Someone on Twitter sent me a link to a list of the most controversial mag covers of all time and on it was this one. I remember it well. Back in the nineties there was quite the media storm when someone everyone looked at this cover and said “WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO SARAH MICHELLE GELLAR’S ARM”.
She had a baby girl yesterday so there’s that.
What I love is how many people would have signed off on that cover. The art director. The editor. The sub-editors. The publisher. The printer. And nobody, NOBODY said “You know what? We’ve re-touched this shot so much she now has a totally deformed arm.”
From memory, that same shot was bought by either Cosmo or Cleo (they blur, even for me, ESPECIALLY for me) and had to run with something over the deformed arm. To hide it. Not that there’s anything wrong with deformed arms (please do not write to me if you have a deformed arm or know anyone with a deformed arm). It’s just not ideal to make a person’s arm deformed with an air-brush.
You know?
The National Body Image Advisory Group is due to present our report and recommendations to the Minister for Youth & Sport, Kate Ellis in the next few weeks. It will include an outline of a proposed voluntary media code of conduct. Can’t say more about that yet. Watch this space.
But this week there is some interesting news out of France about re-touching and air-brushing. Reuters reports…
PARIS (Reuters) – French politicians want to stamp a “health
warning” on photographs of models that are altered in order to make
them more appealing; part of a campaign against eating disorders.
French parliamentarian Valerie Boyer, a member of President Nicolas
Sarkozy’s UMP party, and some 50 other politicians proposed the law to
fight what they see as a warped image of women’s bodies in the media.
“These images can make people believe in a reality that often does
not exist,” Boyer said in a statement on Monday, adding that the law
should apply to press photographs, political campaigns, art photography
and images on packaging as well as advertisements.
Under the proposed law, all enhanced photos would be accompanied by
a line saying: “Photograph retouched to modify the physical appearance
of a person.”
Digitally enhanced photographs have been at the centre of a string
of scandals; two years ago, Paris Match altered a photo of Sarkozy to
remove chubby love handles.
Luxury brands and fashion magazines have been accused of digitally
making models look thinner, enhancing their breasts, whitening teeth,
lengthening legs and erasing wrinkles.
Boyer said being confronted with unrealistic standards of female
beauty could lead to various kinds of psychological problems, in
particular eating disorders.
Breaking the law, proposed last week, would be punished with a fine
of 37,500 euros ($54,930), or up to 50 percent of the cost of the
advertisement.
Thoughts? Do you think something like this could work? Should it happen here? Is re-touching totally out of control and can you even notice it in magazines anymore or are your eyes just accustomed?
OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK OUT…
I’m really worried about Gwyneth’s head
What if men’s penises were re-touched?
Why small boobs don’t exist in Hollywood
Keira Knightly – boobs by photoshop
Comments
69 Comments so far
loading...
I think it’s funny when nipples are photoshopped out… I think it’s even more hilarious when the picture is of a woman wearing a kinky costume/sexy lingerie that is completely sheer over the breasts, or has cut outs, or is made of netted material… OBVIOUSLY the nipples are going to show!!! WHY oh WHY would they photoshop them out!? Don’t say censorship because it was in a sex shop and again at Sexpo one year that I saw these images on the packaging for various costumes!! Lol!!
As for the warnings about photoshop- I guess for me I can’t see how they would work- a general disclaimer perhaps? I like the Girlfriend magazine “reality check” buttons that go on pictures saying something like “this shot took X# makeup artists X# fashion people etc. etc. to look this good” or “it took 10,000 photos to get this one cover image” they put things in perspective and actually relate it back to the reader’s life. They also sometimes answer the why the photo was made/included the way it is.
Things need to be related to the viewer for it to have an effect. Like the smokers warnings on cigarette packets- when I worked in a supermarket alot of men would request “smoking when pregnant harms your baby” as the only warning on their cigarette packet because since men don’t get pregnant they were desensitised to it. Women on the otherhand would specifically request not to have the pregnancy-related warning but were happy to have a warning about a gangrenous foot or a diseased lung since they themselves had not experienced lung disease/gangrene etc (yet) but had already had children. People would request the warnings that least effected them- some didn’t want lung disease warnings because it was too close to home for them. I think for something to have an affect on people it needs to be related to them directly and put into their world perspective.
