Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Its the LIGHTING, stupid. For God sake, get some light on Kerry eyes or

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Sensitivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:17 PM
Original message
Its the LIGHTING, stupid. For God sake, get some light on Kerry eyes or
viewer will only see a dark and brooding shadow.

Close-up Kerry's eyes show intelligence and determination.
But I have watched some speaches in which his over-arching brow cast
a shadow over his eyes and makes him look shady, gloomy and out of
touch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. Wrod. Or worse,
he looks like he has no eyes at all....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sensitivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It is amazing that his "Campaign" has not figured out that Low Fill-Lights
Edited on Mon Sep-27-04 05:37 PM by Sensitivity
are absolutely needed for a face like Kerry's -- strong brow and
deep-set eyes. They really need help, still talking about issues
when they now have to reach out to ave folk who can't tell the
diff between Bush lies and Kerry policies.

JK needs to be able to look folk in the eye and convince them that
he, not Bush, is trustworthy. Nothing else matters much to these
folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samtob Donating Member (253 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Man I hate to repeat this,
but my seven year told me;

"John Kerry looks mean"
after watching an out take of the speech in NY.

I agree, they need to work on the lighting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. I hope you told your kid not to vote for or against someone
based on their looks.

Or to judge anyone based on whether they "look mean" or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. yep yep yep
I've noticed that, too. When his eyes are lit, he looks a thousand percent more likeable and approachable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Ugg
another stupid thread...... too many to count lately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Not only are you wrong...
You are very wrong. This is actually important. Image is 50% of electability in this culture, at least, and this particular thing has been driving me insane for a while now. His eyes are very deep set and when he has bright overhead lighting, (unacceptable, especially at Dem staged events), he looks like he has two fucking black holes for eyes. Is that the image you want our Candidate to project? Mr. Death?

I'm begging, on my fucking knee's for chrissakes, for the Kerry people to attend to this.

:cry:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Oh really...
It seems to me he won the nomination just fine the way he looks...

Again...this is a stupid fucking thread!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Winning the Primaris is one thing...
Selling yourself to a national audience who aren't registered Democrats, who base their "swing votes" on their "gut" and other illogical nonsense, is another.

It isn't stupid at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. No it isn't... Plus the guy has won every Senate race he's ever been in
His looks are just fine.... Stupid thread!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SayitAintSo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Not in this media driven world I'm afraid - they are right ... sadly
Guess nobody's noticed they HAVE trimmed his eyebrows to open his eyes up ... did that months ago ... maybe he needs another 'trim'...I think the lighting is the thing though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogtag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. I read somewhere that the 32 page agreement
calls for personal makeup artists, but don't know if there is anything about lighting. At the very, very least the Kerry people need to do lighting tests before the 'debate' and I hope someone is 'on' it, but I'm not confident. Someone should have been shot for allowing the Grand Canyon photo op, while we're at it, he looked washed out staring into the sun, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I disagree
I think John Kerry is amazingly photogenic. I haven't seen a bad photo of him since all of this began, and I liked the Grand Canyon photo, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
necso Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. It has been said that Nixon
lost the 60 election because of his poor appearance on TV in the debates.

One would hate to think that this was true, of course.

And, of course, marketing is the strength of the neos... along with ruthless politicking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. Part of the debate agreement can help us with this
The debate agreement says the candidates can choose any kind of paper they like to take notes on. There will be pens and this paper sitting there for the candidates to pick up.

If Kerry's people are smart, they'll ask for 17x22 sheets of Pure White Irish Linen paper. Cover the whole surface of the podium with this, and the paper will kick enough light up into Kerry's face that his brow won't be a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogtag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I'm an ex art director and producer. What's your background?
Just curious. It seems that a few of us have some experience with these issues. I'm glad I'm not the only one driven a bit insane by the lax campaign person who should be paying attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-28-04 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
23. It's fairly extensive
I learned to set type in 1988.

