The French are messing with us

[Benny Profane]

Well, there goes the magazine business in Paris.....

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/...photoshop.html

[Salomon]

sadly this not about about retouching. this is about the basis of our economy; consumerism. we're selling a product, make people want to buy it, making it looks good.
why people feel cheated about a retouch ad and dont complain about a science fiction movie ? after all we're both selling a dream and fantasy putting sparks on it.

I guess it's our fault, working too hard to get invisible. everyone else gets credit, stylist, hair, makup, DA. as much as i think this law is stupid i agree that our names should be mentioned somewhere.

[Markzebra]

Good link Benny. I found the narrators voice lazy and irritating, sounds like she's been stuffing her face with cheeseburger all day - if you ask me she should have her voice digitally resampled.

[Benny Profane]

Ha, you may have something there. I have an idea - let's let her start the movement and have her put her face on the cover of the NYT Magazine, untouched for all to see. After a long Saturday night in winter. With a cold coming on. And, of course, a zit or two.

[Markzebra]

…and mayo dribbling down her chin

[Salomon]

LOL what a sight

[Quantum3Studio]

Originally Posted by Salomon

why people feel cheated about a retouch ad and dont complain about a science fiction movie ?.

JAjaja... That's the best point! XD LOL!!!!!

[twopoint0]

Maybe magazines should print every image as a before and after. That way everyone can see how crappy the photography really is and why we do what we do. Then the Benny Profane's and the Markzebra's and Quantum's will become the Jay Meizel's and Annie Leibovitz's of the industry.

[Benny Profane]

Originally Posted by twopoint0

Then the Benny Profane's and the Markzebra's and Quantum's will become the Jay Meizel's and Annie Leibovitz's of the industry.

Oh, yeah, I can see me just walking by the line at Elaine's as she rushes out to give me a big kiss on the cheek and elbows the paparazzi out of the way as she shows me and my two dates a nice secluded back table. Yeah.

[psdbunny]

Originally Posted by Quantum3Studio

JAjaja... That's the best point! XD LOL!!!!!

I have to say, as a woman, I do feel severely "cheated" when I see an ad for a beauty product (especially mascara) and the ad has been severely retouched - in such a way that I know the results of the image were not achieved with the product. I do feel this is outright lying or fraud. On the other hand, I also love retouching images and uncovering the hidden beauty in an image. I really enjoy it, to be honest, but I also feel some sort of conflict when it comes to retouched photos for beauty products (in particular).

[amica999]

Originally Posted by psdbunny

I have to say, as a woman, I do feel severely "cheated" when I see an ad for a beauty product (especially mascara) and the ad has been severely retouched - in such a way that I know the results of the image were not achieved with the product. I do feel this is outright lying or fraud. On the other hand, I also love retouching images and uncovering the hidden beauty in an image. I really enjoy it, to be honest, but I also feel some sort of conflict when it comes to retouched photos for beauty products (in particular).

Aren't all commercials like that? "Eat chocolate cerials and get slim";"use this cleaner and you don't have to clean for 6 month again"; 16 years old modells using products that reduce wrinkles and and and....It's not really lying, they just leave out needed information i.e "Eat chocolate cerials and get slim" only once a day and nothing else...so it may as well work

[psdbunny]

Originally Posted by amica999

Aren't all commercials like that? "Eat chocolate cerials and get slim";"use this cleaner and you don't have to clean for 6 month again"; 16 years old modells using products that reduce wrinkles and and and....It's not really lying, they just leave out needed information i.e "Eat chocolate cerials and get slim" only once a day and nothing else...so it may as well work

You're very right about that; I think my conflict with print ads for beauty products is that the "fraud" that I perceive is a lot more blatant or "overt". It's hard to describe, but the transgression seems so much more palpable in that particular instance. Mascara ads in particular are notorious for this.

At the same time, I really love retouching...so I get over it, fast.

