Actually both of those photos have been retouched. The model is actually 140 pounds overweight, bald and a guy.
Angel Panneflek
· 2 months ago
Well, there is a law that doesnt allow the sale of E.T. dolls in France too.. The law states that no dolls without a human head can be sold
Walt
· 2 months ago
hey if bullshit laws like that work in France....
twitter.com/__0Pete0__
· 2 months ago
There actually different photos anyway.....the one on the right isnt just touched up its completely different. Anyway!! I think its actually an okay idea....if it just means they have to have a tiny disclaimer or something like it on the photo then its fine. Hopefully then wont go overboard by banning the images altogether! Not everyone knows about the magic program called Photoshop!
andrea
· 2 months ago
i agree with it! People who constantly get fed a false (usually negative) "lie" they will think that's how they should be, that it's the "right/normal" way to be. I work in an elementary school and I see the kids (not just girls) emulating popular celebrities starting as young as kindergarten! BUT it's not just the media and other peers that pressure people- it's also parents/spouses/friends.
There are so many kids missing a positive role-model to show them the "correct" or should I say healthy (?) ideals. Not just in looks, but also in one's personality/character. People focus too much on looks and not enough on being a good, outstanding citizen. I have luckily found a supportive bunch of friends. None of us is any one shape/size/race/way. We support each other not only on being/eating and thinking healthy, we squash the falsehoods and negative things before they harm us. But then again we are adults.
We HAVE to step in early enough to help kids know that the MEDIA is the messed up one, not them. That they are beautiful whatever they look like. We need to focus more on helping our kids to grow up physically, mentally and emotionally sound and healthy adults. ~A
brandonhess
· 2 months ago
They're making it so they have to place a warning with it is all. I think that's completely justified. We make advertisers do the same thing with products (Options vs Model shown so they can't suggest a price is for the top-line model, etc).
Derek Jensen
· 2 months ago
There goes the fashion, beauty, and magazine industry in France. Because those types of pictures are what magazines love here in the United States and they attract people.
But on the other hand, I see this as a positive move. Kind of reminds me of the movie, "13 going on 30"
TWlTTERLOGOS.com
· 2 months ago
I will take the one on the left any day
Super Carly
· 2 months ago
It could actually be a very positive thing. Imagine this. 3 adverts promoting make-up. 2 admit to using 'photo-shopped enhanced pictures' on the ad, the third doesn't enhance the pictures at all - it's all done naturally. I know which I'd buy. Brands advertising in France could really tap into this and use it to their advantage if they position it correctly. 'We don't need Photoshop to sell our products like other companies.' In fact, they could go global with it and really spark something off. And I'm copyrighting that idea all you make-up people, thank you very much!!
Name
· 2 months ago
Sounds like a good idea.
jasonn
· 2 months ago
You know a few filters on the camera and poses could have yielded a very similar look.
A lot of the Photoshop work is unnecessary. I'm not sure how much effect it will have, but a great example of how France 'liberty' is quite different than American concepts about freedom. Then, American concepts about freedom are changing as well.
Whatever happened to simple buyer beware?
Federico Contreras
· 2 months ago
> Whatever happened to simple buyer beware?
Defective seatbelts. Explosive fuel tanks.
jasonn
· 2 months ago
You can't really compare product liability cases where a product causes death (without risk disclosure BTW) with a modified photo of a model everyone knows looks nothing like that image. I wonder, is it "fair" for her to wear makeup or be allowed to wear a lift bra or hosiery? The real female form is quite different than that propped up and squished into modern clothing and underwear.
haroldcampbell
· 2 months ago
Clearly you missed ...'She points to the deterimental effect that unrealistic body images can have on adolescents: “Many young people, particularly girls, do not know the difference between the virtual and reality, and can develop complexes from a very young age. In some cases this leads to anorexia or bulimia and very serious health problems.”'
So yes, in some case of these modified photos of models may result indirectly in death. As not EVERYONE knows that the model looks nothing like the image.
minder
· 2 months ago
I don't think a camera filter or different pose would have taken those inches off her waist and hips. Perhaps you have already been brainwashed into thinking that bod is natural?
jasonn
· 2 months ago
I realize they shrank her waste, but it's not a significant improvement on her form. Most of the changes are colors and textures.
She's a very attractive woman with the extra few inches. Maybe I just don't care. I'm thinking most people don't really care. Is there an epidemic of children dieting and getting too thin in France? I can assure you that thick teens in America are proud of their extra pounds. There's an obesity problem in the US, but I don't see a skinny obsession here. And, I think ... LIKE I SAID BEFORE ... that people /know/ what a reasonable healthy shape is. This is an argument for super models and professional popularity biz folks - actors, performers, and the sort. The average person is well aware of what a healthy form looks like.
