in-progress photos from earlier today.

Yuck.
posted by djeo at 8:21 PM on July 31, 2007

Mouth replaced.

Why not just fill your house with pictures of more attractive children and keep your kid chained up in the basement?
posted by Nabubrush at 8:22 PM on July 31, 2007 [3 favorites]

That is the creepiest thing I've ever seen.
posted by empatterson at 8:29 PM on July 31, 2007

davejay your plastic son is ready. server is down for maintenance, might have to wait until after 11pm pacific.
posted by furtive at 8:29 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

I've fixed your kid for you davejay. I think it turned out great.

Send the restraining order to the usual address
posted by meech at 8:36 PM on July 31, 2007 [38 favorites]

They're coming for my soul.
posted by 0xFCAF at 8:40 PM on July 31, 2007

People are insane. That is all.
posted by SassHat at 8:48 PM on July 31, 2007

People, especially children, aren't measured by their IQ. What's important about them is whether they're good or bad, and these children are bad.
posted by Astro Zombie at 8:49 PM on July 31, 2007

Oh is this were we all make up for this ugly horror by posting pics of our own kids, never touched by the hands of Pagent Photo Retouching?
posted by Jimbob at 8:52 PM on July 31, 2007

How ironic is the URL? ... www.NATURALbeautiescontest.homestead.com
posted by bdragon at 8:57 PM on July 31, 2007

/runs screaming
posted by gemmy at 9:01 PM on July 31, 2007

Oh -- previously on MeFi: Is your child an angel with attitude?
posted by ericb at 9:06 PM on July 31, 2007

Yikes.
posted by blaneyphoto at 9:11 PM on July 31, 2007

"They wore the latest colors of lipstick and matching eyeliner. Some had fake hair and even fake teeth. They pranced on stage in sequined gowns and rhinestone-studded jeans.

Occasionally there was a problem. One girl in a pink sequined dress began to cry. The tears carried streaks of mascara down her face. Her mother grabbed her and tried to get the girl to stop crying. When she didn’t stop, her mother dragged her off the stage by the hand.

Meanwhile, an unfazed announcer told the audience that the girl was 2 years old, from Massachusetts, and her life’s ambition is to bring happiness to all who come into contact with her.

The girl stopped crying and began to eat Cheerios with the other beauty-pageant contestants. Her mother began laying out her rhinestone-studded jeans for the next phase of the competition – modeling."^*

"Pageants can be costly. Entry fees range from $100 to $200; there are travel expenses; a pageant dress can easily cost $150--or sometimes as much as $1,000--and the more competitive parents also invest in makeup and hair stylists (used by about 40 percent of entrants), wigs, false teeth to cover gaps from missing baby teeth, and beauty pageant 'coaches.' (Embellishments like the false teeth and hair indicated that the contests 'weren't just judging natural beauty,' Levey says.) One subject told her, 'I know people who have spent so much on pageants, they have lost their [house] trailers.'

The payoff, many parents say, is that their children learn social skills--interacting with others, making friends, not being shy....One mother declared, 'Competition is very healthy. It's the problem with today's educational system: there is none of it. We need competition to keep the idiots out of the workforce.'"^*

BeckyCarter.com
posted by ericb at 9:13 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

The horror...the horror....

To think that people actually pay $40-$60 per picture for this.
posted by zardoz at 9:14 PM on July 31, 2007

I give you the 'Little Miss Sunshine' (Olive Hoover) Dance Scene -- "I'd like to dedicate this to my grandpa who showed me these moves."
posted by ericb at 9:17 PM on July 31, 2007 [2 favorites]

My first thought was, they lied in every shot,
that evil child, with the empty eye
On mine, and mouth scarce able to afford
Suppression of the glee that pursed and scored
Its edge, at one more victim gained thereby.
(Childe Roland to the Photoshopper Came)
posted by blue_beetle at 9:18 PM on July 31, 2007

meech, that edited photo made my day.

