Comments on: Photo Retouching: the Delicate Balance

By: dimas

dimas — Fri, 27 May 2011 20:11:17 +0000

Good post

By: Brightly Whiten Teeth

Brightly Whiten Teeth — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 19:17:36 +0000

Good solid professional work with Photoshop (I use it time to time, but I am not so advanced), but all of this is beside the point. I think the most shocking that these celbs actually or in fact total different in real life (I do not mean nicer!), and to the contrary there are many good looking people who has more aesthetic appearance in fact. Probably that is why a good photoshop expert will be hit last by the recession. You know… there is always a demand for a wee “touch up”….)))

By: Willis Lawe

Willis Lawe — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 06:52:48 +0000

Great post, just what I was looking for! Thanks for the information :D

By: Obi

Obi — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 01:55:40 +0000

Theres really nothing wrong with airbrushing and enhancements especially in magazines, as long as everyone knows they’ve been done, which more and more people are becoming aware of these days.

By: Handgun Safe

Handgun Safe — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 02:20:49 +0000

Things like this is what leads others to be insecure about them selves as they see these people with no flaws and forget about the photoshop editing that has been done. I think more people need to know about this. Lol sometimes i wonder what the world would be like if photoshop wasnt made. hahaa

By: Diane

Diane — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:09:15 +0000

You really have a good eye, telling the different changes in the photo.
Anyways, This is just a product of our advance technology today, but in my opinion; a n individual especially female models really don’t need those editing as long as they have a healthy lifestyle, this includes adequate rest and sleep. This is important to regain our cell’s energy.

By: Diane

Diane — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 06:15:40 +0000

Photoshop is every celeb’s bestfriend. It makes them younger. Their faces plastered on magazines are always fake. Some edited heavily than others but edited all the same. It’s kind of demeaning.

By: Jaime

Jaime — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:57:18 +0000

How deceptive magazines are! Just look at the whole lot of difference with faith hill’s eyes and face! She simply looks plastic in the second cover. I think she’s great looking in the first picture, wrinkles and what not! I say that is aging gracefully. Hiding her true and real beauty with Photoshop is simply disgusting. It’s like saying she’s not beautiful as she is.

Anything temporary should be removed, like zits, cuts and scratches, but not permanent features of the body.

By: Justin Henin

Justin Henin — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 20:27:55 +0000

What a lie! Did you notice the side of her back above the dress? And even her hand looks more skinny. Not to mention the eyes and the face in general. That’s unexceptable. I object.

By: Ryan Dearlove

Ryan Dearlove — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:38:30 +0000

Wow, this is fantastic. I think you can always make photos look better. It’s just getting the balance right, the subtle touches are the best.

Great Article.

By: lora

lora — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:26:43 +0000

her arm doesnt look graceful .. is it only me that thinks it looks scarily long and thing .. it looks awful :S

By: Natalie M

Natalie M — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 02:54:21 +0000

Hey, does anyone here by any chance know who took the photo for Redbook?
Good article by the way.

By: Rosie Peters

Rosie Peters — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:59:51 +0000

Thank you for this amazing eye opener. I’m going to use this site with my teenage and impressionable students who think it must be real if it’s on a cover, in a book or on TV. Excellent information.

By: Natural Soap

Natural Soap — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 04:05:49 +0000

Yes, it is unfortunate that the entire body seems to be an airbrush of the original. We are almost to the point of just having virtual models. Why start with anybody in particular if what you want to end up with is a plascticized creation.

By: Lindsay

Lindsay — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:32:04 +0000

Personally I don’t see a problem with it. It’s how people make a living. I love retouching in Photoshop- it’s amazing what can be done. Sorry- but people buy fashion photography and magazines because of the the fantasy- if they want reality they can wlak outside their door. I was a women’s studies, magazine journalism and photo ilustration major in undergrad. Believe me– I’ve weighed the options.

By: gershon

gershon — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 15:12:26 +0000

Airbrushing did not start a decade ago. Our Philadelphia advertising agency was using it routinely 40 years ago, as were most agencies and magazines. Playboy was airbrushing its centerfolds from the first issue with Marilyn Monroe on.

By: Notes on Design » Blog Archive » A “Frankenstein” Tool for Photo Retouchers

Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:56:52 +0000

[...] Speaking, as I was last week, of photo retouching, BBC news has just reported on a new tool that takes image doctoring much further than a little dodge and burn. Developed by James Hays and Alexei Efros from Carnegie Mellon University, this new algorithm replaces unwanted bits of photos with preferable scenery cherry-picked from other images. [...]

By: Retouching at its worst (and best) « Design . Illustration . Photography

Retouching at its worst (and best) « Design . Illustration . Photography — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 00:10:49 +0000

[...] Take a look at Nomi Altabef’s blog on designsessions. She analyzes the techniques of an unknown photo retoucher who used Photoshop to transform an image of Faith Hill for a Redbook magazine cover. Amazing! What is it about some retouchers and photographers that make them feel like they need to remake their models into something other than what they are? Why can’t they just remove the dust spots and blemishes and leave the model’s likeness intact? Hear what some magazine editors have to say about it on this Today show segment. [...]

By: Nomi Altabef

Nomi Altabef — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 21:16:40 +0000

Rachel, thanks for posting these examples. The Time cover with O.J. Simpson is incredible. It really illustrates how our prejudice towards something visually “dark” as adding a sense of menace and intrigue plays into racial prejudice and stereoptyping.

You could probably dramatize and add menace to anything by making it darker and more shadowed– an entry or hallway could be made to look ominous, or a landscape more threatening– not necessarily a person. People tend to attribute threatening qualities to something that is mysterious or partly hidden by shadow. The OJ photo really illustrates how our prejudice towards something visually “dark” as adding a sense of menace and intrigue plays into racial prejudice and stereoptyping.

TIME probably would (and did?) argue that they would have darkened a mugshot of any suspected murderer for dramatic effect, regardless of race. But the fact is, race is an explosive subject, and mixing it with the controversial issue of photo doctoring was bound to provoke outrage.

And as for the tennis beefcake on the cover of Men’s Fitness, Andy Roddick was quoted as saying of his digitally pumped-up arms, “Yeah, I wish I had those guns!”