Not Always Meant to Flatter

Retouched photos are no stranger to the competitive world of politics. Usually candidates or elected officials are made to look more appealing just like celebrities. However sometimes retouching can offer a different opportunity. Take a look at these before and after photos of then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

   

Notice the menacing eyes in the second picture? This rather offensive photo was quickly removed from the USA Today website after criticism and replaced with something much closer to the real thing (yet still retouched!)

Read more about this story here.

Retouching: A Hollywood Demand, Not Request

Retouching has become so mainstream today that almost every celebrity has their own freelance retoucher to perfect images of them. Publicists demand this, and what used to be a rarity has become common place among Hollywood elites.

So, these images of perfection can be seen in most (if not every) magazine and television ad. Editors assume that readers understand that the images they see are altered in some way. But, does everyone really have a grasp on just how drastically these images are retouched? Probably not. This can cause feeling of stress for people, especially girls, to achieve the impossible. And when they can't, feelings of failure, hopelessness and loss of control set in. These feelings can be linked to eating disorders, such as anorexia and bulimia.

Faith Hill - Not Pretty Enough

  This is a 2007 Rebook cover featuring then 39 year old Faith Hill.  Spot all of the edits:

1. Extra hair.
2. Smoothed eyes.
3. Smaller, smoother, cheeks.
4. Smaller arm
5. Smaller shoulder.
6. Back perfected.
7. Skin tone changed.
8. Dress line changed.
9. Right hand removed.

Is this too much editing or should we simply accept that ALL magazine covers are highly retouched?

Not Just Females

Women are not the only ones being retouched in an artificial quest for perfection.  Unsuspecting men are also targeted by hollywood artists for the purpose of a virtually unatainable figure of masculine idealism.  Washboard abs and bulging arms stand for more than the "norm" of male body image.  What does this do for the self-esteem of young men?  How could this effect the perception and expectations of women and their views of a male figure?

Real Women? or Real Hypocrisy?

According to a New Yorker article, published in May of 2008, "Pascal Dangin is the premier retoucher of fashion photographs."  In the March 2008 issue of Vogue, 144 of images that made it into the magazine were "tweaked" by Dangin (36 fashion pictures, the cover, and 107 advertisments from clients).  Clearly, Dangin is one of the best retouchers in one of the best in the business. Here is a brief excerpt from the article:

I mentioned the Dove ad campaign that proudly featured lumpier-than-usual “real women” in their undergarments. It turned out that it was a Dangin job. “Do you know how much retouching was on that?” he asked. “But it was great to do, a challenge, to keep everyone’s skin and faces showing the mileage but not looking unattractive.”

After Dove received bad press, Dangin claimed he only worked on the Dove Pro-Age campaign and only removed dusted and corrected the image colors.  Given the statement above, that seems unlikely.  Dove claims they specifically requested no retouching.  However, if the photos were edited by an expert like Dangin, how would they know? 

Unless the work is sub-par, it is impossible to know whether or not an image has been retouched.  The safe bet: if it is an image in a magazine or an advertisement, then it has been heavily retouched.

Not Only Magazines

Magazines are not the only industy which retouches photos. When a big movie is coming out, photoshoppers will edit movie posters and the like for "better looking" actors and actresses. Although many posters are taken straight from a sence in the movie, sometimes there are photos taken to capture the essences of the film. Here is a untouched photo of Kate Winslet at the movie premire of Last Chance Harvey and to the right is the retouched photo for the promo poster. Notice they took away the crows feet, softened her skin and norrowed her cheeks. In the movie she showed many of the features you see in the photo on the left, but those are not the qualities that the producers wanted the people to see in the posters. What does this do for the people who look up to these people? Can their perceptions change of their favortie actress or actor? What are we suppose to expect from a movie when retouching is done?

Healthy Weight Loss?

This cover of Self magazine offers insight into losing weight and looking your best "your" way.  Suggesting healthy ways to lose this weight Self features a picture of a lighter Kelly Clarkson.  In fact Kelly has lost no weight and does not plan on it.  "I'm never trying to lose weight - or gain it. I'm just being!" said Kelly.  Clearly then we can tell how everything from her neck, to her arms, and down to her waste have been dramatically toned down to fit the theme of the cover.  This is not even the real Kelly Clarkson and she does not endorse this photo as such, so how are readers supposed to?  Does this magazine serve to embrace women of all sizes even if, as in Kelly's case, they are still beautiful?

Magazine Perfection

The perfection complexion.  Good news.  Girls no longer need Sephora or MAC to look beautiful.  They just need photoshop.  How are girls supposed to feel okay about their bodies when all the images in magazines are not even real?