no i dont, but these covers always look like they dismembered the picture, then put it back together slightly skewed. and theres more 'airbrushing' going on than a nicole 'coco' austin photoshoot.
The photos (for one) are duplicated into many, many layers, and then thrown back together. It's easier this way as far as tedious work is concerned. It also helps for that "3D" look that is talked about so much.
All photos on every magazine cover from Readers Digest to Penthouse are touched-up to some extent. Wedding photos, whatever ~ photography in general is not considered *complete* these days without enhancement.
It's no secret, it's just simply that folks don't know what they are looking at. What they don't know might not hurt them... in bodybuilding, well... it can be a real let-down for the youngsters.
The most hilarious photos ever, made strictly for advertising are your " before and after" shots. They are actually taken within minutes of eachother, yet they state that they are weeks (or months) apart. When you start lying to people to steal their money, it becomes a problem, otherwise you can just chalk it up for pure *creativity*