C
· 2 months ago
I disagree complete. They shrunk her waist an made the v in her bottom area just a straight line. This makes her form seem competely different and definitely smaller than I think is physically possible proportionally. Girls will try on a similar outfit, look in the mirror, see that their body looks nothing like hers did in the picture and instead of blaming the product will blame themselves. People don't know what a reasonably healthy shape is, we're taught that skinny skinny skinny is healthy and what to achieve by any means necessary. Thick teens in america are NOT proud of their extra pounds, have you read any statistics on women and how they feel about their body? Not only did they change her body, but they also changed her hair and her neck. Her neck is not that skinny. This happens in many ads and like I said before it adds up to unrealistic expectations for teen women (and men) to have about their body. And teens are not the only ones affected by this.
jasonn
· 2 months ago
The photo on the left is a voluptuous attractive woman.
I'm not saying they didn't modify her. I'm saying she was already quite fetching.
Maybe teens aren't capable of making rational decisions, developing rational ideas of self-image. If Americans aren't happy being pudgy, they should stop eating so much. The stats on BMI and overall indicators like diabetes don't show me a country starving themselves to death.
I have two daughters. We talk about this issue occasionally. I always tell them fat girls have fewer options than thinner girls. And, living a healthy lifestyle creates a much better life all around. Obesity is epidemic in our country. Maybe anorexia is as well, but I don't see any evidence of it near me. But, then I'll admit I live in the fattest part of the fattest country in the world.
But, there are tons of women who are naturally skinny. Millions of women are thin without Photoshop, and lots of them have the 'perfect physique' without the added benefit of skilled artistic modifications in post-shoot. If this Photoshop effect is set aside for cocaine powered models that weigh 90lbs and burn out at 19, does that really help France's teen population?
Maybe this conversation should take place at home. Maybe parents should discuss realistic body images with their children. Maybe they should be taught to separate fantasy from reality instead of just throwing our hands up and expecting teens to conflate the two.
In the end, I think the photo on the left looks good too. The model is attractive without modifications post-shoot. I think the obsession with this so-called perfection element is more in the model and fashion industry than out here in the consumer world. But, I could be wrong.
Big Daddy
· 2 months ago
Fix the typo in the fourth line. no "Photostopped" it's "Photoshopped"
doctorparadox
· 2 months ago
oops, thanks for the eagle eye -- corrected. Although "Photostopped" might be a good term to encapsulate this law! ;)
Big Daddy
· 2 months ago
Or fix my typo from "no" to "Not". Ha ha ha.
Sophia Daniels
· 2 months ago
i think the untouched photo looks better. really with a bit of adjustment to the curves to bring out the details it would have been fine.
they completely wrecked her neck and sholder... and the belt looks wrong where they squished her waist.
Pishabh Badmaash
· 2 months ago
I hope they use this to regulate the look of Dell Computers too. Have you seen some of the latest ads for Dell? Perverts...
Brandon_Sheley
· 2 months ago
getting a bit slow on the stories guys ;)
tweetamar
· 2 months ago
Do you mean Photoshopped? Because you wrote Photostopped. Just letting you know :-) Otherwise - this story is really funny!
Name
· 2 months ago
I have never heard anything so stupid, and I am French!!! Are we also going to set this rule for art....?
Allie Merrick
· 2 months ago
I don't think photoshopped body imagery is a public health issue. I think the development of a generation that can't tell the difference between reality & virtuality is the REAL issue. Being consumed with a virtual existence is bad enough. The inability to distinguish what is real & what is virtual is even worse. I don't believe I single line of text is a viable solution.
AJ
· 2 months ago
By all means, take it upon yourself to educate every youngster out there how to tell the difference between a true representation of a specific person, and a digitally manipulated image of the same subject. If a young child sees a new photo of a celebrity they look up to, how are they supposed to know that the person doesn't actually have a waistline that thin? Or a bust that developed? They can't tell the difference. And they see it, and want to emulate it, and it is "that" which is causing the health issues.
I think the line of text should read "Image adjusted to what we feel beauty is, for the specific purpose to sell more magazines. Do not emulate"
adonfff
· 2 months ago
Hi, I'm French. Since Mr Sarkozy election, each problem has his law. Farting at home is a problem, so they make a law to solve it. In my opinion, they had better to spend money in education and learn to the youth the difference between reality and virtual. Marked a product "photoshopped" will solve the problem of bulimia and anorexia, I don't think so.
Mike Rogers
· 2 months ago
France should ban misleading headlines, like the one on this article...
I think it is a good idea, then people will know for sure that an image has been enhanced digitally.
Brands-and-Jingles
· 2 months ago
Of-cour.se!
XO
· 2 months ago
Interesting idea, but then it would just go on every image!
How about educating adolescents that every image they see in an advertisement is photoshopped and is probably not an attainable ideal?
deestewart
· 2 months ago
I think that, instead of trying to be more creative while actually taking the pictures, they rely too much on the post-production/photoshop it stage.
Although I'm not a big fan of some kinds of rules/regulations, this could be interesting.
robblewis
· 2 months ago
This will have no effect on solving the concerns of anorexia and bulemia. It's just a way for the French govt to find new sources of revenue. Most kids already know the photos are touched up. The issue lies in self confidence, attitude and even depression. Slightly changing some picture isn't going to change that. What's next, regulations on the body types of people on TV shows?