I've done a lot of photography, including quite a bit of portraiture. I've done some makeup, some hair, quite a lot of lighting. I did sound for a while.

The last place I worked at, my boss had me do six political campaigns for his friends. I am ashamed to admit that five of these campaigns were successful. (Ashamed because all six were Republicans.)

If I was in charge of Kerry's campaign right now, Kerry wouldn't be defending himself against all these piddly little attacks the Repugnants are throwing at him--our campaign would have attacked first, attacked loudly and kept changing the attack to keep this asshole off guard. And we'd use attacks he can't rebut, like BCCI.

I think one of the reasons Clinton beat the Titanic candidate*, the unbeatable George H.W. Bush, is he attacked first.

Kerry is going to beat the latest Titanic candidate but right now Bush's approval rating should be about 30 percent--his diehard freeper/Cross Voter base. And if we were able to prove Bush's hard-living days are not behind him, we'd get the Cross Voters too.

* The RMS Titanic was billed as unsinkable. It went down on its first voyage. Bush was supposedly unbeatable in 1992.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogtag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-28-04 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Thanks for responding -
I agree with you 100%, btw. Captain Shrubby Smith thinks he's unsinkable and that may be a good thing for us.

Like you, I chewed my nails down to nubs watching the 'nice' convention and the weeks of non response to the most heinous attack ads I've ever seen in a presidential campaign.

The Bush campaign thinks they scored big time with all the restrictions in the 32 page agreement. If the Shrub is feeling particularly 'buoyant' and then unexpectedly hits an iceberg...and the petulant, angry frat boy appears from out of the mist...BINGO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-28-04 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I don't think it will take much to set him off
I remember a press conference from earlier this year where some reporter asked him a question he didn't like and Bush stormed off.

If he storms off during the debate, he's screwed--although Limpdick the Junkie will spend three hours Friday telling us all how great Bush did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peter from vermont Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
12. It's the Philospohy, Stupid
I know that if there's one resource that's never in short supply in a campaign, it's unsolicited avdvice. And that kind of advice is invariably worth a lot more to the would-be-advisor (who feels good simply to get it off his or her chest) that it is to the candidate. That said, here, for what it's worth, and written from my perch in the safely democratic state of Vermont, is my unsolicited advice to the Kerry-Edwards campaign.


IT'S THE PHILOSOPHY, STUPID

If I hear “It’s still the economy, stupid” one more time, I think I’ll scream. While I understand that many people “vote their pocketbooks,” I for one think that many more people actually “vote their philosophy” (and even more would if encouraged to do so by the candidates, who are in the unique position of being able to articulate the philosophy that will best resonate with people). In my mind, Clinton did not win because he focused on the economy, he won because he articulated a broad philosophy (“Putting People First”) that people liked, and because people believed he truly understood their real concerns and shared their real values.

Building a campaign around the economic non-performance of the incumbent seems a hollow and dangerous strategy to me for three basic reasons: (1) It is a negative appeal, not a positive one, (2) Economic statistics are subject to manipulation and spin to such a degree that any incumbent can make their performance sound good in one way or another, and (3) Voters recognize that economic performance is a cyclical phenomenon, and won’t hold a downturn against the incumbent if they think his policy and philosophy are fundamentally correct.

People, I believe, much more powerfully want a leader whose PHILOSOPHY they think is right, not just someone who MIGHT be able to manage the economy a little bit better.

That’s why I think Job #1 for John Kerry and John Edwards is to return to the POPULIST PHILOSOPHICAL THEMES we heard about in the primaries and during the convention, and insist that those themes are the TRUE AMERICAN VALUES we hold most dear as a nation.

More specifically, I would suggest they start re-iterating themes like these:

This election is about the core American value of FAIRNESS and EQUALITY, about electing someone who do all he can to make sure all Americans are treated fairly and not electing someone who only wants to help those who are already well-off!