Something like “this image was created in a professional environment with access to technology A/B/C and fashions A/B/C” I think would have more effect on women reading Cleo/Cosmo etc. than something that said “photograph has been modified”… Relate it to us!! Don’t keep it in the techno-loop!! If you don’t regularly work with photoshop or the usage/creation of photoshop images the disclosure of the airbrushing is not going to mean much to you- saying “this woman isn’t real without technology” says to me “she’s not real!??! Is she an alien!?!? Does she really have four legs and a tail!?!?” It doesn’t tell me how it was done or what was done or why it was done- that’s what I want to know- THE WHY!?!?!
Sorry bout the rant peoples!! xoxo
loading...
Have you noticed the disclaimers on some mascara ad’s?! “This was not achieved by the product. Individual results may vary” or something along those lines? So funny!!
loading...
I couldn’t see it either, but her midriff is off – no belly button and it appears to be made of beige cardboard.
loading...
I recently saw a mascara ad featuring Eva Longoria, her lashes were so ‘plumped’ she appeared to have twin catterpillars sheltering in her eye sockets. It looked ridiculous.
Another shocker on the photoshop front I have seen was a school photo, one naughty child must have flipped the bird in an otherwise good class shot so the offending arm was removed and replaced with a copy of his other arm.. problem is, they forgot to mirror the image! Forget two left feet….
loading...
Mmm, this is the Rachel Zoe photoshop pic.
They photoshopped her from a size 0 to a size 8. (I think she looks better when she isn’t a skeletor…)
loading...
you’re hilarious
loading...
I once saw a picture of Rachel Zoe that had been photoshopped to make her bigger. She was a size 0 and they plumped her up a size. The side-by-side was startling.
loading...
Can you post the other worst covers in history mia?? I love to see them.
loading...
Ummmm…. Where is the photo?
loading...
yup – thats what I thought – it’ll always be the question ‘did they just have a pimple removed, or is it REALLY possible to be that thin and still have breasts? On so many occasions?’ That would get to me…the not knowing exactly.
loading...
Photoshopped images only prove what everyone knows- thinner is more beautiful. No magazine ever photoshops anybody to make them appear chubbier. I don’t see what good warnings would do- We all know that they are photoshopped, but if you’re telling us that they most certainly are every time we see a picture it’s only re-enforcing that thin is hot. I don’t want that wake-up call all the time.
Oh, and for the record I am not some thin person rubbing it in your faces and thinking I am beautiful. In fact, quite the opposite.
loading...
Agreed!!!
loading...
I am SO SICK OF AIRBRUSHING!!!!! I remember being appalled at a Cosmo (or was it Cleo?) cover a few years ago, also of Sarah Michelle Gellar. Her back was basically airbrushed out, to reveal a bizarre (albeit, smooth) bit of… I don’t know what. But it did not look normal. That was my first experience of being grossed out by airbrushing, the latest was on a major newspaper’s web page today. I am loving the current Avon ads with Reece Witherspon in them (which are probably also airbrushed, but at least she appears to have pores in these).
loading...
It also looks like she has no hand – her hand is bent at a very odd angle.
loading...
It’s Geller’s LEFT arm – the one underneath the writing – where is her elbow???
loading...
Thanks
loading...
I’ve looked and I’ve looked but I can’t see what’s wrong with SMG’s arm!?!?! Isn’t she just bending it funny?
loading...
Bravo to the French Govt…It’s the young people that are at risk of eating disorders as they are so impressionable – we have to do something to protect them. I hope out Govt. quickly follows.
loading...
How were they planning to explain that to their dates? Oh no, no one will notice you don’t actually look like your photo…
loading...
