I don't have a problem with color correction or anything. I think their problem is when they digitally make someone thinner or smooth out wrinkles on an ad for anti-wrinkle cream. It makes sense to me. If the photoshop misleads someone about a product, thats bad and there should be rules against it.
@KentuckyBabe: Color correction may seem innocuous, but think of what it means for POC. Many color "corrections" blatantly promote a white standard of beauty. See: [jezebel.com]
I would also like a note on unphotoshopped images that says:
Schlegs,
It's okay! You don't have to look like this lady. It's her JOB to look like this! She's genetically gifted. She has time to jog 7 days a week and has a private chef. She gets daily facials! No one who has to walk the dog and get expense reports done looks like this on a Wednesday. Don't be sad!
I don't know, it feels a bit like treating the symptom and not the illness. Photoshop is just a wonderful tool that can be used for a number of things other than erasing cellulite, and putting a warning saying that said cellulite might have been erased doesn't change the fact that it was. If we don't start taking away power from a sexist industry that capitalizes on exploiting women's insecurities and assigns value to women according to their fuckability, no band-aid fix is ever going to work.
@sarasasa: I think it becomes a question of finding a quantifiable way to decrease the power these images have. And since in most cases it's the viewer giving the image its importance, I can't think of a better way to do it. We women are half the market and half the population. Clearly some of us are buying this stuff -- and buying into what it's telling us.
So then what happens to expectations for models? I mean, the reason they produce photoshopped images is because that's what we like to see, at least to an extent, right? Well if that's what we want to see, and that's what they want us to see, what happens when models can't give it? They're already expected to be so thin and perfect all the time. I don't know. I worry.
@Blueberry26: Worry for the actors, too! With high definition, we're either going to have to stop caring about wrinkles and imperfections or send them all to the plastic surgeon's.
@Blueberry26: I'm not sure it is what we actually want to see. I think we've just been fed it so long and told it's just part of some harmless "fantasy" that we've become hyper critical of reality.
High def has caused an interesting sort of...redefining of what's possible and how people are going to look. The Office, for instance, tries to keep things subtle.
I think this would be a great start. We all know this stuff is 99% fake, but I swear, MANY people don't. My father really and truly thinks that people look like they do on magazine covers.
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs. Sarah.of.a.Lesser.Hobbit): My niece showed me a picture of Selena Gomez (I'm not sure of her name but she's a new Disney singer/actress/brand) and said, "She's so pretty and all she wears is lip gloss" and then got this sad look on her face. I may or may not have FLIPPED out and explained the complicated make up and photo shopping that goes into making these girls look the way they do... with internet examples. As cheesy as it sounds: DO IT FOR THE CHILDRENS!
@BrutallyHonestBabes (aka Mrs. Sarah.of.a.Lesser.Hobbit): You raise a good point. I immediately thought of this in terms of how it would help me interpret these images. A whole other aspect of this is how it would influence viewers who are not trying to look like these images, but instead are trying to date/fuck/possess women who look like these images and the problematic expectations being created in their minds.
@schlegs84 thinks John Galt can suck it.: I have nieces too, and I see the exact same thing.Young girls do not know that the photos they see are altered, and I think it makes a big difference in terms of self-perception to know that these celebrity women don't really look like that either. Even as a grown woman who knows about photoshop, I am sometimes shocked when I see "before and after" mag covers because they make so many changes to things that I wouldn't even think of. A reminder for us all might not be a bad idea.
I don't think this would help anyone. I know how much the images are Photoshopped. What bothers me is the expectation that I, and other women, will and should look like that anyway.
@SarahMC: I know too, but I find myself forgetting when I'm looking at them. Which is ridiculous cubed, because I'm the one turning to my own thighs and wondering why they don't look like that!! Pragmatism goes right out the window. Though from the comments, it seems most people don't have these flashes of memory loss when seeing a lady mags or fashion ads.
@JerseyGrrrl: Yes, that too. I know in my head it's not real but I aspire to look that way because, well, that's what I'm being told from every angle.
I have to agree with Downwithdebbie, though, that skinny people I see IRL make me feel worse about myself than the real or unreal skinny people on magazines.
@SarahMC: Really? Because sometimes I see a really thin girl and think, "I know she looks like she could be in magazines, but in real life I'm just not digging it." And/or, in real life, extreme thinness can often look sickly. But then, I don't live in a town populated with models - if you're super-thin in the Midwest, it's probably because you are sickly.
@rixatrix: I live in northern VA and work in DC. Just today I took a stroll around Georgetown during lunch and found myself envying other women's bodies. It's not that I wish I were stick-thin. But I'll see a woman whose thighs don't rub together walking in front of me and start feeling self-conscious.
@SarahMC: I feel that way about larger but well proportioned ladies. So many of my friends or cast members are thicker but have beautiful lines... it makes me very envious.
I think they should use a coding system, like they do for television programs, like so:
SS = Skin smoothed out and airbrushed to a wrinkle and blemish free age-free, monotone patina;
AE/LE = Arms/legs elongated to ridiculous proportion;
BFO = "Belly flab" obliterated;
PC = Parts Collage, or the taking of random pieces of a normal photo and sticking them on at odd angles to achieve a Frankenstein-like abomination of impossible anatomy.
This sounds like more silly faux-legislation from people trying to justify their jobs.... and yet, I think there may be something to it, at least for me.
I remember when we were all looking at those photos of Crystal Renn, and then there was a link to an un-Photoshopping one. For me, it was shocking --shocking!-- that she had cellulite**. Like it hadn't even occurred to me as a possibility. We believe what we see, many of us. Even though we're aware of technology in the backs of our minds. Something like this could have the two-fold result of reminding us what we're looking at (immediately!) and discouraging mags from excessive "editing" when it's not "necessary."
