This is always a hot topic. You often hear people talking or writing about how harmful edited photos of women in ads are because it gives girls, women, men and boys an unrealistic, unobtainable beauty marker. I believe it is important to discuss when Photoshop is appropriate for advertising, and when it becomes harmful.
So this..
Is harmful in that it makes the woman look younger, takes away some distinguishing features, like her dimples and completely removes her under eye bags (which every person has to some extent). It is also edited for better lighting and color, which I believe makes sense because after all, it is an advertisement, and needs to look professional and well done. Perhaps instead of manipulating bodies on the computer, editors can use lighting, color (And the actual product) to sell, not perfect people
This...
Is harmful because the woman on the right and the woman on the left are two completely different people. The woman on the right does not exist, she is not a real person and can never be. Even if the woman on the left lost weight, she would not look like that. But people only see the edited image and assume that it is a photograph of a real person, and woman say, "if i lost 10 pounds I could look like that". I believe it is equally as harmful to use larger models and edit them into skinny ones as it is to hire unrealistically skinny models in the first place.
Unfortunately, most magazines are not changing their photoshopping practices, so lawmakers are trying to change it for them
However, we do see some companies like Aerie and Dove taking small (some would argue very small) strides in the right direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment