I posted about photoshopped/airbrushed/retouched images a little while back, so this video piqued my interest when I stumbled upon it on MySpace's Impact page.

It brings up the idea of putting warnings to let people know when the images have been retouched. The idea is to remind people that this is not really what the models and actresses look like and, therefore, it's impossible for regular people to ever look like that. My first thought- which was mentioned in the video- is that it wouldn't necessarily work that well. As the video points out, cigarette boxes have warnings on them, but millions of people still smoke.

Maybe it's a start? What do you think?

4 comments:

At Wed Jul 09, 06:06:00 PM Samina said...

Hopefully ppl can tell the difference between a "Photoshop" picture and a "regular" picture looks like. In case there are ppl out there that don't... a before and after magazine should be published. I'm game to buy.

 
At Wed Jul 09, 10:49:00 PM Sally said...

Haha that's true. The problem is that now pretty much EVERYTHING is retouched. So seeing that over and over again hits girls and young women even harder. Sadly, once something has affected you that deeply psychologically, it's hard to reverse that.

 
At Fri Jul 11, 07:55:00 PM lindabeth said...

Actually, I think most people cannot tell the difference between photoshopped and non. Because almost any pic you see in a mag or online is doctored in some way. We ought to be able to, since clearly the snapshots we take with our camera don't look like the Cosmo cover image, but we tend to attribute the difference to the their superior aesthetics and not to photographic manipulation, digital or otherwise.

Photography manipulates, period, even before the age of Photoshop. Ask any photographer (which I am one). Get the right lighting, softer focus, etc, and you can make an "average-looking" person look "great", even before Photoshop. Not to mention they are overly "posed" and positioned, and often uncomfortably, to get their hair/ass/legs look "just right."

And while most people acknowledge that photos are doctored, I think we tend to view them as being "touched up' not "altered" to the point of being a lie. Most people I talk to think celebrity women for the most part look the way they appear in mags, with just some small fixes. Little do they know they probably wouldn't look any differently at a female celeb walking down the street than they do any other attractive woman.

I bet some of this is because men's photos tend to not be altered much less and much differently than women's. So when men see pics of men, they see a more reasonable representation of themselves than of women.

I think the suggestion of a warning is interesting-it may not be effective, but it's damn clever.

 
At Tue Jul 15, 11:00:00 PM Sally said...

lindabeth, you've pretty much summed up the issue. I've bee thinking more about it and I think the warning might actually be a good start to this problem. My preference would be one that then lets you check out what the original pic looked like though that's never gonna happen.

 

Post a Comment


feed me! yummy!

Jump off the Bridge

the archive

what I blog about

communities & stats

trophy case

brillante weblog award