Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 155 posts

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#91

Post by 0x8BADF00D »

dirtyid wrote: post #79

There's an analogous drive for men in western masculinity with the resurgence in gym culture and elevation of muscularity in media, particularly driven by physiques portrayed superhero franchises. We're rapidly shifting from Brad Pitt fight club "ottermode" bodies into some bignorexia territory. Though, it's much more self limiting, since you can't simply "buy" a well built physique, even with drugs unless you're an…

It depends on the person, but many people’s bodies tend to be catabolic which makes gaining muscle hard - the so-called hard gainers. These males also tend to have feminine qualities in facial structure. TRT will probably help those individuals more w.r.t to muscle gain than steroids. Or RHGH.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#92

Post by sk0g »

austhrow743 wrote: post #77
sk0g wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so weirdly hostile. You essentially chose to have that problem, and yet you're blaming individuals in a company on a personal level? What...

They didn't say the person should still feel bad for the bug. If I had to take a stab I'd say it's because they work for facebook. A company many people find to be unethical.

A job is a job. Would you begrudge soldiers who have to choose between an (arguably) unethical job, or letting their family starve?

I'm aware the change of working for another company wouldn't be quite so stark in tech, but it can still be a massive boost to your career to have a big name on your resume. Most people at those companies would just be doing boring day to day things, and not plotting world takeovers.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#93

Post by dang »

illinx wrote: post #16
klodolph wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be worrying but it’s not new. What we got from magazines in the 1980s and 1990s is found on Instagram and YouTube in 2020. Now, what’s fun is digging up an old magazine and making fun of it with some friends. You can occasionally find one on Imgur or the Internet Archive.

It doesn't seem like you read the article, which is about two specific technologies which did not exist in the 80's and 90's.

"Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that.""

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#94

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

I one time let a friend edit a photo, blurred my skin, etc and posted it to social media, and it got way more likes than any of unedited, unfiltered photos. I never edit photos (rarely do I post any for that matter) but man that was a real disappointment.

There's no question social media has to be bad for our self-image.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#95

Post by Spivak »

oliv__ wrote: post #57
smacktoward wrote: post #22

The key takeaway here isn't that "Instagram face" exists or what it looks like, but that it's a product of two factors: the emergence of less invasive plastic surgery techniques, and of software specifically dedicated to producing these faces. This being HN, the existence of the software is the really interesting bit. It's called FaceTune: > FaceTune, which was released in 2013 and promises to help you “wow your frie…

> I think ninety-five per cent of the most-followed people on Instagram use FaceTune, easily,” Smith told me. Whenever things like this app reveal themselves to me, I feel so naive for not realizing that they even existed or that people would actually use such things. Man I live in my own bubble...

I mean the only thing that’s actually different is that there’s a tool that can do the thing that professional photographers do(-ish).

The tools are approaching real PS experience where before canned photo enhancing software was a lot more limited. But it’s not new that they’re ragingly popular.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#96

Post by [deleted] »

hellisothers wrote: post #71
guelo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warning: if you click that link on some browsers it will remove your back button history by opening a new tab and killing the previous one. Instagram is aggresively user-hostile and if you work there you should feel bad.

When did it become ok to target individuals who work at companies? The last week I’ve seen an uptick in these attacks on HN, they come off as very “I’m better than you” SJW’y, totally oblivious to a person’s situation. Let’s not turn this into a thing people do.

[deleted]

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#97

Post by cmdshiftf4 »

brenden2 wrote: post #39

I've really improved my happiness ever since I uninstalled these apps (IG, Snapchat, etc) and never looked back. I suggest everyone do the same. They get you hooked on a dopamine drip feed, instill feelings of inadequacy, and otherwise do nothing to improve your life.

>otherwise do nothing to improve your life.

I overwhelmingly agree, but disagree in one regard; there is some signal in the scream of the noise and in not engaging whatsoever you miss that sliver of signal, which can be very important events in friend's/family member's lives they've chosen to document there, or maintain some sense of contact with people who are now geographically distant, etc.

Overall their effects are indescribably negative, simply due to how they effectively game people's innate insecurities, but they do have 1 to 2 uses that do improve the life of a private individual.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#98

Post by texasbigdata »

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #91
dirtyid wrote: post #79

There's an analogous drive for men in western masculinity with the resurgence in gym culture and elevation of muscularity in media, particularly driven by physiques portrayed superhero franchises. We're rapidly shifting from Brad Pitt fight club "ottermode" bodies into some bignorexia territory. Though, it's much more self limiting, since you can't simply "buy" a well built physique, even with drugs unless you're an…

It depends on the person, but many people’s bodies tend to be catabolic which makes gaining muscle hard - the so-called hard gainers. These males also tend to have feminine qualities in facial structure. TRT will probably help those individuals more w.r.t to muscle gain than steroids. Or RHGH.

