Procter and Gamble Unveils New Device That Aims To Remove Signs of Aging (bbc.com)

In a video for the BBC, technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones uses Procter and Gamble's new device to maker him look younger. Called Opte, the device scans the skin and precisely applies tiny amounts of make-up to remove age spots, burst blood vessels and other blemishes. Opte has a camera in it that captures 200 frames per second and processes that data by looking at the difference of the color of your skin. It then sends it to a microprocessor and 120 thermal inkjet printers print the product directly on your skin. The company says it works with all skin colors via three different cartridges: light, medium, and dark. Procter and Gamble is planning to release the device in late 2019 or 2020.

Comments

I have something a lot cheaper

[Scoldog]

I have something a lot cheaper that will make you look years younger. It's a nappy and a rattle.

Really cool tech if it works

[phantomfive]

This is really cool tech, micro-makeup application. I can see a use for it, but I never want to use it.

I don't mind looking old, I mind being old. The appearance isn't the problem.

Re:Really cool tech if it works

[mentil]

This'll be revolutionary for Hollywood makeup artists. Now they can make Data the exact shade of bubblegum pink, consistently.

Question

[Ol Olsoc]

My wife wears a relative minimum of makeup, mostly a little eyeshadow and mascara. Point is, it was never a surprise to see what she looks like in the morning.

But I'd be interested in what men's reaction was the first time they saw their wife or girlfriend without makeup. Today's style is pretty much flat monocolor. many women even hid their freckles (a mortal sin).

She does have one friend who's husband has never seen her without. She puts it on in the morning, sleeps in it, then washes her face and goes through it again.

Just curious - women hiding behind excessive makeup to me is the equivalent of a male wearing a braunschweiger in his pants.

Re:Question

[Ol Olsoc]

My wife doesn't wear makeup. At all. She uses lip balm, but that's it.

The creation of this "expectation" that women will always wear makeup in public - it's an astonishing triumph of a vile and misogynistic industry. It's a global multi-billion-dollar business that should be attracting worldwide protests, boycotts and pickets. And yet - women not only accept it, they all but enforce it on each other.

And don't even get me started on cosmetic surgery.

Cool story bro. Why do you think that women are so weak that some evil patriarchy forces them to wear makeup?

When the real reason for makeup is two different things. The first is that in various species, one or the other sex is more decorated, more beautiful. Sometimes, as with many birds, the male is the gaudy and more beautiful sex. In humans, it's the opposite. Women through the ages have enjoyed decorating themselves. Jewelry is one item, clothing is another. Looking at men's fashions they have changed very little over the last century. Women's fashions are all over the map.

Makeup, which is not good or bad within itself, is another form of decorating. Where it becomes an issue is when women go overboard in order to hide their age. Just like this article. The reason they do this is that the male of the species is inherently attracted to women during their most fertile years. That's just the effects of evolution.

So the idea that makeup is something forced on women by the evil patriarchy is both silly and very demeaning to women, casting them as so weak that they can't even make up their minds.

They want to look younger than they are, and that's about it.

I know many men, and the ones I have talked about women's makeup do not like it at all - they consider it dishonest, and some like myself, simply love freckles - covering them up is unforgivable. So either start understanding that not everything wemen do is men's fault, especially when men don't like what they are doing.

Or you can get on over to Jezabel - you'll have agreement there.

Re:Question

[Shotgun]

Umm? No. Just no.

My wife, and my ex-wife, both would not put on make-up or dress up if we were going out for lunch or hanging around the house. "Going out with the girls" would send them into hours of preening preparation.

Trying to blame make-up on misogyny is idiotic, and truly makes me wonder if you're actually married.

Re:Question

[Ol Olsoc]

So the idea that makeup is something forced on women by the evil patriarchy is both silly and very demeaning to women, casting them as so weak that they can't even make up their minds.

Says the incel who thinks women are just obeying their animal natures:

I don't think you read my other posts. I'm neither incel, nor MGTOW if you planned on going there as well. Been married over 40 years.

Or maybe you don't know what the term incel means.

No matter how they market it

[93 Escort Wagon]

We guys aren’t the target demographic.

Re:No matter how they market it

[Rufty]

I dunno. What CPU is this running? Can I reflash it? Anyone got a repo for the "Star Trek alien" firmware? (Not one of the old ones, obviously.)

Why all the negativity? This is quite innovative.

[psperl]

This product lets people use much less makeup while achieving a more natural look. It also helps people who don't know how to apply makeup well. I'm all for this if we see less of the painted-on face look.

Additionally, cosmetics are regularly scrutinized for containing potentially dangerous chemicals, and this product reduces the amount needed significantly.

Re: What the fuckvertisement?!? AI airbrush ad?

[sheramil]

I think this is the most useless product I have ever heard of

O rly?

http://theworstthingsforsale.com/

Injet Tech?

[Psion]

How much are refill cartridges, and can I buy third-party refill kits?

Re:What the fuckvertisement?!? AI airbrush ad?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

"AI airbrush ad?"

The ad's motto: "We put the 'AI' in 'airbrush'."...?

I bet someone thinks its useful

[Roger W Moore]

I think this is the most useless product I have ever heard of

Oh, come on. You know there is at least one guy in the US who is probably already on the phone with them asking if he can get it with an orange skin tone cartridge.

The printer's cheap

[VeryFluffyBunny]

The printer itself costs only $50 but the inkjet cartridges cost $1,500 each, & contain all 3 shades; light, medium, & dark. If one shade runs out the machine refuses to print anymore until you've replace the whole cartridge. Cartridges are digitally signed & can't be refilled & used again. Would actually be cheaper to hire a professional make-up artist, plus they'd make you look a lot better.

BTW, since IT & therefore /. is predominantly male, does it have a drag-queen mode?

Obligatory Dilbert

[ChrisMaple]

https://dilbert.com/strip/1997-11-13

Anti-Aging Chemicals?

[NicknameUnavailable]

She said the ink only prints to blemishes and contains "anti-aging chemicals" so "they should start to fade over time with use of the device." If they have fucking "anti-aging chemicals" why bother with the printer? Are they just calling cell-killing chemicals "anti-aging" and taking advantage of the fact the ink only prints over blemishes while healthy cells can fill in when they die?