Comments on: Making Beauty Artificially http://www.writingfordesigners.com/?p=2639 The class blog of AVT 395-4, George Mason University Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:19:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Sarah Yarbrough http://www.writingfordesigners.com/?p=2639&cpage=1#comment-1041 Sarah Yarbrough Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:52:28 +0000 http://www.writingfordesigners.com/?p=2639#comment-1041 I was going to write about this same issue. I think the problem with manipulating photographs for magazine covers and advertisements is that the manipulated image is being marketed and being percieved as reality, when in fact it is not. People are being told this is what you should look like, this is what these models/celebrities look like, when they don't at all. It's completely an unachievable look. So how are the images that designers, editors, ad execs, put out there effecting our culture and how are they altering our perceptions of beauty? Who is responsible for the aftermath that occurs from these images? Is it wrong? Is it ok even when people know it's an airbrushed image? I don't really think a disclaimer will alter people's perceptions. Even when being told an image has been touched up, the artists behind the image are still insinuating this is real beauty, this is what we should want to be. Side Note: This year, model Gisele Bundchen did a photoshoot for a british coat company, London Fog, while pregnant, and they airbrushed her "baby bump" out of all the images!They said it was to protect her privacy (odd statement since she was photographed naked wearing only an open trench coat). Anyway, I just think it's odd that the company hired a pregnant model to begin with and even more odd that they openly admitted to airbrushing her. Regardless, I think it is an interesting story relative to this topic. Thoughts anyone? I was going to write about this same issue. I think the problem with manipulating photographs for magazine covers and advertisements is that the manipulated image is being marketed and being percieved as reality, when in fact it is not. People are being told this is what you should look like, this is what these models/celebrities look like, when they don’t at all. It’s completely an unachievable look. So how are the images that designers, editors, ad execs, put out there effecting our culture and how are they altering our perceptions of beauty? Who is responsible for the aftermath that occurs from these images? Is it wrong? Is it ok even when people know it’s an airbrushed image? I don’t really think a disclaimer will alter people’s perceptions. Even when being told an image has been touched up, the artists behind the image are still insinuating this is real beauty, this is what we should want to be.

Side Note: This year, model Gisele Bundchen did a photoshoot for a british coat company, London Fog, while pregnant, and they airbrushed her “baby bump” out of all the images!They said it was to protect her privacy (odd statement since she was photographed naked wearing only an open trench coat). Anyway, I just think it’s odd that the company hired a pregnant model to begin with and even more odd that they openly admitted to airbrushing her. Regardless, I think it is an interesting story relative to this topic. Thoughts anyone?

]]>