*Photoshopped*

Recently I beginning to notice a severe increase of graphic designers for big wig companies/advertisers are abusing Photo-shop to make people looking unrealistic.. Point of interest was the recent Ralph Lauren photo shoot of Linda Hamilton Was the photoshopped Ralph Lauren model fired for being overweight? - Fashion + Beauty on Shine... Even worse was that after 'announcing' their mistake, they fired her for being overweight ... That really curdles my milk if you ask me:mad2:


I aspire to be a fashion designer but even I think having super skinny models does not bode well for body image and self esteem.

What other things have you noticed about the abuses with photo-shop in the main stream world

Recently?

Airbrushing is nothing new :)

Her head is wider than her waist in that picture. Is it even possible to see that as 'attractive'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Momiji

Her head is wider than her waist in that picture. Is it even possible to see that as 'attractive'?

---

Whoa. Like, she could fit her waist in her hands.

She looks ridiculously gorgeous and still mega slim unphotoshopped, this woman. Ralph Lauren is an ass and the clothes are all dull dull dull anyway. I hope she'll get some better contracts out of this.

Thats The Most Blatantly Photoshopped Image I Have EVER seen.

Thats Sick RL. Sign her Back on. In The other images I saw Towards the Bottom Of her in Vogue She looks Stunning!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scrumpleberry

She looks ridiculously gorgeous and still mega slim unphotoshopped, this woman. Ralph Lauren is an ass and the clothes are all dull dull dull anyway. I hope she'll get some better contracts out of this.

---

Word. Their brand bores me. I associate them with middle aged men wearing polo shirts.

I associate them with high class just-working preps. ;3

What a sad article. Especially since 5'10" and 120 is so slim already.

i thought girls used photoshop to make their photos look sexier, not the other way around!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojee

I associate them with high class just-working preps. ;3

What a sad article. Especially since 5'10" and 120 is so slim already.

---

I need help determining if i'm "under weight" or to fat. because i've gotten mixed answers. I'm like..6'5'' and i'm 228 lbs. Is that to skinny, or to fat?? :confused:

PhotoshopDisasters

I lol.

Those pics made me giggle.

The way it's pretty much destroying the traditional art-form of colouring in!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IXVI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojee

I associate them with high class just-working preps. ;3

What a sad article. Especially since 5'10" and 120 is so slim already.

---

I need help determining if i'm "under weight" or to fat. because i've gotten mixed answers. I'm like..6'5'' and i'm 228 lbs. Is that to skinny, or to fat?? :confused:

---

Um, how can you not know if you're on either end? xD Do you look underweight or too fat? BMI says you're slightly overweight, but shrug~ you're really tall, the number sounds fine to me x3 You're probably normal.

My roommate in University was 5'9 and 125 lbs. She actually gained 10 lbs since freshman year prior to the statistics I cited.

She's very attractive but TBH I always thought she could lose stand to gain some muscle or lose some fat around the midsection. The fact that she told me she gained 10 lbs (is how I knew) is telling of the pressure such magazines give us.

But I'm the worst person on the planet to be giving this type of statement (apparently). I still stand by my claim.


On a more...tolerated note, Muscle+Fitness magazines show steroided 'athletes'. And models are known to be photoshopped and air-brushed for years now. It doesn't stop us from having an unrealistic expectation of our bodies.

Hell it took me years to get over it and I'm positive I haven't yet.

The people at Ralph Lauren are superficial idiots! I mean look at the Filippa Hamilton ad below the photo shop disaster pic in the article Rodarian posted. She's gorgeous! I find super skinny women are just as unattractive as really obese women (I know that sounds shallow but I'm making a point here). About 10 stone or 140 pounds is the recommend weight for women (this of course is based on a woman of average height which is apparently about 5 foot 4 inches in the USA if your are taller or smaller weighting more or less is okay obviously) lower then that it just starts looks unhealthy. Being able to see a womens skeleton through her skin is the opposite of sexy.

