Kamala Harris, Before After, and After After

This photo of Ms. Harris that is making the rounds has me a bit ticked off. Not because it is making fun of her, which I'm very OK with, but because the picture itself is so obviously not a good, publication grade pic.

The story is that sometime in the last month or so, she had 'some work' done. No bi deal. But many Tweeps are passing this pic around, claiming that this is her 'new' face.  (A face only The Joker could love, IMHO.) But it stinks to high heaven.  Her face is significantly out of focus.

In particular, look at the colors below her right cheek. The transition from light to darker (shaded) skin is way too grainy to have come directly from a studio camera, or, for that matter, a decent phone camera. Ether the image was captured with a 640x480 camera, or it has been 'de-rezzed', i.e., the pixle per inch value reduced somehow. 

(I make no call about the' how', just the 'what'.)

This one was taken over Joe Biden's shoulder, as he is calling Harris to offer her the VP job.  It looks like a real person's face. His res image of a high res image.

My point isn't to go off about 'poor Kamala'. She's a big girl, and should be able to take care of herself. Both sides do this - find a pic of a candidate that makes them look goofy, dumb, or evil, and run with it.  How many times have we seen the picture of AOC with her mouth in the bid 'O'? Ms. Omar looking smugly like the cat who just swallowed the proverbial canary. Or Ms. Talib just looking plain evil?  

I know that's done to support the story and the narrative. But the editorial decision to use such a bad quality image and promote it as ac accurate representation is editorial malpractice.

Our side, we, need to be better.