This photo isn't retouched at all! Haven't you heard? Partial hip removal is the new weight-loss trend sweeping Hollywood!
All the leading ladies are doing it!
There is absolutely, literally (literally!) no question about whether this image was altered-- it was. The question is, to what extent was it altered. Little things like blotchy skin, shadows, flyaways are always fixed. But a retoucher can obviously take it to that next step where body parts are slimmed, posture is changed, etc.
@lafleur: Ugh, she looks like a bobble head afterward. I much prefer the "frumpy" version that doesn't look like her body was left in the dryer too long.
I completely agree with the photographer. Anyone who has worked in this industry can tell that the image has been worked on. It may not have been the final proof, but color corrections and contrast adjustments were made. It also seems that her eyes were whitened amongst other things. It's very easy to do a quick retouch when selecting the final product, which helps to give a better idea about the end result. This is probably what Demi got ahold of.
Edited by sydbarrettsaves, emissary of hell at 11/20/09 5:24 PM
sydbarrettsaves, emissary of hell was starred
sydbarrettsaves, emissary of hell was unstarred
honestly I wouldn't have noticed anything amiss if it hadn't been pointed out to me. it just looks like she's quite thin with narrow hips. but the most disturbing thing is her butchery of the English language. *shudder*
I have mixed feelings about this. Half of me is thinking, "Who cares?" Not, mind you, because photoshopping isn't a problem, but rather because calling Demi out on her photo seems tasteless and petty. The magazine's editorial staff and photographer should be held accountable, not the actress, in my opinion.
On the other hand, I find it really annoying that Demi would claim that the photo is not re-touched. It comes across as paranoid and shallow--like when people have had obvious plastic surgery (cough, cough) and claim to the contrary. She's beautiful and having had help by re-touching or cosmetic procedures does not take away from that. I fail to see the point in lying.
Judging how her inside wrist is kind of pixel-y looking, and how the gathered fabric seems to stick out there more than anywhere else, it seems photoshopped. I guess the lesson we could perhaps learn is how jaded photoshopping has made us all. We all just assume it's photoshopped, because so much is. And it's hard to tell these days what is reality or what is not, because of just how much is fake. #demimoorephotoshop
To be fair ladies, that's kind of what my hips look like. This does not mean I am super skinny (I am not), I just happen to carry my weight more like a dude( in my thighs and stomach. When I am standing, I can literally feel the bones of my pelvis right under the skin. So I'm hoping against hope that she just carries her weight like me, because I have never ever seen a person with fat distribution like mine even in so called "shape" or "size" articles.
That being said, there are a lot of internet nerds with mad photo shop skills. If you must retouch, at least get someone who can do a better job than what we see on Ms. Moore.
@jskenandore: It's not that her hips are so small. It's that her hip is one size, and then it appears to jut sharply out beneath the sarong-thing she is wearing, like someone sliced a divot out of her upper thigh or something. #demimoorephotoshop
Love google. Turns out Pascal did the photoshop for the Dove "real" campaign and found a quote of his about retouching: "I want people to have an understanding of the skeleton and musculature and how it works. There is nothing worse than looking at an ankle or a calf that’s wrong. This is what bad retouching can do—you see in magazines girls having their legs slimmed and they no longer have tibias and femurs, and it’s weird." [www.newyorker.com]#demimoorephotoshop
This could very well be shopped but also could be a fairly true reflection of real life. I did a quick check in the mirror in the same pose, with my leg in approximately the same angle. It did appear that my hip was narrower than my thigh. (and I am not as thin as Demi.) After taking years of life drawing and anatomy classes, this seems pretty plausible.
@tesapie: Yeah, I tried it too. I think there was some photoshopping going on, (I don't think anyone's hip is just straight like that) but I don't think it's as extreme as people are making it out to be. #demimoorephotoshop
Edited by Remedios Varo can't see no huevos. at 11/11/09 3:40 PM
Remedios Varo can't see no huevos. was starred
Remedios Varo can't see no huevos. was unstarred
The retouchers "did not do anything unusual or out of the ordinary on Demi Moore for the photo on the cover of W." Of course not -- because photoshopping women to look like praying mantisis is the norm in this industry. Nice doublenewspeak W. #demimoorephotoshop
I said she looked gaunt that day - and said it was not as redonk as the pic below (the fired toothpick RL model) - but I may have been hasty. When will they stop making women look unnatural? #demimoorephotoshop
11/20/09
11/20/09
All the leading ladies are doing it!
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
On the other hand, I find it really annoying that Demi would claim that the photo is not re-touched. It comes across as paranoid and shallow--like when people have had obvious plastic surgery (cough, cough) and claim to the contrary. She's beautiful and having had help by re-touching or cosmetic procedures does not take away from that. I fail to see the point in lying.
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/11/09
That being said, there are a lot of internet nerds with mad photo shop skills. If you must retouch, at least get someone who can do a better job than what we see on Ms. Moore.
11/12/09
11/11/09
[www.newyorker.com] #demimoorephotoshop
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Just wanted to say ... nice "dress," Demi and W.
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/12/09
11/11/09