What? Assuming you live in America, "many" people's bodies are not catabolic for any meaningful portion of a given week. Not even close.

You can force a catabolic state onto yourself...but how does TRT help? Note also that insulin levels associated with obesity also modulate that mechanism, in the opposite direction of your argument, but let's ignore that. Theoretically you prevent loss of lean muscle mass while in a calorie deficit while intermittent fasting, but that's an obscure edge case for someone looking to increase in size.

Also, TRT is a steroid. At high enough doses. And, if that holds, how can it be less effective? Ignoring some of the biology itself.

Sorry for the sharp rebuttal but what are you talking about.

If you look at the research there's a very narrow band of philiosogic changes available to new and intermediate gym goers. The exact figures escape me, but if I recall with perfect nutrition and perfect gym adherence I believe I previously calculated for an average american male for that top end to be around 0.2 to 0.7 pounds of lean muscle mass additions per week. Based on an older paper. And that's the theoretical ceiling.

But, the flip side was that even for "hard gainers" with "feminine qualities in facial structure" (for which I've never seen research for but will take you at face value on that, no pun intended) that also means that gradual incremental changes are probable and positive with enough adherence.

Saying that a healthy strong body is not attainable without growth hormone or steroids seems like a cop out, when just sticking to it will (very very slowly) yield incremental progress.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#99

Post by smogcutter »

jquery wrote: post #74
smogcutter wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That okcupid stats blog was great, here’s a thread on reddit where someone archived them: https://www.reddit.com/r/gwern/comments/aapn1l/okcupid_blog_... To sum up for parent: in okcupid’s data, women considered attractive but not super hot got fewer messages than women who were less conventionally attractive but had more polarizing photos. In other words for most women it’s a better strategy to play up a look/featur…

That’s one explanation. Another possibility is a more polarizing face makes some guys feel like they have a better chance. This is total speculation, of course, just offering up another way to explain the data. Could be a mix of both explanations.

I went back and read the post, and I remembered it wrong. The effect is there for women with the same overall attractiveness rating, which is a stronger version than I originally posted.

> Another possibility is a more polarizing face makes some guys feel like they have a better chance.

This explains why guys would send messages, but not why they would rate pics highly. It’s a better fit for why guys would message girls with lower ratings, not girls with high ratings and high std. dev. The trick in their version is it’s not just “I think other guys aren’t into her”, it’s “I think other guys aren’t into her, but I am.”

But yeah, being a story that explains the data doesn’t make it true, and all sorts of stuff could be going on. And like the other poster pointed out their analysis is fun but not necessarily ironclad. For my part I figure there’s a ton of cultural signaling going on in dating pics that they can’t really account for.

Re: Instagram Face: The rise of selfie make-up and quest for hyper-perfection (2018)

#100

Post by dirtyid »

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #91
dirtyid wrote: post #79

There's an analogous drive for men in western masculinity with the resurgence in gym culture and elevation of muscularity in media, particularly driven by physiques portrayed superhero franchises. We're rapidly shifting from Brad Pitt fight club "ottermode" bodies into some bignorexia territory. Though, it's much more self limiting, since you can't simply "buy" a well built physique, even with drugs unless you're an…

It depends on the person, but many people’s bodies tend to be catabolic which makes gaining muscle hard - the so-called hard gainers. These males also tend to have feminine qualities in facial structure. TRT will probably help those individuals more w.r.t to muscle gain than steroids. Or RHGH.

I think somatypes like hardgainers have been debunked, the explanation being that predominantly, these folks are habituated to not eating enough, GOMAD etc. There's edge cases of medical conditions or training non-responders though.

My main point is that western aesthetic standard for muscular men is increasingly moving towards more mass to the point where most individuals are below the bell curve for what's attainable naturally even with consistent training. It's reaching a point where achieving these bodies require either both elite genetics and conscientiousness, or good genetics and conscientiousness and illegal drugs. It can't simply be bought by 30k worth of plastic surgeries.

Theoretically most men can diet themselves down to Brad Pit fight club, there's an attainable amount of muscle mass, the trick is mostly diet and fat loss, which may still be prohibitive for some. But much less men can be Chris Evans Captain America, or more obviously the Rock. At some point drugs enter the picture. There's also VFX that adds muscularity in these productions, so we're also dealing with filters at the end of the day, but most people do not know that muscularity is just as easily edited in live action as facial features or de-aging.

Post reply on HN