It doesn’t matter HOW they did it, what matters is the final product, and the aesthetic it’s demonstrating.

The less human you look, and the more like a perfect illustration, the better. It doesn’t matter where in the media you look, that’s the guidelines used.

“The very presupposition that natural human features, as they appear on real bodies in real life, are ‘flaws’ which need to be obscured for the comfort of the audience points to a very disturbing set of ideas about how we collectively view and value bodies and persons today.”

And the truth is that many efforts to make faces and bodies more smooth and ideal are themselves distracting–so I’d rather they didn’t! (On the other hand, IIRC, Shatner was corseted for some episodes of Star Trek, as his shape strayed from the show’s vision of a fit, taut captain–so maybe that hasn’t changed so much.)

I think this captures one of the common ‘justifications’ used by media producers for such decisions (otherwise, how would they sleep at night…). The very presupposition that natural human features, as they appear on real bodies in real life, are ‘flaws’ which need to be obscured for the comfort of the audience points to a very disturbing set of ideas about how we collectively view and value bodies and persons today.

Remember that in 1967, a lot of homes still didn’t even have color televisions–so the details of skin texture, hair, facial symmetry, etc., would probably not be so closely judged by the audience. And at the time, they hardly expected that anyone would be able to freeze-frame, screen capture, etc. Now, with HD televisions and DVDs, film and TV makers know the onscreen actors’ smallest flaws will be highly visible and could pose a distraction. So it makes sense (sadly) that they’d want conventionally “prettier” casts.

(Also, Kirk and Spock used to be played by Jewish actors; now they’re not. Huh.)

Just at a glance, even with thumbnails, I can tell that the original had (probably) a single somewhat-diffused light source on camera left. It’s not too diffused though because the light falloff is quite dramatic across Kirk’s face. This could just be a reflector, but I’d guess it’s another flash firing just a touch lighter than the main light.

This would make a huge difference, even before they let the airbrush near the shot.

The other photo is using multiple light sources, two minimum. The first is on the left, in almost the same position as the original but it’s considerably more diffused. I’d say a larger softbox or perhaps just ‘a’ softbox if the original was using an umbrella.

There’s a second light source, camera right, facing them at about 45 degrees. Kirk’s right half is clearly more well lit, but Spock’s is still dark. So, it seems like Kirk is in the path of the light, and is blocking some to Spock’s right side.