Hi everyone. I registered here a while ago and have been reading but this will be my first post. I’ve read all of Cecil’s books but I don’t remember seeing this question answered.
I’ve recently started working on losing some weight. What really motivated me was seeing pictures and video of myself w/my 2 year old daughter over the holidays. Although I see myself in the mirror every day and realized I needed to lose some pounds, I was shocked at the double chin, gut, etc. I saw on the video and pics. Cripes, I realize there is the reversed image in the mirror, and possibly harsh shadows from the camera’s flash, but when I saw the “real” images I just felt sick to my stomach. They looked so much heavier than what I “see” in the mirror.
Has anyone else experienced this? Any idea if there has ever been a psych study on this phenomenon?
Anyway, I hung up a couple of the pics where I’ll see them every day and have dumped 19 pounds since Feb. 03. Thanks for any input.
My WAG-What you see in the mirror changes very little from day to day. You don’t notice that today you weigh three ounces more than last week, or that there are 6 new grey hairs, sort of like watching grass grow. Also, you may not notice these small but cumulative changes because you’re not really looking for them. You see what you expect to.
I had a friend once who had anorexic tendencies. No matter how thin she got, it wasn’t thin enough. Her ribs stuck out, and she looked positively gaunt, but when she looked in the mirror, she saw fat, fat, fat. Exactly what she expected to see.
Congratulations on losing the weight, and don’t forget to put up thinner pictures of yourself as well as the old ones. Seeing how much progress you’ve made toward your goal is even more effective than seeing how far from it you were when you started.
It’s a fair rule of thumb, although Im not sure how much can be attributed to how the image is made. You can be lit to show the angles and curves of your face, for example. BUT-it’s awfully hard to maintain that level of dramatic lighting as you move around a set. It gets done, and has been done with incredible success since the dawn of Filmmaking.
Television cameras ( even High Def ones ) don’t quite capture an image the way film does. Typically, until the most recent years, the lighting demands have been such that you wind up with fairly flat lighting, say a 2:1 ratio, or worse, a 1.5:1 ratio from key side to fill side.
With flattened lighting, you will appear heavier. With sharply angled side lighting, or back lighting, the true angles of your face and body will become more apparent. And yes, make-up helps here too.
Cartooniverse
If you want to kiss the sky, you’d better learn how to kneel.
The lens used to take pictures can create a very different look depending on the focal length. I do part-time photography and videography. To shoot a portrait, I use a 110mm lens on a 645 camera. If I use a wide angle lens instead, you will see a very distorted, and depending on the angle, a rounder and “fatter” person, complete with protruding nose, flappy ears, etc… Most point and shoot cameras and a lot of video is shot with wide angle, because either they don’t have a zoom, or in the case of video, wide angle minimizes the relative movement from the hand shaking holding the camera. Therefore, the picture is a very distorted view. Aside from that, the transformation of the 3D world to the 2D world of images could possibly cause parts of your body that are actually on your side, to look like they
are stuck right in the front of your body, thus looking wider. Thats why you need a professional photographer when you want a flattering picture of yourself. The professional take everything into account: lighting (to apply shadows appropriately, or remove them as needed), your look, the lens, etc. to put togather the best possible 2D image of you. A mirror, on the other hand, pretty much shows you as others see you, whether you agree with the image or not.
A question that Marilyn Vos Savant fielded (and in my opinion flubbed) a couple of years ago was similar. Someone asked why photographs of himself looked so different that what he’s used to seeing in the mirror. Marilyn answered basically that it’s because the mirror image is, well, a mirror image.
However, I think she was overlooking an important factor - photographs are usually taken from some angle other than straight-on, which is what you see in the mirror. I’ve noticed that photographs of myself taken from a straight-on angle look generally like I think I look, but others are of this geeky guy with a receding hairline.
A video would add another dimension - time. Seeing yourself moving around would be different that standing up straight in front of a mirror.
WShen you look in the mirrior it is possible to reposition yourself to your advantage in order to make the best of lighting etc. You can look at yourself at your best angles and make expressions that flatter you. A camera captures you without you being able to tailor how you look to your prefrence. A still photograph can also freeze a really funny looking face or unflatering position into eternity. Even the most beautiful people on Earth can be subject to unflattering angles or lighting, and there are pictures to prove that.
I’ve noticed the same thing as the OP. The effect is the same regardless of angle, when looking in multiple mirrors when buying a suit or checking the results of a haircut. The “reversal” of normal mirrors is not a factor because I’ve seen myself in a non-reversing setup of mirrors and I look the same as in a normal mirror.
Perhaps this effect is different for different people.
My WAG is that it’s analogous to hearing a recording of your own voice. Your voice sounds weird, but everybody else’s sounds fine. That would be a way to check if this effect applies to you - if you look weird in a picture or video but everybody else looks okay, you are experiencing the effect.
Perhaps a factor is that your movements in a mirror exactly match your own physical perception of them (I think the techical term is proprioception or propriosensation). This is obviously not true in a video or picture. There must be some research on this subject.
I think that last sentence is an oversimplification.
“No,” he replied, and smiled seraphically, as was his wont.