[Quantum3Studio]

Even if we show to everybody that all is retouched, people will keep trusting on the illusion. People love the illusion so much, that they will fight to keep it alive.

[MaximMorin]

i will be the black sheep for this one, but at a certain level, i think it's a great thing to put credit and tell if the photo have been manipulated. People "trust" photography more than science fiction (to take the upper comparaison) because they use it on an almost daily basis to record their memories.... So, when i show a before/after of some retouch i did to some people (like one of my friend who had an eating disorder because she was always comparing herself with model in magazine) they didn't thought it was that modified. for us, who are in the indistry, it's an evidence, but for the general public it's not. They know it's modified (their not stupid either), but not that much. I'm not so sure people want to be keep in illusion.... Just look at how much extra money Dove did after lunching that "self confidence" campaign we all saw (who was a great marketing piece if i might say). And i don't think we must be on the defensive so fast, a magazine in Québec claim that they stopped retouching their cover/editorial/etc picture inside (Chatelaine) but they still hired retoucher to do the chromo work and style work... well it's just my opinion...

[psdbunny]

Originally Posted by MaximMorin

i will be the black sheep for this one, but at a certain level, i think it's a great thing to put credit and tell if the photo have been manipulated. People "trust" photography more than science fiction (to take the upper comparaison) because they use it on an almost daily basis to record their memories.... So, when i show a before/after of some retouch i did to some people (like one of my friend who had an eating disorder because she was always comparing herself with model in magazine) they didn't thought it was that modified. for us, who are in the indistry, it's an evidence, but for the general public it's not. They know it's modified (their not stupid either), but not that much. I'm not so sure people want to be keep in illusion.... Just look at how much extra money Dove did after lunching that "self confidence" campaign we all saw (who was a great marketing piece if i might say). And i don't think we must be on the defensive so fast, a magazine in Québec claim that they stopped retouching their cover/editorial/etc picture inside (Chatelaine) but they still hired retoucher to do the chromo work and style work... well it's just my opinion...

Great points that you raised, especially about the success of the Dove campaign. Also, you're right, laymen don't realize at all to what extent images are retouched. When I show friends my before and afters, they're completely shocked at what is possible technologically...most of them hadn't a clue.

It's interesting that self-esteem issues are suddenly this big cause for concern and legislation when it comes to magazines and the fashion/beauty industry. Magazines aren't at all inclusive or diverse and often show a single-sided standard of beauty/beauty ideal. That approach which has been in place for decades has caused many self-esteem issues among certain demographics, but nothing was ever done about it then (or even now).

More than just people with eating disorders emerge from reading magazines with self-esteem issues.

[Markzebra]

"I have to say, as a woman, I do feel severely "cheated" when I see an ad for a beauty product (especially mascara) and the ad has been severely retouched" Yes having changed the color, the tone and the way it reflects light of mascara many times - the way I justify it to myself is that its an illustration of the product not a description. Like the old 1950's illustrators who used to draw the product in an obviously contrived way. Times were simpler then, I'm not so sure now.

like one of my friend who had an eating disorder because she was always comparing herself with model in magazine - I once lived with someone who had an eating disorder, by this I mean she was forcing herself to be sick and getting thinner and thinner. When she left the place I was in, I found beauty magazines and 2 CD's stuffed behind the bed- Britney Spears and J'Lo - its haunted me ever since.

[MaximMorin]

and i just want to add. the industry is not the only player into the eating disorder problem, it's basicly a low self-estim issue, but it doesn't really help those peole ;-)

[zacker]

Originally Posted by Markzebra

Good link Benny. I found the narrators voice lazy and irritating, sounds like she's been stuffing her face with cheeseburger all day - if you ask me she should have her voice digitally resampled.

lol Awesome!!!

