Comments on: Is Photoshopping images lying?

By: Claudia

Claudia — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:37:36 +0000

I don’t know, but I don’t share a lot of people’s point of view on this subject. I don’t think there should be a disclaimer accompanying pictures that have been “photoshopped”. It is now a known fact virtually every photo we see from a fashion magazine has been worked on. I simply think this media is there to sell a dream and that people should know better… It is the parent’s responsibility to educate their children properly.

By: amanda

amanda — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 01:57:02 +0000

I personally think that pictures that have been subjected to photoshop should contain a disclaimer. In a society where young men and women are subjected to distorted ideas of what beauty really is there is a great need for disclaimers. Boys are grown up thinking that for a girl to truly be beautiful she needs to look like models in magazines. When men are shown pictures of normal women after just inanimate objects and think they are gorgeous but are then shown the same women after pictures of photoshopped models they are okay with that women they just gorgeous to get work done and lose weight to make herself look like that model. It is sick and wrong. Even with a disclaimer, there will still be problems. So instead of disclaimers I feel there needs to be a ban on photoshop in magazines. The women and men in magazines are beautiful with out the work and deserve to be seen in a positive light.

By: Aiko Scheuermann

Aiko Scheuermann — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:10 +0000

Seriously! Many thanks! I continually wanted to create in my site a little something like this. Can I have part of your blog post for my own webpage?

By: Lynn Indrizzo

Lynn Indrizzo — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:32:11 +0000

I think plastic surgery gone awry reflects the desire to look perfect. We’re already perfect. I love what photoshop can do but that final picture posted above doesn’t look real. I think photoshop can do wonderful things, especially if the subject is kept looking as close to the real thing as possible. As for the law…we have too many laws as it is. It is our own personal responsibility to know, and own, who we are. And who we are is not our flesh, bones, hair, eyes, etc. To quote Lao Tzu…”that which is real never changes”. We are more than we see, more than our bodies…and until we all realize that…REALLY realize that, we cannot be truly happy with ourselves. Photoshop that!

By: jaymz eberly

jaymz eberly — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:14:15 +0000

love your site :)
this is a hard one.. two parts to it…

where i do not like photoshop is when you look at a magazine and the girls are photoshopped so much it is not real.. but teens or even older women think they need to starve themselves to look like this.. women that will look in mirror and find fault in themselves and look so close and say, omg i have fat right here… look closer, see that little piece or i cant leave the house i have a pimple… this is not because they are wanting to find a mate … no person looks that close.. this girl who now opens her mouth like that is less attractive to a man haha.. we dont mind.. we will kiss a girl with a zit.. its normal not gross.. if they have a little fat.. nice.. some men want a marilyn monroe monroe looking women (count me in :)

but on the other hand… sure it is good to have photoshop to create art… maybe take off some fat cells that are not looking nice for the model.. maybe she scratched herself and yes it is ok to take off the pimple for the magazine.. i take off anything that is not normal for the woman.. but if moles i normally dim them unless model wants them off… i want to keep it looking like them.. if i do make the faces clear it better be for artistic purposes.. does this help get photography jobs? i dont think so… for one it puts you in a rank that all your photos will look like you get the best looking models.. all normal women will look at themselves and say.. i cant go take pics.. i do not look like that… it is sad.. all women are beautiful we as artists find that beauty and capture it,.. this is out talent as a photographer.. but some do not understand this.. that is why we have issues with people going to photographers that clearly are beginners ( i support them) but the model might say see i am no model.. and quite.. but this is the fact of magazines posting so much..

what do we do?
nothing…
what do we change?
well i say look at your work.. are you trying to get normal people or trying to get fake mag work…
i do wish we could love normal looking people.. quit making fun of ugly people that you feel is ugly.. this is only yourself .. the rest of the world does not believe that 100% so keep it to yourself… put all sorts of women on sites :)
i have heard many people say, take that girl down she does not make your work look good.. what??? silly no person can make my work look bad.. its how i take the pic or lighting etc…

i try not judge people.. i put up what i think is pretty but i do not put down what i do not choose as beautiful it is just my outlook at that time.
like for some wild reason i love big noses haha dated a few.. but i do know most go to contests and get funny looks.. this is not 100% true just a wide view..like people think fat is ugly… just a wide view but no one can say 100% there are some beautiful fat people :)

sorry for the book haha :)

By: ProImage Weddings

ProImage Weddings — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:14:12 +0000

Great insights, it is all very much appreciated.

By: jmsa

jmsa — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:32:15 +0000

My theory is that the quantity of intelligence in the world is constant. So when a person dies his intelligence goes to the new births. As the world population increases exponentially, intelligence share decreases for each birth. So young people are less intelligent than old people.

