Is it me, or are modern makeup and lighting artists accentuating women's sharper and uglier features these days? I used to think it was just changes in technology, but after comparing sexy European webms to sexy American webms I've concluded that it's still possible to make women look like they used to, but that they're not doing it on purpose.
>>67253084
the makeup and lighting fags make them look bad out of envy
It's called HD, anon.
>>67253084
makeup and lighting wants to make them look bad because they're angry
>>67255810
and we all know classic films can't be watched in HD
Wait, what?
>>67255999
This may come as a surprise to you, but they weren't shot in HD.
>>67256079
they weren't shot in SD, either, retard
>>67256079
They were shot on film, which scales better than HD ever could.
>>67256346
They were shot in film and had very few close-ups. There is a vast difference in watching something shot on variable quality film projected onto a large screen far away versus watching a crisp HD of an all digital modern movie on your monitor. Not to mention the fact that fine detail is lost in black and white especially with the high intensity studio lights like in OP's image.
>>67256535
Just wanted to say that this is absolutely correct and OP is a dummy.
>>67256587
>>67256535
>very few close-ups
>absolutely correct
>>67256079
I do know that, actually. They were shot in 35mm which makes digital HD look like shit. Some were even filmed in 70mm, pic related
![The Passion of Joan of Arc.mkv_snapshot_00.56.15_[2013.07.18_11.42.13].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/on5C2XA.jpg "The Passion of Joan of Arc.mkv_snapshot_00.56.15_[2013.07.18_11.42.13].jpg")
>>67256651
But it's true.
>>67253084
What is this nigger even talking about?
>muh black and white waifus were pretty and pure, born in le wrong genershun
>>67253084
No women just act gross and manly now
>>67256535