[Markzebra]

Yeah there's a certain amount of guilt associated with me making that comment I can assure you. It wasnt meant that way though, I promise. Guess I did make it though

[Quantum3Studio]

Originally Posted by MaximMorin

They know it's modified (their not stupid either), but not that much. I'm not so sure people want to be keep in illusion.... Just look at how much extra money Dove did after lunching that "self confidence" campaign we all saw (who was a great marketing piece if i might say).

Hi pal,

Yeah, I saw the Dove's ads, very nice ones. However, behind each advertisement there is always an economic interest. In my country (Argentina) those ads have been not shown on TV. I just found them in YouTube. So it's just a regulation of some countries or something like that. Here, the Dove's ads keep the same.
And yeah, people like living inside an illusion. From the veryfirst tribes on the earth, the human being live illusions, exactly for the same thing than nowadays, status and power, but the difference is the moethods have changed, also the symbols, but it keeps the same thing. And it's related with the very first pusional desire of reproduction, talking very globally.
Going a bit more accurately, people don't accepts a lot of things, for example the fact that will die some day, that's the biggest topic in the human life. Death and Sex are the main themes in advertisements, in general. Advertisements stabs where most hurt: lacking self-confidence and they offers the solution (over and over again) to solve all our daily problems, to give us more status, more power, more free and so on... Seems we're nothing without this or that product, and people believes that ads have the solution to all its insecureness that they will never accept. People is driven by pride and ego, they will never change their minds if they don't recognice they have faults, deffects. All the time, people tries to hide their deffects by using retorical fallacies, blaming others for their faluts and they will never ask for apologiez, nor forgive because the pride. People doesn't get stunned by advertisements, that's too naïve, they really believes in advertisements. They really believes they will have more status by buying this product or that one. For example, some people believes there are professional cameras, but that's a fallacy, because cameras have not adjetives that only belongs to human beings. And that people will buy a camera because the camera "is professional" and psychologically, the consumer believes he will be: 1) A professional, 2) A daredevil traveller 3) and the person's look will be more attractive. After they have bought the equipment, they feel dissapointed and leave the equipment in some corner, inside some closet. What says a Nikon's Advertisement: says power, confidence, domination, dynamism, perefection, accuracy, fast response and a lot of similar things. Characteristics that Heroes have. And people feel they will achieve all those characteristics by having that camera. Of course, people who's not photographer and have a very low self-steam and self-awareness. And don't forget that people always needs the approvation of their fellas, but their fellas will not value how kind or how educated, or how much culture this person has, these fellas will value how much power, how much status, how big is his camera, car, house, salary, etc are. And then, the pride. It's a circle of power and recognition. Even the very well educated people have vanity, Intelectual Vanity I call it. We all need to look ourselves in the mirror and think we're the best of the best, otherwise, we buy something that makes us feel we're, otherwise, we're nothing and there is where advertisements plays the whole game.

[zacker]

Originally Posted by Markzebra

Yeah there's a certain amount of guilt associated with me making that comment I can assure you. It wasnt meant that way though, I promise. Guess I did make it though

Oh believe me, her voice was making me involuntarily clear my throat.
I HATE that!

[MaximMorin]

Quantum3Studio:

I totally agree with you on much of your point (even if i'm not such a fan of the freud theories, thoses about the pulsion of life and death applied well to the advertising world), espacially when so well explain. but still, we can offer and illusion world without body modification i think. I understand thought that the goal must be almost impossible to reach, because, if so, they will stop consuming products...

[Quantum3Studio]

Originally Posted by MaximMorin

Quantum3Studio:

I totally agree with you on much of your point (even if i'm not such a fan of the freud theories, thoses about the pulsion of life and death applied well to the advertising world), espacially when so well explain. but still, we can offer and illusion world without body modification i think. I understand thought that the goal must be almost impossible to reach, because, if so, they will stop consuming products...

