| 
Harry Potter IMAX Poster Ad Breast Enhancement
Above shows the original artwork poster for Harry Potter Order Of the Phoenix. The IMAX version has Emma Watson’s breasts digitally enhanced. See the difference in both posters after the jump.
Source: Poster Wire
Related Posts
May 9th, 2007 at 1:21 am
Hawhaawhaaaw, brilliant.
Too bad they aren’t that big in real life -_-’
May 9th, 2007 at 4:36 am
Wow, marketing sex appeal to children, nice one Warner Bros.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
thats pretty funny
May 9th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Duh, that’s because the IMAX one is in 3d. The added dimension adds volume!
Fucking pathetic.
May 9th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
They aren’t marketing it to children. They are marketing it to perverts LOL
May 9th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Lol gutted Emma
May 9th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Look close, it is two completely different photos of Emma. The hair is quite different. So it is quite possible she was just in a different position for the one in the IMAX poster, and no “digital enhancement” was performed.
May 10th, 2007 at 12:47 am
They also modified her hair. In the second pic (with enhanced mammory glands) her hair is covering more of the face of the kid behind her. There are other changes too. Reminds me of PhotoHunt.
May 10th, 2007 at 2:20 am
Examine Emma’s portion of the photo for a minute….you’ll see her hair a little more ruffled, her head is tilted just a little bit more, and she’s been moved a little closer in to the group.
It’s my opinion that “they” just took a secondary picture and photochopped it into the ad and she just happens to be standing at a slightly different angle making it appear she has a slightly larger rack, add a few shadows and BAM!…rack for days.
…Or the internet sheeple are right and Warner Bro’s are pigs.
May 10th, 2007 at 3:57 am
Her hair is not arranged in the same manner. Look at the ends near her shoulder for an obvious difference. It appears to be a different picture of Emma superimposed on the art rather than a pure digital edit. Given the difference in lighting and the different angle of her torso, it might not even be a ‘digitally enhanced breast’ picture.
Call me a skeptic…
May 10th, 2007 at 6:43 am
I’d like to add that she has makeup on in one picture, and no makeup in the second.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:23 am
It is the first picture that has been modified – the intenal line of hee hair hanging on her right (our left) is identical. The outerline isn’t – some one deleted hair in the first image; this may have made her look odd so the ‘re edged the rest of her to match – reducing breast size.
The IMAX picture has had less re-touching.
May 10th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
also, the P in Potter is right over harry’s penis.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:44 am
Simply, yes it is two diffrent looking photos, but the thing that makes her look “enhanced” is the fact that the lighting is so much brighter. Therefore curves are “enchance” — DUH!
May 11th, 2007 at 2:54 am
Well, if you look at her hair in the second poster, that HAS been altered. If they merely changed the “lighting” of the second poster, as James Mauler suggests, how would you explain that difference?
May 11th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Here you go:
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/4205/potterimaxcj4.gif
May 16th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
its enhanced, I do that stuff for a living. Its pretty obvious I think. Her posture doent change enough to warrant that kind of increase in size. If you overlap the image on top of each other you see that they actually increase size slightly and then they slim down her stomach to a curvier shape to accent her chest.
May 20th, 2007 at 12:12 am
Is it just me or does Daniel Radcliffe’s wand look a little thicker in the IMAX poster?
May 22nd, 2007 at 9:14 am
She has more hair in the IMAX poster too, people. These are composite posters, each person was photographed seperate and photo-shopped together. The first poster they too off her hair as well. It’s not that they made her breast larger for the IMAX poster, it’s that they cut them off in the first one. They didn’t augment her, they fixed the mistake.
Again, check out the hair and you’ll see thet cut her entire side off in the first poster.
This is so dumb I feel bad commenting on it but to set everyone straight.
May 25th, 2007 at 7:09 am
Perverted
May 31st, 2007 at 10:00 am
images today are so tampered with i wonder how much is real in any advert. her face is different,body line is different,hair has been moved slightly,hate to say but it looks like they made her boobs bigger,in the ad for the 3d show…thats funny in a horrible way
July 10th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
i think that she is a diffrent position then before and the other poster is just way to diffrent from the imax one the imax one look like it is a normal poster
June 19th, 2009 at 6:58 am
I am so late…
As far as I can see, it’s an issue of retouching. Both use the same photo. The actual promo photo has darker lighting around Emma, making her breasts appear smaller. They also made her hair longer so she isn’t blocking “Neville”‘s face and retouched her face to make it looks as if she’s wearing make-up. So in a way, they are pigs…Just not pervs.
Cause if they can make Susan Boyle a hottie on YouTube, retouching Emma can’t be that hard…