The Grand Narrative

Amazing Computer Graphic of Go Ara (고아라)

Posted in Korean Art by James Turnbull on August 25, 2008

( Source. Click on the picture for a larger image )

I don’t know why this two-year old computer graphic of Go Ara (고아라) graced the front page of Yahoo!Korea yesterday, but it’s surprisingly convincing, and fooled me for a minute or so (only the hair gives it away really). In contrast, this one of Song Hye-gyo (송혜교) I posted earlier in the month seems much better done, but her strange expression gave it away instantly.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Rwellor said, on August 25, 2008 at 10:54 pm

    James,

    yeah.. but I’d say that the hair is the giveaway because hair still isn’t heavily airbrushed/shopped in commercials with real women….

    This computer generated image would have looked tres fake in the days before all advert graphics were fake by design…. (I give away my nearly expired age by noting that)

    the “success” of this pic fits right into your arguments about female imagery, except that it suggests that it has now gone beyond local culture to some kind of imaginary meta-aesthetic.

    keep your daughters safe!

    ;-)

    Roger

  2. James Turnbull said, on August 26, 2008 at 11:47 am

    Roger,

    Oh, I’m not so young that I don’t know what you mean by it looking “tres fake in the days before all advert graphics were fake by design”. Taking a second look at it, it’s not quite as convincing as I first thought, the line between her face in the foreground and her hair in the background on the right in particular being quite sloppily done. The expression though, still remains very natural, leading me to suspect that the whole thing was in fact superimposed on a photograph.

    I’m not sure what you mean exactly by how “the ’success’ of this pic fits right into [my] arguments about female imagery” though; could you please elaborate? Naturally I do understand and agree with what you’re saying about a meta-aesthetic, à la Baudrillard and all, I’m just not sure how it applies in this case.

  3. Amy said, on August 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm

    Her ear looks a bit grotesque as well.

    By the way, while I’m here: Who makes these images, and why?

  4. Kym said, on August 26, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    I find the eyes very convincing! ;)

    And I agree with you about how the Song Hye Gyo CG looks better, but with an unnatural expression.

  5. James Turnbull said, on August 26, 2008 at 8:30 pm

    Amy,

    come to think of it, yes it is, and quite a good way to put it too.

    As for why people make these images…well, presumably for a number of reasons, but I imagine they wouldn’t be any different to those for making any other art form.

    If you follow the link to the post about Song Hye-gyo, there is a link there to a description of how the graphic was made that might have a few more answers. If not, then the computer graphics site that that description is on surely will have somewhere.

    Kym,

    thanks! Great minds think alike…

    It’s not just the eyes for me though, it’s the whole face, which is what made it take so long for me to notice the right side like I mentioned, and then the ear which Amy did.

  6. Roger Wellor said, on August 27, 2008 at 12:28 pm

    James..

    I meant meta-aesthetic in non-exciting ways.

    First, that the shopping of photos and “smoothing” out of things is an aesthetic imperative imposed from above the level of local decisions as to what is beautiful. Increasingly all pictures are taking on these characteristics. The skin-level individuality of folks is being completely erased. This is following on the body level (alterations to create S-lines in Korea, and alterations to create less-lines in the west – check out the “beauty” Photoshop sites to see this in action)

    Second, that this aesthetic also goes beyond human beauty – these altered photos and CGI creations are part of the same aesthetic that produces the IPod, the bodies of most porn stars, and the eee pc. We want the sleekness of the machine and the efficacy of the appliance, not the often troublesome integrality of actual humans.

    This adds up to an external re-creation of the human (not just female) image, that I think is consistent with much of what you have argued on this site. To be honest, I’m not even sure where it comes from – this is not a conspiracy, nor do I think there is a central headquarters, rather a lot of economical, historical, technological, and social trends are converging here..

    Now, I’m off to go purchase me a sex-doll! ;-)

  7. jobob said, on September 11, 2008 at 7:21 am

    (deleted)

  8. James Turnbull said, on September 11, 2008 at 8:25 am

    Jobob,

    you want to criticize anything on the site, just go right ahead, but the instant you start insulting and swearing at me or other commentators then your comments will get deleted.


Leave a Reply