Justin Kistner
· 2 months ago
Confuses the issue of body image. People can develop a poor self image just from looking at another real person. Poor self image is about 1) Paying more attention to the negative things people say about you than the positive 2) Not feeling good about yourself from not having a sense of purpose 3) Not feeling sufficiently loved by others and 4) Other deeper issues like these. Thinking that Photoshop is the issue totally misses the real problem. People that believe their problems could be solved from having a different body are as fooled as those who play the lottery thinking their financial problems would be solved with a huge influx of cash.
jon
· 2 months ago
Isn't every photo in magazines "photo-shopped?"
Levi Lenaerts
· 2 months ago
mmm, interesting! but I doubt that this law will pass. Almost every picture nowadays is processed through photoshop. Where do people have to draw the line in what they can and can not alter in an image. After color correcting for example, the mood of the image can change. With this color correcting, the skin of the model can also change, for example. This side effect is normal, and is this then wrong or misleading? I think not.
Robert
· 2 months ago
Wow, I never thought something like this would actually happen anywhere. Well done for the French
Gawed
· 2 months ago
love the idea :) it's time things get done about being fake all over!
Annalee Blysse
· 2 months ago
Do they really think that girls that develop anorexia saw one too many issues of French Vogue? Girls learn to feel inadequate and get a screwed up view of the world when they're raised by drug addicts, or abusive parents, or were sexually abused. Advertising can only effect someone that is already damaged.
mary
· 2 months ago
So then you think that only damaged people respond to grocery store ads too?
JPLett
· 2 months ago
The girl in the pic is hot as balls, w or w/o ps.
PammyCakes
· 2 months ago
I agree with JPLett and I think this is percisely the point. Okay, so maybe we as adults know that the picture is digitally enhanced. Over time we have learned that it happens often. However, there are two problems with this. One, why must we enhance photos that are alone beautiful and don't need modifications. If she was beautiful before the enhancement, why must our society or the french society make her look skinnier to make it more of a selling feature. My salient point is that there needs to be more mixed media of what is beautiful. Men may have several characteristics they desire. I agree that young women need more classes on how to see themselves as beautiful, but they also need an adequate role model that conveys that. If women are being told one thing, but shown that beauty is another, it is quite a conundrum. So my two issues are: why not enhance less and show us more natural beauty and why not put a disclaimer for developing minds that aren't set in their ideals of self esteem.
graeme_harrison
· 2 months ago
Oh just think of all the great CGI based movies that the French are going to miss out on.
not forgetting that Jessica Rabbit will no doubt be removed from the shelves.
Jason Toubia
· 2 months ago
SimpleTechGuru
· 2 months ago
Enfin! While we do know that there will be some photoshopping, let's get some "truth in advertising" here in the U.S.! Trying to keep up with a lie is exhausting! The Dove beauty campaign has got it right!
tragedyintoyland
· 2 months ago
great idea
Name
· 2 months ago
I think this is a good thing. Technically it is false advertisement. If you really have a good product it will sell, if not..too bad.
Blake @ Props Blog
· 2 months ago
I remember seeing those photoshopped images above on model mayhem about a month ago. There was a big uproar about people over-photoshopping. A few years ago, a couple of places in europe put a limit to how low a model's BMI could be to try to limit the number of models that were unhealthy skinny; that didn't last long though
camkevbell
· 2 months ago
I'd think most magazine photos are enhanced in some way. How are they going to make the law meaningful if nearly every photo has a disclaimer on it. Are they going to quantify the amount of editing? And where are they going to put the label? I'd guess vertically along the spine to make it all but invisible. I'm all for portraying reality, but for a law like this to have any meaning it has to be applied in a very well thought out manner.
Phil
· 2 months ago
people shouldnt be looking to magazines for self esteem. If a magazine ruins your self esteem you are retarded
jips
· 2 months ago
... or a teenager or a child (who cannot make any difference)! For them, without any explanation (from parents/friends/teachers/magazines), what they see is what is real. A color/light (or any basic modification) enhancement is ok but here we are talking about fakes (different body's parts from different models + "How-to-Lose-20-pounds-in-20-seconds" feature to create a *hot* Frankenstein)! Only few people are aware and able to detect them all the time while most of people know fakes exist but are unable to say when/where they see one. Fake after fake, people might feel like "Ugly Betty" (who is a also a fake by the way) and they might feed a new complex. This a all about *education*. I agree, a single line will not avoid anorexia nor bulemia, but this small warning could be a first step toward education. Fragile people could feel a little bit less guily if they understand what they're shown is not (totaly or at all) the truth. I'm a french photoshopper.
bhartzer
· 2 months ago
amazing. just about everything is touched up nowadays, right?
Adwiz
· 2 months ago
Reminds me of California's absurd Proposition 65. Someone didn't think this through very well. Since pretty well 100% of magazine and advertising images are enhanced in some way (even just applying a filter is an enhancement), then every image will have the warning. What's the point of that?
