The Effects of Photoshop on Society - Page 6 - the Fashion Spot
 
How to Join
27-10-2010
  76
clever ain't wise
 
iluvjeisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Gender: femme
Posts: 13,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVeed View Post
Completely agree but again, those ads probably (not certain, but probably) were the art director's direction. Nothing a retoucher does can go past a director; the client is the one who dictates what to do and how far. Nothing can be published without the approval of the client.

There are tons of bad retouchers out there, as in any occupation, but nothing can go to press without the consent of the client.



EXACTLY. This is also one of the reasons why it is next to impossible for another supermodel to emerge. Celebrities have taken their place, and why? Because they can look just as good as models now. Julianne Moore, gorgeous 40-something, retouched (very well, I might add) to look younger than Karen Elson on Vogue Paris. Any US Vogue cover you look at, you see these flawless celebrities with their beautiful bodies and their glowy skin.

Models once represented a small genetic pool of women who had an out-of-world presence, of beauty. When every single person on a magazine cover can look like that now, well... there's no need for a model spokeswoman anymore.

Drew Barrymore for Cover Girl anyone?
First, I'm completely with you there. The retoucher made the least grievous mistake because it could be that he is churning things out mindlessly and simply overwrote the image he wanted to send with an image that was portrayed a mythological monster. At least two people made a horrible mistake in the making of some of these ads that have cropped up lately, that much is for sure.

Second, there is an easy way to turn all this photoshopping idiocy around. You can show real images of the people that actually are so beautiful that they need next to no retouching - and you could preserve the air of something real....if that was the accepted standard it would require much more work to get most of the actresses to look as good as models...

But that requires the return of texture. As long as it's ok to use ridiculous smoothing techniques on everything without this turning people off, I suppose it's never going to change.

  Reply With Quote
30-10-2010
  77
front row
 
senorgemma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 339
"I’ve seen my photos form Balenciaga recently and thought: “Am I that thin?” but than I realized that my arms were retouched in order to make them too thin. Maybe they just need a sort of sensation, like look at this poor thing... so thin.. how does she even walk?"
-Vlada Roslyakova
Not sure if this quote is relevant but hey, she's addressing retouching!

  Reply With Quote
09-12-2010
  78
windowshopping
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Birmingham
Gender: homme
Posts: 33
While I am in no way excusing the "three legged model" look, and object to reshaping models faces or bodies, it is pretty clear to me that some retouching is required by most clients.

I remember the first time I did a shoot for a MUAs book, my thoughts were "I need to show off this persons skill, so will do minimal Photoshop work".

I removed obvious skin imperfections but left it at that (the MUA was very happy with the shots). Later that week I decided to try out a few Photoshop techniques on the skin to make it very smooth while retaining skin texture. I asked the MUA what she thought (I thought I might have overdone it) and she said she absolutely adored the shots and was amazed at how good they looked.

My guess is that untouched shots would be rejected by most magazines.

__________________
Adam Fraise Photography
http://www.adamfraise.com
  Reply With Quote
10-12-2010
  79
windowshopping
 
nomorerack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: canada
Gender: femme
Posts: 23
the thing is...if we see models or actors and actresses looking so perfect, flaw not just less but like i said - perfect-, we want to know what special things they do or what products they use to have achieve this perfection, we then would follow their routine but after achieving nothing but...we end up disappointed and shift focus to another perfect picture seen on the magazine and same thing goes....

it's a very insecure world we are in

__________________
We are ambassadors of the most High God, therefore, we should represent Him in the best and righteous way we can
  Reply With Quote
13-12-2010
  80
clever ain't wise
 
iluvjeisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Gender: femme
Posts: 13,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraiseap View Post
While I am in no way excusing the "three legged model" look, and object to reshaping models faces or bodies, it is pretty clear to me that some retouching is required by most clients.

I remember the first time I did a shoot for a MUAs book, my thoughts were "I need to show off this persons skill, so will do minimal Photoshop work".

I removed obvious skin imperfections but left it at that (the MUA was very happy with the shots). Later that week I decided to try out a few Photoshop techniques on the skin to make it very smooth while retaining skin texture. I asked the MUA what she thought (I thought I might have overdone it) and she said she absolutely adored the shots and was amazed at how good they looked.

My guess is that untouched shots would be rejected by most magazines.
And if you ask me, they're idiots for it. It's easy to focus on the detail - and of course you have to - but a necessary requirement for any artist should be able to travel between a detail-oriented and a holistic view.

  Reply With Quote
13-12-2010
  81
windowshopping
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Birmingham
Gender: homme
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvjeisa View Post
And if you ask me, they're idiots for it. It's easy to focus on the detail - and of course you have to - but a necessary requirement for any artist should be able to travel between a detail-oriented and a holistic view.
I totally agree. I like my photographs to show what I am seeing during the shoot, not some idealised version of it. But I have just flicked through the Jan edition of UK Vogue and, excluding the paparazzi style and catwalk shots, I got to page 100 without seeing a single image that did not look obviously photoshopped.

__________________
Adam Fraise Photography
http://www.adamfraise.com
  Reply With Quote
13-12-2010
  82
backstage pass
 
Join Date: May 2009
Gender: homme
Posts: 692
i have no problem with photoshop! it can be pretty useful sometimes,but what i don't like about it,is that they are over use it in make up campaigns!!!you can't eved read her facial expressions!!it's just bad!