I'm 7 pounds heavier then my ideal weight for someone my height & I used to be 21 pounds heavier then the ideal about 2 & 1/2 months ago!!! Having a health body image is okay but the image portrayed by the likes of Ralph Lauren is just plain disgraceful:mad2::mad2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

PhotoshopDisasters

I lol.

---

I can never understand what's wrong with half of those photos ;_;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shattered Dreamer

About 10 stone or 140 pounds is the recommend weight for women (this of course is based on a woman of average height which is apparently about 5 foot 4 inches in the USA if your are taller or smaller weighting more or less is okay obviously) lower then that it just starts looks unhealthy. Being able to see a womens skeleton through her skin is the opposite of sexy.

---

Pretty much every generalized statement of this kind describes me as an unhealthy, skeletal girl. I weigh about 98-100 pounds, and my height is about 5'3", but I'm not skeletal - just my arms are a little thinner than I like. Every other part of me is fine. Stop it, people!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Momiji

Her head is wider than her waist in that picture. Is it even possible to see that as 'attractive'?

---

Now you know what a Final Fantasy VI character would look like in real life.

Obviously I know airbrushing has been around sometime, but usually the models look some what normal... That reminds me..There is is D&G shoot I think where the looks ridiculously thin.

These days even guys are getting body conscious.. Hell I wish I had a body of a Greek God or something akin to that...

>>> Lol, even my cousin who is a total photoshop amateur can do a better job than that..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Momiji

Her head is wider than her waist in that picture. Is it even possible to see that as 'attractive'?

---

Now you know what a Final Fantasy VI character would look like in real life.

---

Some things are just better left two-dimensional. ー。ー

I wish I was in 2D....<+_+>

That would be wierd lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshall Banana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shattered Dreamer

About 10 stone or 140 pounds is the recommend weight for women (this of course is based on a woman of average height which is apparently about 5 foot 4 inches in the USA if your are taller or smaller weighting more or less is okay obviously) lower then that it just starts looks unhealthy. Being able to see a womens skeleton through her skin is the opposite of sexy.

---

Pretty much every generalized statement of this kind describes me as an unhealthy, skeletal girl. I weigh about 98-100 pounds, and my height is about 5'3", but I'm not skeletal - just my arms are a little thinner than I like. Every other part of me is fine. Stop it, people!

---

I knew I was bound to offend someone sorry Marshall Banana no offence meant!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshall Banana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shattered Dreamer

About 10 stone or 140 pounds is the recommend weight for women (this of course is based on a woman of average height which is apparently about 5 foot 4 inches in the USA if your are taller or smaller weighting more or less is okay obviously) lower then that it just starts looks unhealthy. Being able to see a womens skeleton through her skin is the opposite of sexy.

---

Pretty much every generalized statement of this kind describes me as an unhealthy, skeletal girl. I weigh about 98-100 pounds, and my height is about 5'3", but I'm not skeletal - just my arms are a little thinner than I like. Every other part of me is fine. Stop it, people!

---

Monda isn't a skeleton under her clothes.

Trust me. I know.

:kaoclove:

Coming from a decidedly unskinny girl on this note, I hate the REAL WOMEN HAVE CURVEZZZZZZZ thing. No you are not more of a real woman for being a fatty, nor are you more of a real woman for being athletic, or less of a real woman for having no boobs. REAL WOMEN HAVE FEMALE GENITALIAAAAA funnily enough, it has nothing to do with whether you're skinny or curvy or short or tall or w/e. The REAL WOMEN thing irritates me more than I can possibly express. Augh. It's so damn stupid, and it's hugely insulting if you don't fit into the REAL WOMAN parameters being presented in the statement. There's more than one way to be an attractive girl, it's not nice being made to feel otherwise.

YouTube - Dove - Evolution Commercial (higher quality)

Body size to weight ratio is ridiculous.

At 69" I have weighed both 128 pounds before I joined the Army and 155 now. I'm exactly the same size. I can wear the same clothes at both sizes. Makes no sense to me.

Quote:

---

There's more than one way to be an attractive girl, it's not nice being made to feel otherwise.

---

I think that's why they started. It would be better if their point was 'real women look like all sorts of ways' but that's not as concise and good for short advertisements.