Say No to Photoshop

Honestly i think its a form of art. It's not photoshop making girls self conscious, it's everything else. It's telling a young girl that having meat on her bones is unhealthy and that her facial features just aren't extraordinary. But photoshop? i think it's fine, i use it sometimes, actually I'm pretty good at it. Just like women use make-up it's only to enhance your beauty. I'm not offended to see these perfect women, they're all just symbols for some product and I'm not. I'm 16, probably never going to get much taller than 5 ft, i sure ain't skinny and I'm still comfortable in my own skin because i've embraced who i am, not who the media wants me to be. Those magazine chicks don't bother me.

I don't really mind the photoshop... I mean if it's done within reason, then fine.

I don't see the need to make someone's boobs 3 times bigger... but removing some pimples or two is not a big deal.

OK - so what´s all that about? Some people don´t care about their look or style, others do. And for them here is the fashion bussines with style, manipulations, icons etc. Would magazines and clothes producers (whether ready to wear companies or single fashion designers) sell that much of their products if they are presented by average people? Of course not. Being pissed by Vogue because it´s full of visual perfection is the same like to be pissed by water because it´s wet. Dressing itself is a way of manupulation - then why should it be presented naturally? Twisted reality is everywhere around, starting with TV ads. Of course it´s wrong and sad if teens are able to hurt themselves when trying to get the look... But what shall we do with people who are beautiful already by the nature? Should they be hidden somewhere because some labile persons can´t bear the fact that their own look is not comparable? As professional I have to tell you that most of postproduction is done to better the photo itself, to obtain the atmosphere, action, lighht, surrounding...not just make the model more bautiful. Because believe or not - there are thousands of incredibly beautiful models which do not need any postproduction to be more attractive. If you can recognize the retouching in the photo, it´s bad work done - then it can´t be taken seriously as an idol. If somebody can be upset by these visible fakes, it´s probably job for psychiatrist. Good retouching is not visible - then how can you be sure that you are not watching natural beauty? We simply have to admit that some people look much better the we do - and retouched photos are really not the problem. One point more - nobody wants to do more work than necessary - magazines, photographers and fashion companies have so much perfect faces to chose from, why should they use people which need hours of post pro if they can have people who were born perfect? Beside other activities I run my own casting srudio 9 years - and I really know what I am talking about.

Nobody is perfect. This is why we have plastic surgery and teenage girls hurting themselves thinking they're unattractive or they dont have the look. Not just magazines but stores like A&F where their models looks are all stereotypical caucasian preppy kids; Hot Topic where kids are poser-punks/pseudo-punk with clothes from sucky pop punk bands (seeing a pattern) and alternative metal bands; and basically stores where hip hop is played and the clothes resemble attract black folk. Every store has the same target audience. Magazines do this to attract people to the magazine and their usual topic. if you look around alot, you'll find yourself probably finding these same patterns

i just picked up an up and coming magazine in California : Ocean_ and it featured "untouched" images of a few [female] stars...and all i have to say is that Drew Barrymore is naturally prettier than Bar Rafaelli{ Bar's a grease ball!!!

Its part of media, it is used to hide the face reality..just like celebrities...

In their defense, these retouched photographs have (in my opinion) morphed into artwork - they are no longer real, and are used to impose the idea of beauty on us. Obviously it's doing what it was meant to do.

That being said, I'll be the first to admit that I'm really effected by these images. I'm not sure if that qualifies me as a weakling or not, but it only takes a few minutes of looking through a magazine for me to start disliking the body that I have even more.

It's an issue loads of us need to address, and we have to find it in ourselves to accept what we have, and who we are, no matter the images around us.

Most magazines that put pictures of actors on the cover are useless anyway: Vogue, 17, all tabloid mags, Cosmo, etcetera.

People just need to wise up and not care about the lives of celebrities and the other useless drivel these companies shovel.

Hmm, I'm going to disagree--as much as we all know things are photoshopped, not letting that affect you is much easier said than done.

I know full well that images in magazines are photoshopped, not to mention the work of stylists, makeup artists, and a diet that would probably make me cry...but that doesn't mean I still don't hold myself up to them when I look in the mirror.

Eh I have no problem with photoshopping in magazines primarily because I work with photoshop all day and have done retouching before so I dont look at those pictures as photographs but as something else. I actually enjoy looking at photoshopped images finding the lines, edges and flaws that make it obvious that they are fake. But thats just the art geek in me. In a way its like digital character rendering...dont think of them as photographs but rather as a collage.

Personally I have no problem with it, everyone knows how fake they are so whats the big deal? Is it any different than the girls who dye their hair, outline their lips, wear slimming patters or padded bras? Its all visual manipulation. Anyone can look like a million bucks with 2 hours of photoshop work so as long as you keep that in mind seeing seemingly perfect images shouldnt affect you.

bingo jennyschu.

LIARZZZZZZZ!