This election is about the core American values of OPPORTUNITY and FAIR REWARD for hard work and sacrifice, about electing someone who will do all he can to make sure every American with a desire to succeed and improve their lives can do that, and not electing someone who is more interested in rewarding the privileged and powerful, and whose economic promise for the majority of Americans is “don’t worry, all those tax cuts for the wealthy should trickle down to you at some point”.

This election is about the core American values of HONESTY and STRAIGHT TALKING, about electing someone who won’t mislead us into war with false information and exaggerated claims and arguments, who won’t make energy policies that favor corporate contributors in secret, who won’t cynically misuse the words “ownership,” “freedom” and “choice” to promote health care and retirement policies that favor the wealthy and undercut and dismantle the bedrock social safety programs that have protected Americans since the days of the Depression, and who won’t cynically spin economic statistics to hide their policy failures like the net loss of over 1.5 Million jobs in three and a half years.

This election is about the American values of COMMUNITY and HELPING ONE ANOTHER, about electing someone who will make sure that the most vulnerable citizens – the elderly, children and the working poor - are given the minimal means to lead dignified lives, and who will make sure that these people do not fall further behind due to the enactment of cynical “policies” like health savings accounts favor the wealthy and undercut Medicaid and Medicare programs.

This election is about the core American values of PROGRESS and BUILDING A BRIGHTER FUTURE, about electing someone who has a hopeful and forward-thinking vision for our future as a nation, based on ideas like harnessing our technological and scientific assets to develop world-changing energy technologies that will free us from damaging economic dependence on oil and ensure a cleaner environment for our children.

This election is about the core American values of MORAL LEADERSHIP and COOPERATION in international affairs, about electing someone who understands the importance of building and maintaining cooperative alliances with other countries, and using our resources and influence to promote the economic and social development of poor countries and thereby to address and eradicate the conditions that give rise to the instability and ignorance at the roots of terrorism.

This election is about the core American value of GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE, about electing someone who will put the people’s business – and not corporate interests - first again, and who will nurture a strong business climate while not appointing scores of corporate lobbyists to important regulatory positions, and not letting corporations and businesses write our laws and dictate our public policies in crucially important areas like the environment, energy policy and health care.

I for one believe this would be a very powerful strategy, and one that would resonate very strongly with independent and swing voters. That's because I think people see this election as being about defining what our real national values are, and about what our long term national future should look like, not merely about how their personal finances might be improved in the short term.

And wouldn't it be heartenting to learn, after Kerry and Edwards become our new President and Vice President, that they won by focusing on the much more idealistic mantra of "It's the Philosophy, stupid"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
13. Maybe we all have to get over image and focus on substance.
That goes for us Soviet Canuckistanis, too.

Besides, it's not like bush has the most attractive of faces.

And besides again, isn't Edwards just the cutest?

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. When image doesn't matter so much...
No one would be happier than I to discuss the issues at hand. Until then, we have to pay attention to these stupid things.

Besides, bad lighting really can make him look like he has no eyes, and I wouldn't want to look like that on tv, no matter why I was on the screen. I'm insecure enough about my photographs, already. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cheshire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
18. A white sheet of paper will do the trick. It's a photograhers trick
The white will reflect overhead lights onto his face. I hope he looks down only slightly, he doesn't do that a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gauguin57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
20. This thread makes a valid point.
Edited on Mon Sep-27-04 09:38 PM by gauguin57
As we all know ... in 1960, the radio listeners thought Richard Nixon had won the debate. The television viewers thought Kennedy had won (because he just looked so relaxed and gorgeous, while Nixon looked like a shifty, sweaty gangster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elperromagico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-27-04 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
21. He really has beautiful eyes. You're right about the lighting.
There's a real warmth about his face that doesn't translate on television, and the lighting is a major part of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-28-04 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
25. just a thought
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-28-04 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
26. Very true, I'm sure though it'll work out well. In the Dem debates
they worked well to let us see his eyes. Which is extremely important.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-29-04 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Would not put rigging the lighting beyond Rove operatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC