2009
11.29

“Photoshopped!”

It’s nearly a universally-understood expression. A magazine hits newsstands, the model or actor looks way too thin, and fingers get pointed. There have been too many cases of photo anorexia lately, and as a result, Adobe’s humble little program has developed a nasty reputation for fraud and body-image quackery.

But it’s not actually Photoshop’s fault at all, no more than a scalpel can be at fault for malpractice. The problem lies with the art director. That red grease pen—with its power to prescribe, alter and heal—has given a few of us a god complex. Now, when Kelly Clarkson complains about the distortion of her own image for a magazine cover , the editor dismisses the complaint, claiming only to make Clarkson “look her personal best”.

In the 80s and 90s, Cindy Crawford nearly trademarked the mole. Now, any little fleck and discoloration is viewed as a cancer and burned away. Modern editors and designers have become numb to perfection, and some have begun seeking new highs—larger doses of symmetry, new extremes in length or uniformity.

Photo alteration has become such a valued skill that some Photoshoppers are becoming famous themselves. Pascal Dangin is considered by some to be the number one retoucher in fashion today. Over thirty celebrities keep him on retainer. The New Yorker has put together a great piece on Pascal and the world he operates in.

Dangin is, by all accounts, an adept plumper of breasts and shrinker of pores. Using the principles of anatomy and perspective, he is able to smooth a blemish or a blip (“anomalies,” he calls them) with a painterly subtlety.

As usual, The New Yorker could take note from Dangin on the whole “subtlety” thing, but they aren’t far off. A good retoucher understands when to improve and when they’ve stepped too far into the Uncanny Valley. And if you’ve ever personally watched one work, they really do use the pen and tablet the way an artist uses canvas and brush.

It’s not all so bad. Photo doctoring, in small doses, is an accepted part of our culture. All over the country, retouchers are curing school portraits of all manner of ailments—Acne cleared up, boogers removed, teeth whitened and eyes brightened. Wedding photographers are taking “bridezillas” from perspiring to smiling in a few clicks. Advertisements, the photos of food in your menus, the sunsets on that travel brochure–Photoshop has been an essential part of quality control in print production for years. It’s not necessarily to manipulate our perception either. The printing press can be an unforgiving tool, and some doctoring is necessary to ensure the image makes it onto paper in one piece. So, don’t blame Photoshop every time some unscrupulous editor decides to trim 50 pounds off a model. Retouching is a little like any other prescription: Healthy in small doses, poisonous in large.

No Comment.

Add Your Comment