I've been a MetaFilter "lurker" for years but tonight's posts made me laugh so hard, I had to sign up for a membership just to let you know how much I appreciated them!
posted by copyshark at 9:20 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

On preview -- what UbuRoivas said about Becky Carter's website!
posted by ericb at 9:22 PM on July 31, 2007

Cool! Taxidermy kids! I want one over my fireplace!
posted by The Light Fantastic at 9:27 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

I can't even fathom what kind of a parent could possibly think those photos are attractive... Yeesh... Don't their friends and neighbors recoil in horror upon viewing them?
posted by amyms at 9:27 PM on July 31, 2007

'Competition is very healthy. It's the problem with today's educational system: there is none of it. We need competition to keep the idiots out of the workforce.'

And in the shopping mall beauty pageants where they belong...

All hail the Hypnotoad!
posted by Pinback at 9:28 PM on July 31, 2007

copyshark: it's not in the official membership info that matt makes available to the public, but the $5 is just an application fee. for full membership, we require a photo of your child, or else of a young relative. now cough up!
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:31 PM on July 31, 2007

Today's children, tomorrow's Stepford wives.
posted by kaseijin at 9:32 PM on July 31, 2007

I once stayed at a hotel in Dallas where one of these pageants was being held. Creepy, creepy. But my stone cold capitalist heart is glad someone makes money off these yahoos. If only I had the Photoshop skizzles...
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 9:35 PM on July 31, 2007

huh? hypno-(!) ooooooo....................................................
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:37 PM on July 31, 2007

actually, the black & white ones are quite artistic & true to life...
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:45 PM on July 31, 2007

Horrendous quality. Sick twisted concept.
posted by cmacleod at 9:56 PM on July 31, 2007

It also creeped me out that they offer a service where they'll create a recent age progressed photo of your child from old photos... just in case she didn't want to sit for it. So what happens when the kid walks into the interview looking NOTHING like the zombie she was presented to be? Is that a disappointment?

Age progressing is a legitimate talent (it's used in law enforcement to find fugitives and missing persons, and can be very accurate) but she's not all that great at it, is she? I mean, the face changes in the first three years, but all she's done is stick the features on someone else's face.
posted by watsondog at 10:00 PM on July 31, 2007

Sorry UbuRoivas, no kids. But I do have two 100% mutt, non-pageant pooches. True "natural beauty."
posted by copyshark at 10:04 PM on July 31, 2007

Weird. Salon picked up the, um, story.
posted by Anything at 10:12 PM on July 31, 2007

Wow, it should be called Pedophiles R Us. Holy Cow. Oh and also damn. And yuck.

Ok, I am sheltered I guess, because I don't know a soul who would do this to their child. But, really, there must be a whole lot of people doing this for this freaking creepy website to exist.

Some one please make the tubes stop the icky.
posted by Belle O'Cosity at 10:15 PM on July 31, 2007

All's I ever do is crop mine.
posted by padraigin at 10:19 PM on July 31, 2007

Must be a Photoshop filter for that.
posted by PHINC at 10:19 PM on July 31, 2007

Sometimes the child you want simply isn't the one you own have.
posted by maryh at 10:22 PM on July 31, 2007

(Actually, I have no complaints about mine.)
posted by maryh at 10:26 PM on July 31, 2007

This one is really scaring me.
posted by salishsea at 10:42 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

Did I just get chuckrolled?

god damned 4chan i'll kill them all i swear
posted by tehloki at 10:47 PM on July 31, 2007

As a side note, my take on davejay's kid. I think the transformation is a little more realistic.
posted by tehloki at 11:04 PM on July 31, 2007 [8 favorites]

Time to upgrade my children!
posted by mazola at 11:10 PM on July 31, 2007

oh god tehloki-- now davejay's kid is going to be a mainstay of my nightmares. Little too Rubber Johnny, man...
posted by maryh at 11:19 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

Who wants to bet these photoshoppers are pro-life? Just a feeling I have.
posted by Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson at 11:51 PM on July 31, 2007 [1 favorite]