**And so, so comforting, oddly. Nobody can look like a model, not even a model!
I've seen both mascara and hair product ads in the UK which carry small print explaining that fake hair/lashes was used. They got 'em under the Fair Trades Act, I think. Trying to pass off the cosmetics as being able to do something they couldn't.
Jesus Christ, do I fume at the lack of regulation in the chemistry of American cosmetics. Actually holding advertisers accountable for their low-grade products? Mind-blowing. (Thank God for makeupalley.com/similar sites and reviews on drugstore.com!)
Hell, maybe even a little too much, sometimes...I pity employees who are work at "outed" companies when their employers use MAC when they're advertising for L'oreal....should I?
Enh. Not like MAC or pricier is always better than drugstore stuff anyway.
They need to do that shit for anti-aging stuff and any cream or serum customers actually rub into their skin, though....that's an entirely new problem together.
@bowleserised:
Excellent! That's like the US ads for various weight loss products touting "I lost 20 pounds in a month" with small print saying "results NOT typical".
@bowleserised: They do that here in Canada, too. I've noticed subtitles on mascara commercials that are all "we use fake lashes, but want you to use our mascara to look like this.";
@CParis, maude_flanders: I *think* there have been mutterings about anti-aging creams too, but I'd have to check. I may be remembering wrong. (oh and I meant the "Trade Descriptions Act" not Fair Trade Act)
I've wanted to pitch an article about the on-line cosmetics culture for years, but usually get told that it would cost a publication advertising revenue.
The FDA has gone for someone though:
@maude_flanders: I work in the beauty industry, and technically they do. They have special wording, like 'reduces the appearance of fine lines' instead of 'eliminates fine lines'. It's bull, because 99% of the skincare products out there do nothing for wrinkles, but as long as they adhere to the wording they can say whatever they want.
I just tell people - got to the goddamn dermatologist & get a prescription for a REAL anti-aging cream.
@rixatrix: Um I actually just gave myself a great idea for a craigslist industry, where I sell hot photos of myself to women who want cuter pictures on dating sites. Now I have to figure out how to make this happen, and I'll be rolling in dough.
We all know how successful cigarette warning labels have been!
Honestly, I applaud the thought behind the idea, but I don't think this is a serious way to attack the problem. The magazines are only one small part of an overall problem in this world, where people try to make women feel bad about themselves for myriad reasons. A warning label is not going to do as much as education and guidance from parents and support from loved ones.
I don't know if it needs a health warning, but I think a "photomanipulator's credit" might be nice. Put them right there with the art director and the photographer on the picture.
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
Schlegs,
It's okay! You don't have to look like this lady. It's her JOB to look like this! She's genetically gifted. She has time to jog 7 days a week and has a private chef. She gets daily facials! No one who has to walk the dog and get expense reports done looks like this on a Wednesday. Don't be sad!
Love,
People who need you to buy our stuff
09/22/09
A warning/label will prove to all of the young girls out there that the unattainable woman they are looking at, is imaginary.
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
High def has caused an interesting sort of...redefining of what's possible and how people are going to look. The Office, for instance, tries to keep things subtle.
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
I have to agree with Downwithdebbie, though, that skinny people I see IRL make me feel worse about myself than the real or unreal skinny people on magazines.
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
SS = Skin smoothed out and airbrushed to a wrinkle and blemish free age-free, monotone patina;
AE/LE = Arms/legs elongated to ridiculous proportion;
BFO = "Belly flab" obliterated;
PC = Parts Collage, or the taking of random pieces of a normal photo and sticking them on at odd angles to achieve a Frankenstein-like abomination of impossible anatomy.
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
I remember when we were all looking at those photos of Crystal Renn, and then there was a link to an un-Photoshopping one. For me, it was shocking --shocking!-- that she had cellulite**. Like it hadn't even occurred to me as a possibility. We believe what we see, many of us. Even though we're aware of technology in the backs of our minds. Something like this could have the two-fold result of reminding us what we're looking at (immediately!) and discouraging mags from excessive "editing" when it's not "necessary."
**And so, so comforting, oddly. Nobody can look like a model, not even a model!
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
Jesus Christ, do I fume at the lack of regulation in the chemistry of American cosmetics. Actually holding advertisers accountable for their low-grade products? Mind-blowing. (Thank God for makeupalley.com/similar sites and reviews on drugstore.com!)
Hell, maybe even a little too much, sometimes...I pity employees who are work at "outed" companies when their employers use MAC when they're advertising for L'oreal....should I?
Enh. Not like MAC or pricier is always better than drugstore stuff anyway.
They need to do that shit for anti-aging stuff and any cream or serum customers actually rub into their skin, though....that's an entirely new problem together.
09/22/09
Excellent! That's like the US ads for various weight loss products touting "I lost 20 pounds in a month" with small print saying "results NOT typical".
09/22/09
09/22/09
I've wanted to pitch an article about the on-line cosmetics culture for years, but usually get told that it would cost a publication advertising revenue.
The FDA has gone for someone though:
[www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com]
09/22/09
I just tell people - got to the goddamn dermatologist & get a prescription for a REAL anti-aging cream.
09/22/09
Would I still need to mention my visual deceit if I just use the photo of someone prettier than me?
09/22/09
09/22/09
09/22/09
Honestly, I applaud the thought behind the idea, but I don't think this is a serious way to attack the problem. The magazines are only one small part of an overall problem in this world, where people try to make women feel bad about themselves for myriad reasons. A warning label is not going to do as much as education and guidance from parents and support from loved ones.
09/22/09