Queen Studios: The Dark Knight Rises - Hathaway Catwoman 1:3

[NorthernLadMSP]

Originally Posted by Phoenixblazes

And JND apologists have always said that in person it doesn't look like that.


Now I've got a total of 10 silicone pieces from both Queen Studios and Infinity Studios, and while there may be a visual discrepancy between how they physically look in camera versus how it is in person, it's relatively minor, to the point that imo it's not really even worth mentioning.

As long as your far enough away from the subject, the only thing that I've noticed is more in relation to colour tones, rather than its physical appearance being altered by the camera lens.

Yeah, I've seen a lot of those apologist comments in regard to that company. I've also been seeing more Mera pics on Facebook, and while the proto looked good, the production piece lost a lot in terms of the resemblance (IMO).

[AC_808]

Originally Posted by Shoo

The one on the left is so much better! That's the one from Queen Studios, right?

[ukshaun]

Originally Posted by AC_808

The one on the left is so much better! That's the one from Queen Studios, right?

No, left! ;P

[AC_808]

Originally Posted by ukshaun

No, left! ;P

Ha!

[Exorcist]

Nothing wrong with the scale

[Hobbyist]

QS's looks like the young Catherine Zeta-Jones.

JND's looks like an aged Anne Hathaway with bad botox lips or her stunt-double.

[Phoenixblazes]

Originally Posted by Hobbyist

QS's looks like the young Catherine Zeta-Jones.

JND's looks like an aged Anne Hathaway with bad botox lips or her stunt-double.

Queen's version is definitely an idealised version of the actress, but that's been the case since the very beginning when the prototype was first shown off.


Whereas JND's at least definitely doesn't photograph well.....for whatever reason. Even though JND's other releases don't seem to suffer from any such effect, or at least not to the same degree as that one supposedly does.


And I have their ridiculously priced WW on preorder, but I just hope I don't regret it.

[pdenham]

(sigh) I have no skin in this particular game, but I think this forum- especially the subforums that deal with companies who produce primarily celebrity likenesses- would provide a good service by having a thread on understanding lens distortion (or rather, distortion related to focal length) stickied at the top.



https://bakerdh.wordpress.com/2012/0...ns-distortion/

The JND is nowhere near that distorted in actuallity and is quite a bit more accurate to Hathaway's features - which are not classically proportioned or symmetrical. The Queen figures are definitely idealized (not that there is anything wrong with that).

[Phoenixblazes]

I think most of us more or less understand this, or at least I do. In my post above, I even mentioned distance of subject, as lens distortion can have much less effect at appropriate distances. I always try to make sure any images I post aren't being altered too much by the lens, though I've given up trying to adjust for colour tones and lighting.

My comment wasn't just in relation to that one image (which probably does exaggerate the problems I see in the piece), but a large portion of the other images and videos posted online for this one particular piece that doesn't seem to photograph well in almost all situations. But I could well be wrong, as I've never once seen this particular piece in person.


(And I think that lens info graph has been posted previously for very much the exact same reason/piece).

[Hobbyist]

To be fair, Anne Hathaway in 2012 looked younger.