That's right, mate. And consumption is like a wheel of fortunes and misfortunes that never stops spinning or capitaslism will collapse. Just see what's happing in these days, "Capitalism will collapse!!!!" says the newspaper... It's just part of the life's natural wavelenghts, however, this partocular topic, which is concuption, is managed by Banks, Enterprises and Governments, in that order (Governments are just the mediator between people and The Bank. You would say Government takes care about other things, but money is what really cares). So, Banks give loans, so, for each loan you have to pay some interest to the bank (3% per american dollar), that interest is multiplied for another interest that makes that each year, the interest is more and more expensive.
For example, you rent a home and the lanlord tells you that the first year, you have to pay $2300 per month, next year you have to pay $2760 and the next one you have to pay $3312 Well, 2300*1.2%=2760*1.2%=3312 and so on. Same happens with loans, and money come from loans that Government asks to the some Bank I cannot remember now which bank is. Anyway, Enterprises also rules the goverments, Banks are the money of the governments and all this events are managed by the people who manages that bank I cannot remember its name. Yeah, it's well said that: "the more money, the more jobs", but also, more inflation, the bigger the interest that keeps growing and growing and countries keep taking loans and the snowball gets bigger and bigger and bigger = collapse. There are too much dollars! The value of each usd goes down because the abundance of these, so a collapse is applyed in order to generate a Financial Crisis, cut abundance and raise the value of each dollar again. And don't forget the interest per each american dollar that goes up and up every year!!! That means that for each 10,000,000.00 of dollars the government asks, there are 300,000.00 of interest, the next year the owe will be 90,000,000.00 and the third year will be 270,000,000.00 of debt, which also means, more money but never enogh in order to pay those damn 300,000.00 usd from the begining. Same happens with sea currents, otherwise, the sea will become stagnant and all the sea life dies. Well, some banks use to blocks that money currents in order to suffocate certain group of countries and then, buying it for some cents. You see what's happening with the homes in Miami. They are sold at ridiculous prices!!! Devaluation and Crisis are very well studied and premeditated. I believe the same real states buy its own houses. It's like having a retail shop, burning all inside and then, getting the money from the insurance. Scam, in one word. And that's how the money flows. Consumers are just a little part of all this chain of events.

Have to go to consume pizza...!

Have a nice day!

Mart

[Little Fisher]

I liked the last thought in that video...

"If a magazine isn't going to disclose the extent to which an image was retouched, then at least put the retoucher's name in the credits"

[Quantum3Studio]

Originally Posted by Little Fisher

I liked the last thought in that video...

"If a magazine isn't going to disclose the extent to which an image was retouched, then at least put the retoucher's name in the credits"

Oh, I haven't heard that part... That sounds superb!!! In fact, and nowadays, pictures without our retouch wouldn't look so nice. Of course, Photographers can do excellent jobs with the make-up, etc. In fact, I preffer the fashion photos before the digital era. They were more appealing and artistic instead shocking. There is a big difference between "shocking" and "artistic", and those are the Special Effects we put on the pics. Another point to keep in mind is that the people gives all the credit to the photographer like "Wow, what an amazing photo!!! Look those lights, those colors!!!", but all that stuff is made in Photoshop. We know that even the best photographer retouchs its pics in order to make them look great. Unless, of course, the photographer like the old fashioned way, which is impossible in practice, due the standards.
It's the same like a music group. People get amazed about how cool sounds any music group, but nobody thinks that, thanks to the sound enginnering, the group sounds that good.
We do the final output, in few words. Just like the sound enginnering.

Mart

[vapman]

I think it would be great for retouchers to be disclosed. Photographers get all the credit, true, and i dont mind with that, but if people are aware of the existance of a retoucher and the vital importance of his role, his leverage also increases.

[LQQKER]

Simple . . . Every human image that we see should have a disclaimer (like a cigarette pack). This should also include every woman that wears make-up, a bra, girdle, wig, colored contacts, etc. By law, they should mandatorily wear dog tags (no pun intended) with their true body image and face.