Alright, that's it. Somebody stop this planet. I'm getting off.
posted by chillmost at 12:01 AM on August 1, 2007

Kids are already evil enough without resorting to computer enhancement.
posted by PsychoKick at 12:05 AM on August 1, 2007

Well I think it's sweet, dressing your daughter up as a high class hooker.
posted by rhymer at 12:56 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

I plan on saving money by just replacing my child's eyes with polished replicas. That way she'll forever be perfectly wide eyed and never confuse herself in front of a mirror.
posted by underer at 1:47 AM on August 1, 2007

Keep posting the pictures of unphotoshopped kids and Little Miss Sunshine clips, and eventually we will neutralise the horror.
posted by saturnine at 2:52 AM on August 1, 2007

You know, the sad thing is that sometime in the future when I'm hearing about a pageant parent who bought breast implants for their 8 year old daughter, I'm going to wistfully think back to the innocence of this post.
posted by BrotherCaine at 3:00 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Can't sleep, crazy photoshop lady will liquify me.
posted by darkripper at 4:08 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

I don't know, I often have to have the drool removed from pictures taken of me.
posted by octothorpe at 4:13 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

You know, BrotherCaine, thanks to the properties of Morphic Resonance*, now you've thought that, it's brought it one step closer to actualisation.

As for the (sic) Naturalbeauties and Becky Carter sites, I noticed that my physical response was to laugh, but that inside I was screaming.

(* Morphic Resonance, you'll be relieved to discover, isn't actual science that exists per se)
posted by Grangousier at 4:23 AM on August 1, 2007

Actually, Belle, I think these would be useful in pedophile aversion therapy. Clockwork Orange their eyes open and make 'em stare at this.. "Noooooo its eyes are burning my soul! Take it away! I hate children!"
posted by fleetmouse at 6:22 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Is it no wonder that people do this shit? You see it in women's magazines every day. Jezebel recently held a contest for an industry insider to show before and after retouching cover photos for a major magazine. It's scary enough when they can't let grown women look like grown women - now they can't let little kids look like little kids.
posted by misskaz at 6:51 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Meh. I'll see your airbrushing and raise you one billion.

They look like they've been disembrained. I blame you.
posted by oaf at 6:51 AM on August 1, 2007

Cadaveriffic!

Seriously, this "after" photo looks like my grandmother after the funeral parlor was done "making her look natural."
posted by kirkaracha at 7:04 AM on August 1, 2007

I'd like to see them work their magic on these little ones.
posted by JBennett at 7:10 AM on August 1, 2007

"Winner of Cover Miss State Photogenic Supreme!"
posted by kirkaracha at 7:12 AM on August 1, 2007

I'd like to see them work their magic on these little ones.

You do realize that the photo linked under little is CNN"s Anderson Cooper?
posted by ericb at 7:19 AM on August 1, 2007

Maybe we can Photoshop away death one day.
posted by PHINC at 7:38 AM on August 1, 2007

All the pictures appear as everyone has a Thyroid condition.
posted by eatdonuts at 8:13 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

But I do have two 100% mutt, non-pageant pooches. True "natural beauty."

Oh, well, if we're doing that, then here.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:38 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Uncanny Valley of the dolls.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:38 AM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

And...goodnewsfortheinsane for the win!

Also, UbuRoivas, my soul has been sucked out through my eyes and I hold you responsible.
posted by adamrice at 9:08 AM on August 1, 2007

I'm not sure if it's a good thing or a bad thing that my first response to these 'improved' photos is "Argggg! kill it! kill it with fire!"

It's the dead, taxidermist-stylee eyes I think.
posted by ArkhanJG at 9:53 AM on August 1, 2007

I would think that any question as to the authenticity of this site should be answered by this picture.
posted by Brak at 11:02 AM on August 1, 2007

She's crying, so can we change that expression to something creepier? k thx.
posted by SassHat at 11:45 AM on August 1, 2007

*screams*

*gasps for breath*

*continues screaming*
posted by brundlefly at 12:11 PM on August 1, 2007

Thank you, Metafilter. My life was quite happy as it was, you know I was bobbing along nicely. I knew there strange and odd things out there, but I was quite happy to live in blissful ignorance. But then you came and made me dig briefly into the online beauty pageants.