Walt
· 2 months ago
I think government and new legislation is a public health issue.
Norton Zanini
· 2 months ago
Im a photoshopper, but I must be honest... its true that. ppl are driven by media, we can't deny that, It shouldnt though, but it is a fact. and that Totally makes sense... wether is right or not, I dont know... and definitely won't affect anything on my Use of photoshop as well for (i think) millions of others too...
The truth!
· 2 months ago
Bullshit! How can it be health issue? People are smoking and drinking and no one is talking about them! Total bullshit all the way! Perhaps condoms should be banned too cus it gives adolescents the impression that it's safe to have sex! They break the bible rules and no one is complaining! Bullshit!
kiwikatnz
· 2 months ago
I dont understand the airbrushing on the above sample. She looks good anyway. As a matter of fact, she looks more natural and not painted up like a tart. This coming from a female.
Mido
· 2 months ago
So this means In-camera editing, in-iPhone editing as well? Does that mean if we go back to the DarkRoom we are ok?
Ok seriously though, didn't anyone notice the Dove commercial months ago about how a photo gets enhanced? I posted it up...is there something going on on the French side we need to be more aware of? Any French folks here to shed some light?
This is certainly good. They can't rightfully say these pictures can't be published, but they can say that you're not allowed to purposefully deceive an audience.
siliconcowboy
· 2 months ago
Some French politician's model girlfriend doubtless has it in for a photographer so she, ah, persuaded the politician to draft up this piece of sh i mean legislation ...
BebopDesigner
· 2 months ago
Bulimia and Anorexia find their causes on a number of interlocking social aspects rather than an single photo on its own. I don't think this is going to help anybody at all.
jerry
· 2 months ago
The person on the Photoshopped version doesn't even look like the person on the left... After 8 years of Photoshopping images just like those, I decided to stop for the same reason. Specially since I have a daughter. In fact, I wish America's lawmakers where equally smart on the subject.
fakename
· 2 months ago
I think it is a really smart and fair move, specially towards women. We stopped telling our children about Santa Claus, but the new lies are worse than the past ones. I believe adding disclaimers of this types is the best next alternative to actually PROHIBITING ´photoshopping´. Again France becomes an example I hope other nations follow.
Richard
· 2 months ago
This is a good idea. Too many kids are growing up with warped views on physical appearance, and resort to bulimia or anorexia. This can start curving around our culture a bit, and since alot of trendy fashion comes from France, this will be a step back in the right direction.
ASW
· 2 months ago
It's true. The negative body images that develop in children--especially girls--are not simply by seeing one too many magazine covers, there is a lot more to it than that. But the fact of the matter is that these unnatural images contribute to the huge equation that adds up to the body image distortion. By going after one aspect maybe, and perhaps this is more idealistic than realistic, it will bring to light the other areas that need to be held responsible as well. All and in, this is great idea, but unfortunately it most likely will not succeed in accomplishing what it is intending due to the fact that we don't live in a perfect world. God speed!
david
· 2 months ago
the important thing to realize is that you can always find someone better looking than you, photoshopped or not. just learn to be comfortable in your skin.
Anon
· 2 months ago
Who the F cares! Everyone knows that photos in mags are enhanced beyond belief. Wake up to yourselves people and stop trying to measure yourself against an impossible ideal! Disclaimer messages aren't going to make any friggen difference... people still smoke even-though they know it's killing them!
Gaetano Marano
· 2 months ago
personally, I like also the non-photoshopped version of this girl... :)
geekmom
· 2 months ago
yeah well they said socialism would never happen in the US and look at the nutcases we have in office now.
People should be able to treat the images they own however they want to. Stupid governments.
Addoway.com
· 2 months ago
what about an * sign next to the picture with a footnote on the bottom saying: Photoshop pro was here! But she is still hot!
Brie
· 2 months ago
Yes... this is most definitely a public health issue.
me
· 2 months ago
I was anorexic. I was never exposed to fashion magazines, anorexia and bulimia are not caused by images in a magazine. That is like blaming a sad song for a suicide. My problem with photoshopped images is the PRODUCT is altered! Yes, it may get more people to try on the outfit, but there's nothing more annoying then trying something on in the store and saying "This is NOT how it was in the ad!". The way the CLOTHES are in the actual photo is so not how it "falls" in the retouched photo. THAT ALONE should be marked: Photoshop applied, clothes do not fit like this in reality. And before the fat jokes fly, I'm 34,22,32
David
· 2 months ago
Don't forget it isn't just one image, but thousands of images from tiny ads in magazines to giant billboards. It's a saturation of modified forms of images, which becomes more and more difficult to distinguish which have been modified from those that haven't, or even how much they have been modified. I think it is a good thing like warnings on cigarettes...but the warning will just become something that is simply ignored.
A friggin' great idea. The message is a little long for my taste, maybe "retouched" alone would suffice, but I love the point and overall goal.