For example:
"Caution: This human image is retouched or altered to some degree and not in accordance to facts"

"Warning, it is impossible to ever look like this, unless you're a mannequin"

I mean REALLY . . . Did you ever see a mug shot of a movie/TV personality that was being charged with a DUI??

We seem to be a society that is so easily deceived or cheated pertaining to reality. After all, we must all wear deodorant (because we don't smell like we should). Go figure . . .

Bottom line: Vanity is part of the human condition and are we really interested in being shown or told the truth? Of course we bitch about it. . . but you have to keep in mind the percentage that buy into this, subconsciously knowing (hopefully) it's BS.

My next topic will cover "why obese women wear spandex" stay tuned . . . .

[Quantum3Studio]

"Caution: This human image is retouched or altered to some degree and not in accordance to facts" JAjajJAjJA This is freaking funny! I really like it!!! JEjeje... It can be a nice add by the way!!! =D

[vapman]

I believe its mainly a matter of non-awareness of a retoucher in the image producing process (to the mainstream that is).
Retouching is still relatively a new thing. Even alot of photographers i introduce myself to get amazed on what can really be done when i show them some of my befores and afters, and direct them to some retoucher's site's before's and afters of their own, so they can further get the picture on how the game is being played nowadays.
"Oh, so this retouched to this extent? i actually thought the photographer was just really absolutely amazing after all, had better lighting and technique than me, only picked super models, never really could imagine his photos without DI would be so like mine"
I swear this is true. Photographers in the business of ad photography still getting surprised at the extent of manipulations. They were taught to shoot traditionally, not with this new filter gimmicks we use, so as consequence they tend to think traditionally as well.
My point is, if you can even find photographers who are not completely aware of the extend of things, imagine the general public. Maybe 20 years from now we may look at people who still believe all they see in mags is natural the same way we look at people who believe WF matches are for real, but not now. Its all still a novelty.

[Quantum3Studio]

Originally Posted by vapman

I believe its mainly a matter of non-awareness of a retoucher in the image producing process (to the mainstream that is).
Retouching is still relatively a new thing. Even alot of photographers i introduce myself to get amazed on what can really be done when i show them some of my befores and afters, and direct them to some retoucher's site's before's and afters of their own, so they can further get the picture on how the game is being played nowadays.
"Oh, so this retouched to this extent? i actually thought the photographer was just really absolutely amazing after all, had better lighting and technique than me, only picked super models, never really could imagine his photos without DI would be so like mine"
I swear this is true. Photographers in the business of ad photography still getting surprised at the extent of manipulations. They were taught to shoot traditionally, not with this new filter gimmicks we use, so as consequence they tend to think traditionally as well.
My point is, if you can even find photographers who are not completely aware of the extend of things, imagine the general public. Maybe 20 years from now we may look at people who still believe all they see in mags is natural the same way we look at people who believe WF matches are for real, but not now. Its all still a novelty.

Never so perfectly stated, pal. Great coment on this great topic It says all. But from Renaissance, painters used to "retouch" their paints. They used to reduce the age and omitting to paint some skin deffects, in the earlier years of photography, some photographers (or with some painters) used to add some beauty to the portraits as well. Of course, not the huge manipulation we can see nowadays, but retouching always was there. And of course, not all people knows about Renaissance. However, this topic always have been a secret.

I like what you have written here: "Oh, so this retouched to this extent? i actually thought the photographer was just really absolutely amazing after all, had better lighting and technique than me, only picked super models, never really could imagine his photos without DI would be so like mine". Plus, all your comment. I also thought the same till I started doing retouching. There are not super models, well, not the amount that we see in magazines. In fact, have you realized that some models have strange faces in the magazines? I'm absolutely sure those where digitally made. I mean, starting with a real subject, but changing at least, the 70% of the shapes, in order to create a totally different face. Just check what I have done here, it's not an extreme retouch, but it shows part of what I meant

My First Attempt

My second Attemp

Make sure to click on the loupe, located in the right upper corner

Mart