.jpg)
Wrinkle free 59 year old Twiggy sets of Parliamentary debate
Using Photoshop to retouch images may be officially banned in the U.K. Some members of Parliament are particularly irate over the
which shows a 59 year old Twiggy's image wrinkly free courtesy of Photoshop.
Parliament is concerned about images that are aimed at children and the digital alteration of adults.
Britain wants to ban the use of Photoshop for ads targeting under 16 readers and have a disclaimer for all other ads to describe the extent of the use of Photoshop.
Member of Parliament Jo Swinson says,
Today's unrealistic idea of what is beautiful means that young girls are under more pressure now than they were even five years ago. Airbrushing means that adverts contain completely unattainable perfect images no one can live up to in real life. We need to help protect children from these pressures and we need to make a start by banning airbrushing in adverts aimed at them.
Americans are angry about retouching — so widespread, according to an LA Times article that
"it's quite possible that the vast majority of images seen in the public arena have been altered."
Professor of pop culture Montana Miller tells the Times.
Scott Kelby, president of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals, counters that Photoshop just makes the camera as forgiving as the eye. He says,
If you met Faith Hill in person, you would think she's absolutely beautiful. And when you take her picture, you will see every flaw that you never saw in person. Those flaws not only become visible, but magnified. . . . If I were talking to someone, I'd look at their eyes, not at the blemish on the side of their face. But as soon as you open up that photo on a 30-inch monitor, you'd say, 'Oh my gosh, where did that come from?'
But if Photoshop retouching was banned where would we get all the Photoshop disasters to keep us entertained?
Comments
I am the professor quoted in this piece, and yet I did NOT say the words attributed to me. If you follow the link to the L.A. Times story, you will find me commenting on women's body images affected by Photoshop, while the quote about the "vast majority of images" being altered is in another part of the article. Please be more careful, Examiner!
And I Manipulated All of These Images!
(Retro - What's My Line)
what an idiotic notion. Photoshop is used to enhance images and clean them up. I think you'll ALSO find that studio lighting is strategically placed to enhance the image. Make up artists are use to enhance the image. Depth of field is used, glossy paper ion magazines is used.
Do you propose all of these things are banned so that people in images only look like people walking down the street?
People's words are edited in publications and on the news, why shouldn't people's image? Why not just educate kids better to understand how business works. Desirable looking products sell. It's nothing new, we just use technology to help them look more desirable these days.
It would be nice to push a bit more honesty into advertising. Portraying such unreal and impossible people all the time isn't good. but I agree that trying to ban it wholesale is ridiculous. MP's wouldn't go for it either, just think how rough they'd look in their campaign leaflets!
And I altered reality.
(Not WML, you dope. It was To Tell the Truth.)
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!