Bertil
· 2 months ago
You shouldn't ask your geek readers who's only contact with Photoshopped cover models is http://xkcd.com/331/ but rather to psycologists at eating disorder services in hospitals. It's a significant problem in France, but I know for a fact it is far worst in some parts of the US. Artistic licence (having people flying, over-extended arms) isn't the point: she says so explicitly.
jeu de sport
· 2 months ago
France is doing a good work, Photoshopping is really an illegal. On Photoshope any one can make a bad or porn or nude pic of any celebrity or the simple person. Its really a bad work, because of photoshope someone's life has going to be destroyed..
I really hope this goes through. Personally, I love it when I see photos of models that haven't had spot removal all over them. It's nice to see realistic portrayals of people, moles, freckles and all. If they made it to model status, they don't need further digital perfecting. They were beautiful in the first place! Yes, photoshopped images in magazines etc. look amazing, but look up from that same magazine and take a look around. You weren't looking at a human. :)
Peter Warren
· 2 months ago
Best idea I've heard in a long time, should be the same all over
Super Carly
· 2 months ago
I love the idea... I think it definitely should go ahead and I'd love to see it in every country.
Monika
· 2 months ago
"Is Photoshopped body imagery a public health issue?" Yes most of the time, I know men would like to see beautiful small women, but most of the time this women looks ill - maybe france is crazy but the intention is ok for me
Nathan Driskell
· 2 months ago
What got me the most about this was that it would also apply to art photography. Assuming we're talking about fine art, the idea of putting that disclaimer alongside a photograph on a gallery wall is laughable to me.
Everyone seems to have already hit on the real problem, the inability of today's generation to distinguish a realistic image from a contrived one. It's not always government's job to solve these problems, although that might be news to France's legislators.
Christine Wilson
· 2 months ago
I think this is a great idea. Sometimes we forget how influenced we are by the images around us. And setting impossible standards can be very damaging.
Even I have trouble telling when people are airbrushed and I'm a web designer... so I'm expecting my eye to be a little more trained than your average person. I watched Resident Evil: Extinction. Someone asked me what I thought of the movie. I said "It was okay... but was Milla Jovovich airbrushed? I thought they could only do that with static pictures?"
Another friend came into the conversation at that point and said "Oh my friend worked on the 3D graphics of that movie. Yeah they airbrushed her."
After that all I could think was teenage girls trying to live up to that standard. It's impossible. And then when teenage boys talk about how hot the airbrushed chick is, it can really create a body image problem.
So I think this is wonderful. Education is key.
architekt9
· 2 months ago
I'm confused. I thought everyone already knew that 99.999% of ad images were photoshopped/airbrushed...
Elizabeth K. Barone
· 2 months ago
I think it's a great idea, and I hope that it influences other countries to do the same.
jberg
· 2 months ago
This sounds like a good idea. Here in the Us- food is so readily available evrywhere, yet there are people starving themselves to kee p up with false images.
Where did you get that side-by-side image from? Although the right one is indeed photoshopped, it is NOT a photoshopped version of the left photo - they are different photos. The poses are similar, but actually very different. Her head is at a different angle (not just the tilt, but rotation too) which no photoshopper would bother to change that far. The lips, eyes and nose are at different angles which would have to have been repainted. Also the lighting is different and areas around her neck and collar bone would have had to have been repainted if they were the same image. In general the photo on the right is of such a higher quality and sharpness that it could only have been constructed from the left one by repainting. Repainting just doesn't happen on photo retouches in magazines - it takes too long for results you could get from using a slightly different photo from the shoot, as has occurred here. Further proof? The creases on her "shorts" are different.
So really you are misleading readers with this side-by-side - the theme of the article implies the images are the same but one is a retouched version. Fair enough if your source told you it's the same image.
Name
· 2 months ago
Wonderful idea. Let's extend it to ANY modified photograph, I can think of some news outlets that would have little to talk about if that happens.
Nicoleta
· 2 months ago
I wouldn't mind a disclaimer, especially since some enhanced images are done so well, it's almost impossible to distinguish between it and the original.
Anne
· 2 months ago
Here in the UK, one company (Dove) have taken the initiative with their "Campaign for Real Beauty", featuring models with various body types in their ads. OK, so none of them are fat, but they are "real" shapes - curvy, angular, pearshaped, etc. - not skinny supermodels. As a woman, I respect them for that.
A bit of Photoshopping to compensate for poor lighting is one thing, but changing the model's physique is a casual manipulation of women's self-image - pernicious and ultimately dangerous when impressionable teenagers are consumers of such images.
Jen
· 2 months ago
It's unrealistic to remove all spots from a model's face too, and might make a teenager feel she needs to have excessively perfect skin. Some retouching is good and necessary to remove visual noise from the picture.
