Recently I posted over on the APAD blog a little article quoting some editors over at SELF magazine speaking about the photoshop retouch work that goes on for their magazine covers, or specifically, their latest cover with Kelly Clarkson. Former classmate Andrea Morales pointed it out to me via facebook.
Ironically, I subscribe to mostly text-heavy and literature centric magazines so I don’t come across these issues too often. I guess I am reminded why. I know that magazine covers are photoshopped, but the article here made me livid pissed. I know that some people seem to live in a reality that us normal folks don’t occupy (some of them Wall Street folks for example, who think $100 is nothing), but here is another bright and shining example.
If you want to know how some magazine editors think, have a gander, and then don’t feel so bad the next time you look at a magazine and feel frustrated by how abnormal and beautiful everything looks.
Fashion ads are one thing, editorial is another. I’m a photographer. I also happened to teach photoshop for a year. I love photoshop and what it can do. But using it to portray reality in a way that is not realistic is downright irresponsible. That, we should be used to though. If you are an educated media consumer you know that a lot of covers are airbrushed, and it might make you mad with good reason. Read all about what the editor says to justify the decisions though. She had her marathon picture photoshopped. Are we that vain that we need to look back at constructed and false representations of truly good moments in our lives? I hope to hell not. Maybe if we could be more comfortable in our own skin we would start buying magazines that portrayed reality realistically…
I’m a dreamer I know.