Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Photoshop Disappears MP's Cleavage!

One of our fabulous fans reminded me that Canadian chain Jacob Clothing is no longer using Photoshop to slim down their models. This brave step is a huge commitment to portraying women in a realistic way rather than trimming impossible inches off thighs and waists.

We are already exposed to a huge number of extremely thin images, add to that a trigger happy Photoshop artist and you are left with completely unrealistic images that are at best irritating and at worse can seriously affect self-esteem and body image.

In the lingerie industry one of the worst offenders is Victoria's Secret. They are renowned for their over zealous Photoshopping. The one armed Victoria's Secret model is still my favourite example of Photoshop gone wild.

We're all fully aware that Photoshop is used in marketing. We use Photoshop for our own shots at Butterfly Collection to even out light and to remove things like the gigantic bruise one model turned up with on her hip having fallen off her horse the day before! We never take inches off hips or thin out arms to make our models 'better' I think their natural curves are compelling.


You probably know by now that my hips have their own gravitational pull and I have to work hard to keep them under control. Images like the one above make me realize how normal my hips are compared to the doctored hips on the right! Have a look at these two examples and ask yourself why the images would need to be altered.
The stunning Frieda Pinto appears to be virtually white in this add for L'Oreal's 'Colours Take Flight' make-up. Now sure, gigantic lights will make anyone paler but does this image really speak to gorgeous young Indian women and say "your skin is perfect just as it is?"

This one cracked me up. Canadian NDP MP Rathika Sitsabaiesan had her cleavage disappeared by a puritanical press officer who believed that cleavage is a woman's game and politics is a man's arena! Good lord.

The interesting thing about this is that I couldn't find an example of a male model or actor or NDP politician who had been Photoshopped to make their stomach flatter, or arms more muscular. Why aren't women's bodies good enough, exactly as they are? Perhaps supporting companies like Jacob will show that as women we want to truly represented for our diversity and curves. xx


  1. I think photoshop is mainstream in glam magazine covers. People accepted it as a mainstream industry where if you want to sell magazines, your cover must be impressive and perfect.

  2. That's totally true - there were some trials in the mid 90s where a couple of magazine used untouched photos on their covers and sales dropped. It's a fine line between touching up and completely altering reality though. Case in point, severing someone's head from their body and using someone else's body entirely http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/26/kimora-lee-simmons-dare-m_n_551821.html

  3. It is acceptable nowadays. People may gossip about the edited images, but who really cares? A cover must be presentable to the public. Who wants to buy a magazine with a cover girl who shows a lot of impurities on skin like stretch marks and blemishes? I don't think people will buy those kinds of magazines. Anyway, most of the companies make money through photoshops. digital cameras

    1. I think there is a place for Photoshop for sure. However, I don't think that it is definitively 'acceptable'. The fact that companies make money doesn't outweigh a responsibility to teens and young women who try (in vain) to look like the women they see on magazine covers. Photoshopping a size 0 woman to look even smaller with zero cellulite and immaculate skin is irresponsible. The UK is one of the first countries setting some limits for the use of Photoshop in the media because they're finally doing some research between the increased teen anorexia rates and photoshopped images.