As a magazine art director, I'm all for calling excessively manipulated photos "photo illustration." When you get into the realm of changing someone's appearance to something unrecognizable, head-switching, hair-adding, making eyes bigger and waists smaller...it's really not photography anymore. Just an illustration that looks like a photo.
enigmity
· 2 months ago
To be inundated with these images your whole life, even with full knowledge that they have been altered (though to what degree per image, the public has no way of knowing), it still presents a disconnect when a girl looks into a mirror and knows that the image staring back at them is pretty, but for some deep-down reason not quite pretty enough. You can know intellectually that you're a healthy weight, and still have insecurities about this bit and that bobble simply because we aren't witness to enough of these imperfections to realize they are the norm and not the aberration.
Personally, I find no reason for a disclaimer on alterations like skin imperfections, colour, tones, a shadow here, a smoothing there. Not all pictures must be photo-journalistic. In fact we - women included - often desire the stylized 'hyper-reality' that a crafted photo can capture. As a woman though, even one who's thinner than Jessica Alba, I take great offence to the "slimming down" of our human subjects. THIS is where the heath dangers of unrealistic expectations come in. THIS is when my blood boils. Aren't the hand-picked goddess models a selective representation of beauty enough?
Why they'd skinnify the above photos is ludicrous to me. I'm insulted that whoever manipulated that photo is TELLING ME what's desirable. Present a form in its most beautiful light, you have my full blessing. But to alter the true form is a corruption of it.
How can we not be subconciously affected, however minutely, after years and years of being innundated with images drilling into us this unauthentic "standard of beauty"? I feel sorry for the women living up to it. I pity the men who expect it.
Zap a zit, leave the curves!!!
meh22
· 2 months ago
What do you want to bet that, Valerie Boyer is a fat, ugly cow?
CHikes
· 2 months ago
Tremendous! No more people will be hired for modelling, and the computer CGI business will explode. Imagine millions of people yearning to become .... what is purely computer generated, with no human being involved in any way.
The isolation of our lives, cutoff from each other, will be complete. We'll yearn to become images that are not even flesh and blood.
I wonder if the French lawmakers really considered the results of their actions.
Thomas Janson
· 2 months ago
I had this idea myself. Here in Germany, if you advertise a car, you have to put a note at the bottom if accessory parts are shown on the photo that are not included in the car's base price.
Photoshopping has slowly sneaked into advertising and all kinds of media. The impact especially on (female) teenagers in their social orientation and self-confidence building phase is tremendous and hard to understand for grown-ups (and even more if you are from inside the media).
I have doubts about the cost-benefit ratio of such regulations like most of all. But I believe if an advertiser or media company is basing its business on trying to sell as reality to unsuspecting consumers what is not, it is only fair to ask them to put a little note a the bottom. So they can choose between an image and an honest approach.
We are running out of reality soon.
Name
· 2 months ago
Think it's a great idea- definitely a step in a positive direction. Sometimes the Frenchies get it right not wanting to go with the flow and just do what's considered popular/what makes the most GP- also not an easy thing to do.
Geoff McDonald
· 2 months ago
Shall we smash all the Greek sculptures too? Weren't they guilty of presenting an idealized form of the human body? Health issue or political correctness gone made? I call it 'future blind'. A sure case of not understanding what is happening near or in the near future. I wouldn't expect to see a photo in a magazine that wasn't photoshopped!
C
· 2 months ago
Last I heard Greeks sculptures were not used to sell products. The female sculptures had real bodies, with curves instead of jutting bones. Greek sculptures were not always made to present an idealized form of the human body. Many times they were made to humanize a God and they served as a temple or a shrine to that god. Later they were made for tombs of athletes and such. When sculptures started being made of muses it was still a person by person thing. Sculptures were showing beauty, magazine photos and ads are used to sell things. They are used to make us feel like we don't have enough or we won't ever have quite enough until we buy this next product or lose the next 5-10 pounds. Subconsciously when we look at a picture we believe it to be real. You can't take a picture of something that didn't exist right? With every picture of this idealized figure we see we don't always stop and tell ourselves that it's been touched up. We don't have time to. The Greeks weren't bombarded with this imagery day in and day out, They had time after looking at a sculpture to also look at everyone around them. The sculpture wasn't suppose to show a norm, it was suppose to show either an exquisite beauty or a time/pose of beauty. The images we see today are selling a norm. They are not telling us that it can't be achieved by all, they are hinting that it can, with the right clothes, or the right plastic surgery, or the right make up, or the right friends. There is a lot of history behind these sculptures that we get to learn throughout our younger years in school, very few kids are learning about the lies of omission that are coming through in ads. I don't think we should smash sculptures, I don't think we should get rid of ads completely, I think we should be a bit more honest about it though. Maybe the warning stickers on the ads aren't the answer, but getting a conversation going and flushing out different ideas is definitely a good start.
i agree it reminds me of that 13 going on 30 movie.
buntie24
· 1 month ago
I think it should be. It's publishing an image which is not true. It's not a true representation. It will only be time before the law catches up with this - and puts an end to it. And not a moment too soon...
Fabi
· 5 days ago
I'm actually doing a proposal argument about the negative effects of photoshop and how society has created a standard of how women should be viewed, by using tools as photoshop, to cut down on their weight, etc...