Oh it hurts.

So they have photographic contests, where you pay $5 to enter (per category), and you can win $100 cash... or a 11.5" Ice Crystal Rhinestone Crown and Satin Monogrammed banner (cash, cash, give me the cash!). And you play around in photoshop with pictures of your kids (including making them look older than they really are, if you want to). In fact you have to play around with them in order to win, an undoctored photo will not get you the cash, this is a Glitz photo Contest. Apparently.

It hurts, it really really hurts.

People, these are your children! Make them go outside and eat some mud or try finger painting the front room with ketchup or something!
posted by Helga-woo at 3:30 PM on August 1, 2007

Wow, the portraits on Helga-woo's site go so far beyond presenting anything remotely close to reality that I'm starting to wonder if the people who create these things are more interested in just goofing around with Photoshop than with the 'pageant lifestyle.' A lot of these are so over-the-top dollish that the original reference photos (and the kids portrayed therein) are practically irrelevant. Maybe this stuff appeals to people without the chops/humor to try Worth100 contests? Well, I can hope, anyway....
posted by maryh at 4:00 PM on August 1, 2007

And you play around in photoshop with pictures of your kids (including making them look older than they really are, if you want to).

Like painting in some cleavage?

(third down, RH column; sorry, can't seem to directly link)
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:18 PM on August 1, 2007

From the Precious Faces site: You have won your choice of a $100 Cash or an 11.5" Rhinestone Crown and Personalized Satin Monogrammed Banner.

Bet you any amount of money the vast majority of winners go for the crown and sash so that they can show off their "trophies".
posted by LeeJay at 4:26 PM on August 1, 2007

Like painting in some cleavage?

I think that's part of her hair, actually.
posted by dirigibleman at 6:20 PM on August 1, 2007

Ambiguous, I think, but it does raise the important question: is it still kiddyporn if you take an innocent photo of a minor & then photoshop onto them pubes & breasts until they appear mature (sort of)?
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:56 PM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

(oh, dear. there's another nail in the coffin of my political career)
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:56 PM on August 1, 2007 [2 favorites]

More to the point: if you take regular porn, but replace Jenna Jameson's face with Tinky-Winky's and Ron Jeremy's with Haley Joel Osment, is that kiddy porn?

And if you take footage of monkeys humping each other, but replace the faces with James T. Kirk and Gene Hackman, does it stop being science and start being gay porn?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:44 PM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Very good questions.

Underpinning them is the metaphysical "problem of the heap". I could rephrase it as "at what point during grafting Kirk & Hackman parts onto two monkeys fucking do those monkeys actually become Kirk & Hackman fucking?"

There's no easy answer to such questions, so if you don't mind I might take your scenarios & turn them into some kind of public art project - projected onto the walls of large buildings - in order to gauge how the general populace approaches such weighty philosophical issues.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:01 PM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

. . . Wow.

Discussion on metafilter really gets interesting once threads get past 100 comments.
posted by tehloki at 9:11 PM on August 1, 2007

that's about how long it usually takes for the acid to kick in.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:43 PM on August 1, 2007 [1 favorite]

Site's gone 404.
posted by Anything at 6:15 AM on August 2, 2007

Well, I'm late to the party, but I'd like to point out this, since I don't think anyone's linked to Touch of Glamour yet.
posted by Many bubbles at 4:26 PM on August 6, 2007

Many bubbles, the pre-touch up picture looks almost as freaky as the post one!
posted by brundlefly at 2:36 AM on August 8, 2007

Yeah... I think they went heavy on the makeup there. D:

Maybe these two are worse examples. The EYES....
posted by Many bubbles at 2:19 PM on August 8, 2007