I know it’s wishful thinking but WHY does there have to be so much airbrushing anyway? Can’t we all just ‘get real’ ??
loading...
I love STYD but they have been guilty of some absolutely awful retouching. I remember a cover a year or two ago featuring Sarah Jessica Parker and not only did she look 20 years younger, but she had no wrinkles, pores, mole on her chin, or bump on her nose. I seriously did not recognise her.
loading...
I think it’s a brilliant idea. But my mind constantly wanders from the point – don’t you think it will make another problem (may not be a big one, I understand that) of everyone asking and wanting to know what exactly on the image was altered? If its a supermodel – we all know they are pretty gorgeous, but if it’s stamped with the disclaimer, will we be able to tell what it was that was changed? or will they tell us if we ask?
loading...
she looks pretty damn good – last night in United States of Tara while in her undies and bra – I am completely impressed!
loading...
i think she is gorgeous !
loading...
I’d like to be airbrushed to look like Toni Collette…
loading...
Indigo is stocked at some newsagents. Otherwise you can get both mags from their websites
http://www.indigo4girls.com/
http://www.realmagazine.net.au/
loading...
I don’t have a deformed arm but I have one very sticky-out ear & would be thrilled & delighted if it was airbrushed. I want my insides to reflect my outsides, and on the inside, my ears are both very flat.
Having said that, yes, there should be a notice when an image is digitally altered. Even if it is my ear.
loading...
Hey there, are these mags just sold in the newsagent? Would love to get them for my 10 year old.
loading...
Brilliant idea. Brilliant. Its only after reading your book that i went ‘oooh so thats why the girl wearing the bikini and ugg boots in the SNOW didn’t look cold AT ALL’
See i think it will help – yes, the pictures look good and are just for flicking through – but some of us try to manage that level of perfection and when we can’t ‘aren’t good enough’ and yes , deeper psych issues, but still, a ‘this is not real’ statement would help me…then again…i’d start wondering which bits were/weren’t…might make it worse…what if she was thinner and they made her fatter? what if they just erased one pimple but thats her actual body size? GAH!
All the same – be interesting to see how many skin care commercial photos would end up with that label….
loading...
Photoshopping and enhancing pictures to sell products is big business, and I was the first to applaud the Dove “Real Beauty” campaign, where the model famously said that after being Photoshopped, she didn’t recognise herself, and neither did her photographer boyfriend who took the original photos.
But where does it end?
Seriously, who hasn’t thought about getting some ‘Glamour Shots’, not for discreet placement in the photo album but for being placed, front and centre, in the family room?
My former Sister in Law asked my daughter to photoshop some pictures the other day and the daughter was able to skim a good 20 kgs off her size (My SIL is a big girl). Why the enhancement? Why, to place on a dating site profile of course! Then there is the friend of mine who carefully removes all skin blemishes and pock marks from his pics before he loads them onto Facebook. “Here’s me and the missus at a restaurant with friends’ Oh really????
It’s a delusion, beginning with the way we contort our faces for that bathroom mirror ‘look’ as we pose while we inspect our faces for spinach between our teeth. No one thinks they take a good photo and Photoshop has made it possible to send out photoshop imaged bathroom-face to every friend on Facebook. It plays into our biggest self-image fears.
So, please, don’t start bagging the fashion editors and mags – all they are doing is teaching us how to behave. More fool us.
loading...
Magazines are for flicking through. This seems a bit much for me just because I can’t imagine people sitting about wasting time analysing the pictures in that much detail and comparing themselves to them. If they do, they’re going to need more than a “this has been retouched” statement to help them.
Having said that, I recently discovered the retouch tool in iphoto and have been loving removing wrinkles, dark circles and pimples from my photos before forwarding them to family. And giving myself a better tan.
loading...
as a mother of a fourteen year old daughter, I’d absolutely like to see the “art departments” admit when they change how someone looks so they can sell a product. I’m sure it’s all been done for years and years and years in advertising but in this age of internet access and digital enhancement it’s all gotten so out of hand {pardon the pun re: “the arm”.
