I maintain that the worst thing to hit to our "national pastime" (officially still baseball) is not steroid abuse, but HDTV. In high resolution closeups, players spitting chewing tobacco and "adjusting themselves" is far more offensive than Super Bowl halftime shows or Desperate Housewives previews. In a high def world, certain things have to change: performance enhancing drugs are fine - until they kill the athletes, they make their muscles look nice and ripped. But chaw, and polyester pants that gather in the crotch? Those have to go.
It's not that HDTV has so much resolution that you can see every pock mark and wrinkle on someone's face; it's that the camera zooms in much closer than you'd ever get in real life. OnHD.com has long maintained a snarky list of which celebs look better or worse in HD, and Hollywood makeup artists have been altering their technique to airbrush on makeup rather than simply apply it in swatches.
The New York Times Magazine finally picked up on the story, with a twist (free registration required) - younger celebs are now opting for plastic surgery. Conversely, for older celebs, surgery is counterproductive, because its so obvious. The Times also points out something most others miss - it's not just the higher resolution that points out very human flaws, but also that HDTV supports a richer color palette. However, the article makes it sound like there was some sort of ban on specific color shades, rather than a simple technical limitation. You can wear subtle red lipstick on standard NTSC TV, it just won't appear quite the same shade.
Let's not forget the most important thing we've learned about HDTV: some celebs actually look better in HD. Penelope Cruz shows up as #10 on OnHD's list (she was on Leno in HD recently, and I have to concur). It's not just the women, either: George Clooney is #7, and Jay Leno himself gets an honorable mention - I'm sure Jay would have something to say about that.
-avi
Comments