  Reply With Quote
27-07-2011
  83
backstage pass
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Madrid
Gender: femme
Posts: 660
L'Oréal's Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington ad campaigns banned
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...erts-ad-banned
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...=feeds-newsxml

I heard this in the photoshop disasters' thread, thanks to jml2 and coco24 I think the news fits well here.

  Reply With Quote
06-08-2011
  84
front row
 
rosiecheeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Neverland
Gender: femme
Posts: 235
Photoshop or retouching are a necessary evil. On one hand you can't really blame anyone for using it; because if I were a company selling clothes or make up, you want to make them look as good as possible, and where the lighting, the model or the make up has failed you fill in the gaps. A little, a lot, or just too much.
On the other hand, even if we KNOW that what we see isn't real, it somehow affects me still. I notice that whenever I read lots of magazines or see a lot of photos of shows with their great lighting and thinner than thin girls, I start to be much more insecure. Even though I know that it is a lot of fake and enhancement that makes them look that good.

That's how I feel, but I do not have a definitive answer as to what one should do about this..

  Reply With Quote
11-08-2011
  85
clever ain't wise
 
iluvjeisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Gender: femme
Posts: 13,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosiecheeks View Post
Photoshop or retouching are a necessary evil. On one hand you can't really blame anyone for using it; because if I were a company selling clothes or make up, you want to make them look as good as possible, and where the lighting, the model or the make up has failed you fill in the gaps. A little, a lot, or just too much.
On the other hand, even if we KNOW that what we see isn't real, it somehow affects me still. I notice that whenever I read lots of magazines or see a lot of photos of shows with their great lighting and thinner than thin girls, I start to be much more insecure. Even though I know that it is a lot of fake and enhancement that makes them look that good.

That's how I feel, but I do not have a definitive answer as to what one should do about this..
I guess the problem is that it's their job to make the ads look appealing. It's simply not appealing to see the same idiotic filter, the same silly tricks over and over.

  Reply With Quote
12-08-2011
  86
front row
 
rosiecheeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Neverland
Gender: femme
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvjeisa View Post
I guess the problem is that it's their job to make the ads look appealing. It's simply not appealing to see the same idiotic filter, the same silly tricks over and over.
What tricks exactly?

  Reply With Quote
12-08-2011
  87
don't look down
 
tigerrouge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Béal Feirste
Gender: femme
Posts: 14,475
We look to the pages of fashion magazines for fantasy, but it used to be that those effects were created by experience and skill - with lighting and angles - and constrained by other things - such as time and cost of film - and from that combination of factors, pictures were produced that had some degree of spirit and soul. Even when visual perfection was achieved, there was still a sense of connection with the person in the shot.

These days, everything can be created so cheaply, that it's become a plastic world of disposable imagery, where you can take a thousand shots without having to think too much about it, and piece together body parts until you get the picture you desire, post-processing all signs of imperfection from people until you end up with a fantasy world so flat, it diminishes imagination.

__________________
You're perfect, yes, it's true. But without me, you're only you.
Status: Online
 
Reply With Quote
30-07-2016
  88
tfs star
 
CholoChic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Peru
Gender: homme
Posts: 1,649
I think Photoshop starts when you wash your face and there is a long way to make a precious picture so when we see Maria Antoniette paint we have to think that she was "photoshoped" by her artist.

__________________
Please visit and like (if you like it) my Cholochic, thank you!
  Reply With Quote
26-02-2018
  89
windowshopping
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: New York
Gender: femme
Posts: 20
I know this isn't exactly Photoshop, but the use of Facetune is so widespread these days. Almost every girl I know at school facetunes herself before posting the picture on Instagram. You don't even have to be technically proficient to alter your body in a photograph any more - you just need to download a free app. I believe Beyoncé and Kim K were two celebs who were accused of facetuning their photos (badly). You could see the distortions in the background, like curved/wavy steps and walls.

These days, any girl with an iPhone can make herself look model thin. At school, it's kind of shocking sometimes to run into girls I follow on Instagram and realize they are actually 5-15 pounds heavier than they make themselves look online. It also must give them so much anxiety when their friends upload pictures that they haven't gotten to edit themselves in, so they have to detag themselves. It's just a lot, and I wonder how all of this affects the girls' body images. There should be a medical term for this lol. Social media body dysmorphia?

I'm 100% sure Instagram "models" do it too, and the worst is when they preach fitness, healthy eating, body acceptance and self-love, when really they are distorting what they really look like. This just adds to the unattainable standard of beauty and because their reach is so wide, a lot of their followers who are often young girls must feel really insecure: "I'm following all of her healthy eating and workout tips but I'm still not as thin/fit as her! Maybe it's just my body type and I have to push myself harder than she does..." Natasha Oakley from @abikiniaday is guilty of this, although I believe she hires a professional retoucher as the quality of her photos are too high for it to be just Facetune. If you look at paparazzi pics of her online, you can see she's bigger and not as toned in real life. What annoys me is that she preaches about healthy living etc. when really, she just hires someone who is good at Photoshop.


Last edited by domenica; 26-02-2018 at 05:17 PM.
  Reply With Quote
26-02-2018
  90
windowshopping
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: New York
Gender: femme
Posts: 20
Here's a Daily Mail article calling her out: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...s-not-one.html

  Reply With Quote
Reply
Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Tags
effects, photoshop, society
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"


 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:43 PM.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
TheFashionSpot.com is a property of TotallyHer Media, LLC, an Evolve Media LLC company. ©2018 All rights reserved.