The ways girls these days communicate with each other and mimic celebrities is just gob smacking… and I’m quite sure I don’t truly know half of what she’s up to on the internet…. {despite her having to use it in the same room as us ….}
loading...
Haven’t Girlfriend, and to a lesser extent Dolly, being tryyyyying to do this? I know GF has ‘reality check’ stamps on things about how many people it took to make the model look good, and Dolly did that no airbrush issue (is it ongoing?). Are these things seen as a real push or a token effort considering the crap both these mags still push.
loading...
RE Ads for mascara – YES I know what you mean! The thing that gets me most about those ads though is that the models skin is airbrushed soooo much that you can’t see any pores or under-eye lines or anything such as that. It’s so unnatural!
loading...
Oh SNAP !! me too Judy – but you know what ? I get sucked in … I am a mascaraholic !!!
loading...
Thanks for reminding me to post about this. I have something I meant to do on this exact topic. Will get to it….
loading...
BTW : the new cover of Shop Til You Drop is featuring a neckless Chloe Sevingny !!!
loading...
you crack me up mia about telling people not to write to you if they have a deformed arm….it’s easy to see you’ve been doing this blog for awhile as your one step ahead of everyone…
loading...
Yeh I’d like to see some sort of warning detailing what has been photoshopped, eg. models breasts have been enlarged via photo editing, models legs have been thinned, etc…
loading...
You should check out Indigo or Real magazines. The former is for younger girls to promote body image, and the latter is for the 12-17yo range. Both aim to promote positive body image, creativity and inspiration in young girls.
loading...
I think it is a great idea. I for one would like to know how many images we see are photoshopped and we do not realise it. Those pics of celebs at the beach for instance, “paparazzi shots”, are any of them airbrushed?
loading...
And she got John Cusack! Mmmm ..
loading...
Beyonce? Big? I think that is just a sign of how warped our perceptions of what “normal” is. I was a few metres away from her the other night and she is certainly not “big”. Curvy yes.
loading...
how about not airbrushing in the first place. why is it necessary anyway? is that naive of me? is there anything wrong with seeing a celebrity as their real size?
loading...
Whilst we may all “know” that advertisements, covers, editorial photos etc have been retouched, your eye gets so used to seeing them that you process them as normal. Exactly the reason someone raised in the Beyonce thread in response to someone posting “She’s big, isn’t she”. If you have a label reminding you that the image has been retouched, I think it might help.
loading...
I remember reading a magazine years and years and years ago with a picture of a model on the front who actually had a square chunk taken out of her inner thigh. Veeeery bad retouching. I knew someone whose boyfriend worked retouching porn photos (apparently gets very boring after a while!) and if you think lash inserts and missing arms are bad, whooo, the things that went on in porn pictures?! Lordy!
loading...
Must love dogs?? i felt the same way!
loading...
I have an 11 year old daughter and I would LOVE to see big fat labels stuck over airbrushed models and images stating NOT AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL.
loading...
I think it’s a great idea. Sometimes images are re-touched so well that it doesn’t look photoshopped, and you’re led to believe that the person actually as skin that perfext and legs that toned. It would be reasssuring to have some kind of a stamp there.
and that magazine cover is insane! That re-touching is totally OTT.
loading...
I read several blogs where the author has suffered from an ED or extreme negative, controlling thoughts about their body. I’ve done it, we’ve all done it. But one thing I am realising in my 30′s (yes, it takes a loooong time!) is that while we all may pick ourselves to pieces on a daily basis trying to measure up to people who probably aren’t even that ‘real’ (physically or personality wise), we actually all have the most amazing bodies ever. They take us to places we want to go, they help us do the most mundane things and the most amazing things. There are days when I don’t see that, but we’re not perfect and we can improve every day. My mum always says to take a look in the mirror every day and say, “Everyday in every way, I am getting better and better!”.
It’s a ball of cheese, yes . .. but it’s something!