In this assignment, I actually proposed a similar idea to this one, where a disclaimer would be placed on any advertisement that was photoshopped. HOWEVER, I came to the conclusion that this is already being done with other products, such as cigarettes. At least in the US, Cigarettes must have a disclaimer on them that say they "are harmful to one's health and may lead to death"; yet people all over, still buy this product, and they continue smoking and allowing their health to deteriorate.
So the question to ask is, how effective would that disclaimer be on younger girls to be specific, or even the general audience, and would it allow SOCIETY to change the standards of how a women should look like?
All Comments
Anyway!! I think its actually an okay idea....if it just means they have to have a tiny disclaimer or something like it on the photo then its fine. Hopefully then wont go overboard by banning the images altogether! Not everyone knows about the magic program called Photoshop!
There are so many kids missing a positive role-model to show them the "correct" or should I say healthy (?) ideals. Not just in looks, but also in one's personality/character. People focus too much on looks and not enough on being a good, outstanding citizen. I have luckily found a supportive bunch of friends. None of us is any one shape/size/race/way. We support each other not only on being/eating and thinking healthy, we squash the falsehoods and negative things before they harm us. But then again we are adults.
We HAVE to step in early enough to help kids know that the MEDIA is the messed up one, not them. That they are beautiful whatever they look like. We need to focus more on helping our kids to grow up physically, mentally and emotionally sound and healthy adults.
~A
But on the other hand, I see this as a positive move. Kind of reminds me of the movie, "13 going on 30"
A lot of the Photoshop work is unnecessary. I'm not sure how much effect it will have, but a great example of how France 'liberty' is quite different than American concepts about freedom. Then, American concepts about freedom are changing as well.
Whatever happened to simple buyer beware?
Defective seatbelts. Explosive fuel tanks.
So yes, in some case of these modified photos of models may result indirectly in death. As not EVERYONE knows that the model looks nothing like the image.
She's a very attractive woman with the extra few inches. Maybe I just don't care. I'm thinking most people don't really care. Is there an epidemic of children dieting and getting too thin in France? I can assure you that thick teens in America are proud of their extra pounds. There's an obesity problem in the US, but I don't see a skinny obsession here. And, I think ... LIKE I SAID BEFORE ... that people /know/ what a reasonable healthy shape is. This is an argument for super models and professional popularity biz folks - actors, performers, and the sort. The average person is well aware of what a healthy form looks like.
Thick teens in america are NOT proud of their extra pounds, have you read any statistics on women and how they feel about their body?
Not only did they change her body, but they also changed her hair and her neck. Her neck is not that skinny. This happens in many ads and like I said before it adds up to unrealistic expectations for teen women (and men) to have about their body. And teens are not the only ones affected by this.
I'm not saying they didn't modify her. I'm saying she was already quite fetching.
Maybe teens aren't capable of making rational decisions, developing rational ideas of self-image. If Americans aren't happy being pudgy, they should stop eating so much. The stats on BMI and overall indicators like diabetes don't show me a country starving themselves to death.
I have two daughters. We talk about this issue occasionally. I always tell them fat girls have fewer options than thinner girls. And, living a healthy lifestyle creates a much better life all around. Obesity is epidemic in our country. Maybe anorexia is as well, but I don't see any evidence of it near me. But, then I'll admit I live in the fattest part of the fattest country in the world.
But, there are tons of women who are naturally skinny. Millions of women are thin without Photoshop, and lots of them have the 'perfect physique' without the added benefit of skilled artistic modifications in post-shoot. If this Photoshop effect is set aside for cocaine powered models that weigh 90lbs and burn out at 19, does that really help France's teen population?
Maybe this conversation should take place at home. Maybe parents should discuss realistic body images with their children. Maybe they should be taught to separate fantasy from reality instead of just throwing our hands up and expecting teens to conflate the two.
In the end, I think the photo on the left looks good too. The model is attractive without modifications post-shoot. I think the obsession with this so-called perfection element is more in the model and fashion industry than out here in the consumer world. But, I could be wrong.
they completely wrecked her neck and sholder... and the belt looks wrong where they squished her waist.
If a young child sees a new photo of a celebrity they look up to, how are they supposed to know that the person doesn't actually have a waistline that thin? Or a bust that developed? They can't tell the difference. And they see it, and want to emulate it, and it is "that" which is causing the health issues.
I think the line of text should read
"Image adjusted to what we feel beauty is, for the specific purpose to sell more magazines. Do not emulate"
Since Mr Sarkozy election, each problem has his law. Farting at home is a problem, so they make a law to solve it.
In my opinion, they had better to spend money in education and learn to the youth the difference between reality and virtual.
Marked a product "photoshopped" will solve the problem of bulimia and anorexia, I don't think so.
I think it is a good idea, then people will know for sure that an image has been enhanced digitally.
How about educating adolescents that every image they see in an advertisement is photoshopped and is probably not an attainable ideal?
Although I'm not a big fan of some kinds of rules/regulations, this could be interesting.