Of course, is a joke. Intelligence tests shows that younger people are more intelligence than ourselves, at least at test level. But my university students demonstrate year after year that they can do less with his test intelligence. The point is that younger people frequently don’t grasp the differences between real or not real, hence the risks that extreme* “phothobuying” do to their evolving minds. I don’t blame they for that, is our responsability if they can’t do it.

* Ralph Laurent photos of Filippa Hamilton

Disclaimer: i’m not a native English speaker, i’m from Spain, so my writing frequently appears as Spanish with English words.

Saludos desde España.

By: Chrisdavid42

Chrisdavid42 — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:00:53 +0000

Well, I want to weigh in on this subject as a young (to photography) photographer who is still developing my skill and style. I think that this is an excellent discussion to have because as a photographer we must be aware of the mood, message, etc. we create with each image. As a young photographers emulates (we learn by emulating what already exists in the market, on the internet, in books, etc.) the different styles and genre’s of photography those “values” must be considered and developed.

I personally prefer pictures of people that show them as a person. I found your photoshopped picture to be sterile and lifeless, and your original to be very beautiful. This, for me, is because I look into every portrait I see and expect to see a person looking back. I understand that what I value as a photographer is creating an image of the person as I see them. When I look at a person in real life, I don’t see zits, or double chins, or thin faces, I tend to be drawn to a particular feature that stands out. For my wife it is her eyes. My wife has very beautiful eyes and when I make a portrait of her I am looking to highlight the most beautiful part of her, the feature which stands out to me as an observer.
Many times, as an unofficial student of photography, it is when I go to edit the still image that a persons physical imperfections tend to be more obvious. (please do not make a tangent on what is beautiful and not beautiful, I think there is a consensus that there are certain shapes and a certain sense of symmetry that is generally considered pleasing to the eye, Often it is that pleasing combination of shape and symmetry that we define as beauty.) It is at this point that I would use photoshop, or lighting, pose, and clothing if I were to re-shoot, to enhance the natural beauty and diminish the natural flaws. As I said earlier, my goal as a photographer is to make an image of the person ‘as i see them.’ I will tell you that I have not mastered this skill, but that is my goal, and that is what I am drawn to in the portraits that I like. In this way the imperfections and individual qualities that really make us unique are retained in the photo, but are in essence downplayed.

It is my opinion that one of the things that can really help a young girl’s self esteem is a flattering portrait of herself. The photographers role in this is finding and capturing the most flattering angle, light, etc. and presenting it in the portrait.

Despite our cognitive awareness of photoshop, or photographic techniques we, as people, see ourselves emotionally, and we see photographs of others emotionally. A young girl or boy can emotionally view a pleasing portrait of themselves and say to themselves: ‘that attractive person is who I am.’ In the same way, they will look at pictures in advertising and say “I am/am not that person.”

To sum it up, the ability to present someone in their best light is, in my opinion, a positive use of neutral techniques. In my mind the argument is really about how much is too much and where do we draw the line. One thing that I see as a negative is that so often the people who have significant natural beauty are the ones who are overly photoshopped (its a verb whether we like it or not). I think that it skews the the standard. Many people would be pleased if their photo-shopped picture came out looking like your original.

These are my opinions and I think the most important result of this discussion is that we all become more aware that we do not view things neutrally, but that we all project our values and emotions into and onto every image we view. Thanks for reading my comment.

By: bookbabie

bookbabie — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:46:13 +0000

That video in kadajawi comment is hilarious! Disclaimers are a dumb idea, people have been touching up photos forever. My mother-in-law used to work in a photo studio hand painting portraits. I don’t think you need to be a rocket scientist (or a photographer) to know that models in magazines are photoshopped, celebrities even admit to it all the time these days.

By: kadajawi

kadajawi — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:40:48 +0000

I do think most people are morons, who don’t know how much Photoshop goes into photos these days. I do not think however a disclaimer would help… more like before/after photos, campaigns that show before/after photos so that people realize how much is being done. There is this great video by Adobe… http://tv.adobe.com/watch/profiles-of-creative-pros/the-life-of-a-phot oshop-artistmodel/ Something like that would make more sense than disclaimers, IMHO.

I usually remove pimples, clean up the skin etc., which I think is ok. Reshaping the face/body… I have to admit that I do that sometimes… but I prefer it if the photos stay realistic, and I think it looks better that way.

About the to photoshop debate… that’s how language evolves, if enough people use it it will become a part of a language. Live with it. People also use google as a verb. So?