Excessive photoshopping is one of the biggest factors causing eating disorders in young women. As a teenager, I gobbled up everything fashion magazines peddled. Though a size 5, I felt like a fatty fatty 2x4. I’ve seen some pretty ridiculous “thigh gap” photoshops over the past year. Most women of healthy weight don’t even have a gap there! ugh
Number 2 is the closest. I think basic touchups are a part of photography. The only problem is when you use it to mislead.
I mean, you can get rid of wrinkles in camera, too, just by using weird poses you would never actually have in real life. You can use different lenses to get different effects. You can vary the lighting. And you can use makeup to cover up blemishes and scars and tattoos and stuff. All of that is fine, so why not allow people to do it digitally?
It’s when you make the model look like a different person altogether that I have a problem with it.
Agreed.
A nice photographer will photograph a person in the shade or on an overcast day, possibly applying some fill flash, and possibly warming up the white balance in post to give the person a warmer complexion (we often see people in warm light). Bonus points for a proper portrait lens (e.g. 85mm) with flattering blurred background and undistorted features.
A not-so-kind one would photograph the person in direct noonday sunlight, with their eyes squeezed tight. They would use a wide angle lens (like an iPhone or a snapshot camera) that makes the person’s nose stick out like a beak and fattens their face.
A mean photographer could light the person’s face from below and apply a cooler white balance, making the person appear like a lively corpse.
In addition to the light, most women will put on some makeup for a photo, either to hide blemishes or to provide an overall polished look.
I think people often look nicer in person than most snapshots show them to appear: the snapshot freezes unflattering angles and light, while the live person is constantly in motion in different kinds of light, and we see them without their wrinkles constantly exaggerated by shadows.
It’s fine If only to fix small flaws in an otherwise fine picture, like an errant strand of hair.
Or to create something that cannot be photographed, because it doesn’t exist.
You know, I generally hate excessive photoshopping. I certainly hate the excessive body shaping done on fashion photos. I hate the unattainable image created, I hate the idea of pushing a cultural perception of beauty towards the phony and scrawny and elfin. I am personally attracted to larger bodies, and generally find a curvy, chubby, or downright fat woman more engaging, visually.
And yet…the link in the OP is one of the rare cases I can almost support. There’s a linear flow to the “after” picture that I legitimately think is more striking than the “before.” Given the pictorial and surreal nature of the photo, I’m more willing to forgive editing that departs from reality.
That said, not seeking permission from the photographer? Nope, not cool. If you buy an image, either use it or negotiate an option to retouch.
Even in catalogue photos, you have no idea how many safety pins or clothespins are used to change how that clothing appears on-camera.
I am really curious if you are a man or a woman.
I think that Keira Knightley is one of the most beautiful women in the world. I think she has a very unique look to her face. Several years ago I spotted her on the cover of Vogue … except I didn’t even realize it was her until I spotted her name. Between the makeup and Photoshop, they had eliminated everything unique about her face, so that she just looked like a generic pretty face. It kinda ticked me off.
When even a photographic model isn’t skinny enough for a magazine shoot, is it any wonder so many girls have an unrealistic body image and eating disorders?
This. Even when you’re doing a runway show, it qualifies as “fitting” if you can zip it up without tearing a seam, or somehow keep it from falling off. The shirt does not look like that on you because the model wearing it for the catalog is wearing a size up and standing very, very still, so as not to knock off any of the clothespins sticking straight out the back where the camera can’t see.
Positioning also creates a lot of illusions. It’s entirely possible to create a ‘thigh gap’ in a woman who doesn’t really have one by having her scoot her feet a couple inches apart, face the camera, and stick her backside out. Looks ridiculous in person – you end up in a posture not unlike Donald Duck. But to the camera, which only sees you from one side, from one angle, and does not record motion, you have magically changed shape by ‘cheating’ your silhouette.
Whether Photoshopping is acceptable depends on what you’re doing. For news photos, no, never. For ads and fashion photos… maybe. I don’t think anyone has published a realistic photo of Lady Gaga, ever, and she doesn’t want them to, so I don’t really have a problem with them doing fanciful things to her form. Even she doesn’t encourage people to wear a meat dress every day. If you’re advertising a product by promising it’ll make you look like you’ve been retouched, then I’d give you a good hard look, and start agitating for fine print.