After color correcting for example, the mood of the image can change. With this color correcting, the skin of the model can also change, for example. This side effect is normal, and is this then wrong or misleading? I think not.
not forgetting that Jessica Rabbit will no doubt be removed from the shelves.
ppl are driven by media, we can't deny that, It shouldnt though, but it is a fact.
and that Totally makes sense...
wether is right or not, I dont know... and definitely won't affect anything on my Use of photoshop as well for (i think) millions of others too...
Ok seriously though, didn't anyone notice the Dove commercial months ago about how a photo gets enhanced? I posted it up...is there something going on on the French side we need to be more aware of? Any French folks here to shed some light?
http://mid0.posterous.com/false-images-of-femal...
After 8 years of Photoshopping images just like those, I decided to stop for the same reason. Specially since I have a daughter. In fact, I wish America's lawmakers where equally smart on the subject.
All and in, this is great idea, but unfortunately it most likely will not succeed in accomplishing what it is intending due to the fact that we don't live in a perfect world. God speed!
People should be able to treat the images they own however they want to. Stupid governments.
Chris Voss
The Twitter/Social Media Expert, Learn from the Best..
http://thechrisvossshow.com
¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°
http://www.seodoom.info
Yes, photoshopped images in magazines etc. look amazing, but look up from that same magazine and take a look around. You weren't looking at a human. :)
Everyone seems to have already hit on the real problem, the inability of today's generation to distinguish a realistic image from a contrived one. It's not always government's job to solve these problems, although that might be news to France's legislators.
Even I have trouble telling when people are airbrushed and I'm a web designer... so I'm expecting my eye to be a little more trained than your average person. I watched Resident Evil: Extinction. Someone asked me what I thought of the movie. I said "It was okay... but was Milla Jovovich airbrushed? I thought they could only do that with static pictures?"
Another friend came into the conversation at that point and said "Oh my friend worked on the 3D graphics of that movie. Yeah they airbrushed her."
After that all I could think was teenage girls trying to live up to that standard. It's impossible. And then when teenage boys talk about how hot the airbrushed chick is, it can really create a body image problem.
So I think this is wonderful. Education is key.
Here in the Us- food is so readily available evrywhere, yet there are people starving themselves to kee p up with false images.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlRQYFsMg6s
So really you are misleading readers with this side-by-side - the theme of the article implies the images are the same but one is a retouched version. Fair enough if your source told you it's the same image.
A bit of Photoshopping to compensate for poor lighting is one thing, but changing the model's physique is a casual manipulation of women's self-image - pernicious and ultimately dangerous when impressionable teenagers are consumers of such images.
As a magazine art director, I'm all for calling excessively manipulated photos "photo illustration." When you get into the realm of changing someone's appearance to something unrecognizable, head-switching, hair-adding, making eyes bigger and waists smaller...it's really not photography anymore. Just an illustration that looks like a photo.
Personally, I find no reason for a disclaimer on alterations like skin imperfections, colour, tones, a shadow here, a smoothing there. Not all pictures must be photo-journalistic. In fact we - women included - often desire the stylized 'hyper-reality' that a crafted photo can capture. As a woman though, even one who's thinner than Jessica Alba, I take great offence to the "slimming down" of our human subjects. THIS is where the heath dangers of unrealistic expectations come in. THIS is when my blood boils. Aren't the hand-picked goddess models a selective representation of beauty enough?
Why they'd skinnify the above photos is ludicrous to me. I'm insulted that whoever manipulated that photo is TELLING ME what's desirable. Present a form in its most beautiful light, you have my full blessing. But to alter the true form is a corruption of it.
How can we not be subconciously affected, however minutely, after years and years of being innundated with images drilling into us this unauthentic "standard of beauty"? I feel sorry for the women living up to it. I pity the men who expect it.
Zap a zit, leave the curves!!!
The isolation of our lives, cutoff from each other, will be complete. We'll yearn to become images that are not even flesh and blood.
I wonder if the French lawmakers really considered the results of their actions.
Photoshopping has slowly sneaked into advertising and all kinds of media. The impact especially on (female) teenagers in their social orientation and self-confidence building phase is tremendous and hard to understand for grown-ups (and even more if you are from inside the media).
I have doubts about the cost-benefit ratio of such regulations like most of all. But I believe if an advertiser or media company is basing its business on trying to sell as reality to unsuspecting consumers what is not, it is only fair to ask them to put a little note a the bottom. So they can choose between an image and an honest approach.
We are running out of reality soon.
In this assignment, I actually proposed a similar idea to this one, where a disclaimer would be placed on any advertisement that was photoshopped. HOWEVER, I came to the conclusion that this is already being done with other products, such as cigarettes. At least in the US, Cigarettes must have a disclaimer on them that say they "are harmful to one's health and may lead to death"; yet people all over, still buy this product, and they continue smoking and allowing their health to deteriorate.
So the question to ask is, how effective would that disclaimer be on younger girls to be specific, or even the general audience, and would it allow SOCIETY to change the standards of how a women should look like?