Is a little flaw a bad thing?Mar 17
Here are some photoshop before and afters.
The thing that I find interesting is that barring color and light correction, some of the photoshopping that is done is completely unnecessary. They take a small ripple out here, a bump there, an inch or so off of a waist that was slender to begin with, taking everything to an extreme, so much so that it creates an unobtainable ideal for women to strive towards. When the women on the covers of magazines in their natural state (ironically in full a hair makeup and lighting ) still need to digitally augmented and “corrected” then aren’t we are all in trouble.
Penelope is just lovely naturally and took a great photo to start. Now besides the color correction I can understand and perhaps that stray hair, but did they have to get rid of her lines of expression, are they that horrible? and they made her ribcage, and waist just a smidge smaller, so slight that really they could have just let it be?
It’s just crazy how they completely narrowed Jessica Alba’s body, her waist is clearly even smaller, to what end? They adjusted the light around her breasts to accentuate them even though they are already pushed up to her neck. and reduced her thighs. When you first look at the photoshopped image it looks normal but when you really look, it is completely out f proportion, especially the left side of her body. If you look at it too long she starts to look crazy! (I don’t now if these are the same photo, because the focus of her eyes is different, it could be 2 different photos from the same session)
Cameron already has a great body, even though she is thin, she is strong and lean, yet once again for some reason her the line of the bone of her pelvis was offensive and had to be erased. That’s not even fat that’s the indentation muscle makes!
Avril Lavigne looks pretty much the same, so why not just leave it be, what is this concept of making something “Perfect” or “Better” when it was perfectly find to begin with?
I don’t know who this woman is but actually I like the unretouched photo better, even the color, they did touch-up under her eyes, which does look “better” I thought that the before was fine, what is wrong with looking human?
This one is just crazy! they completely reduced her. Her torso is smaller, as is her thigh, they put a curve in her back, added hair, well damn I just she didn’t even have to show up to the photo shoot!
Clearly this is a woman who works out and takes care of her body, but still has bit of a pooch, which by the way is supposed to be considered “sexy” but they just smoothed out her whole stomach, gave her a tan, and changed the color of her bra and panties. Ok they did a good one by taking out the shower water which made it look like she was peeing, so we can’t be but so mad.
Ok when I saw this I was shocked! I was like, that is amazing, all these years I was thinking that Madonna wasn’t aging, I mean I know she has support from a procedure or two (no judging just acknowledging) but this was just way more than I was ready for. I mean this is art, now. But know I kind of understand why Madonna might not think she is not aging either! If you are 50 and kept seeing pictures of yourself looking a flawless 25, you might begin to believe that you really do look that way too… this explains a lot in Madonna’scase, love her but let’s be real you look fabulous for your age but you are still your age, and there is nothing wrong with that!!! And there was nothing wrong with the first sets of any of these photos!!! Damn you photo editor leave us alone, stop messing with our heads!