Standards of Beauty

March 3, 2014

Saw this making the rounds of Facebook :

I generally get the message, but I also feel a little conflicted about it. Absolutely true that a lot of ads are absolutely photoshoped to high heaven. Even my own Glamour Shots from the other day seemed rather plastic.

The thing is though, many of the people who model as a profession are genetically blessed. They are chosen because they have a unique look, good skin, “enviable” proportions…they have a way of posing and presenting themselves that sell the specific ideas of the people who hire them. While there may be SOME photoshopping going on, for some, it’s not the kind that literally changes the person like above, but the kind that fixes a stray hair or a nip slip…or ads some background and color. A filter that adds some artistic element. They don’t have time to spend hours “fixing” a model and I’m sure would rather have one that’s already 80% there. Check Marcus Hyde’s photos for example (NSFW).

(Had to check myself regarding tbh. I was like does his art reflect the reality of this subset of fashion photography or is he intending for them all to look the same? I’m thinking the former…)

Even runway models…they are purposely tall and non-shapely because what’s on display are the clothes…it’s not about the person. For them they’re SUPPOSED to be nondescript.

I used to collect ads out of Vanity Fair (and read the articles sometimes too, lol). I did not admire them because of the individuals in the ads, it was more because of the emotions or feelings the ads evoked.

Makes sense given what I do (User Experience) because I now do that for the web…using psychology to encourage someone to FEEL something about what they’re looking at past it just being easy to use.

So yeah, for me, I get it. I don’t feel anything about a perfect looking person in an ad…or that I should look like said perfect person. It’s more what is she selling? What idea is being conveyed? Do I identify with that idea? IS there something about this that appeals to me?

If yes, I’ll look into it more.

If no, drive on.

Commenting on Culture

5 Comments

March 8, 2014 at 1:19 am

Patrice

While there may be SOME photoshopping going on, for some, it’s not the kind that literally changes the person like above, but the kind that fixes a stray hair or a nip slip…or ads some background and color.

I think the photoshopping is generally used a bit more liberally than that. You won’t see a single blemish, crease, sag or wrinkle, not even on a 50 plus year old model. And not only Photoshop, but there are camera filters, lighting and extreme makeup, too. I agree that what’s underneath all that is probably pretty good to begin with, but where that was once good enough, it now no longer is. They don’t look fully human anymore.
Reply
- March 8, 2014 at 12:02 pm
  
  KaNisa
  
  I mean I would think that if I didn’t know real people who DO fufill an “unrealistic standard of beauty” in real life. Like truly naturally gorgeous people with perfect bodies do exist. I know several. They make me feel way more weird standing next to them than an ad does because they’re real and in my same dating pool, lol.
  
  I don’t know about the older models…but these people go to “interviews” without any makeup or seriously minimal makeup so their potential employers can gauge what they look like without any editing.
  
  And my photographer purist friends say they try as much as possible to do the “photoshop effects” with their cameras and lighting rather than remaking a person in a software program…
  
  I just struggle with advertising, not because what’s depicted in them, but because how people perceive it. Like I said, I don’t feel the need to look like a gorgeous person in an ad, but I may identify with the idea she’s selling. If the person in the ad looks like “the typical American woman” I wouldn’t identify with that because I don’t look like that either.
  
  This would never happen, but perhaps people should work on finding their confidence and validation in real things instead of looking to external sources…
  
  “Get to the deeper business of being beautiful inside.”
  
  Understanding that’s a lot harder than it looks, but just saying.
  
  Same for dudes projecting too…but I’m not sure how to address that side of it as I’m not one.
  
  Is the answer really making ads and marketing reflective of the average person though? Or I guess what’s really the “mode”?
  
  Say they stop photoshoping. Is the problem really solved if they simply find more naturally “perfect” people?
  Reply
  - March 8, 2014 at 6:58 pm
    
    Patrice
    
    I mean I would think that if I didn’t know real people who DO fufill an “unrealistic standard of beauty” in real life. Like truly naturally gorgeous people with perfect bodies do exist. I know several. They make me feel way more weird standing next to them than an ad does because they’re real and in my same dating pool, lol.
    Yes, we all know people like that. I have seen models who are flawless when they step out of the shower and almost unrecognizable, for the worse, in my opinion, in print. And it is not because they are not photogenic.
    
    And my photographer purist friends say they try as much as possible to do the “photoshop effects” with their cameras and lighting rather than remaking a person in a software program…
    Camera and lighting (and makeup) can be tantamount to smoke and mirrors . . .
    
    Say they stop photoshoping. Is the problem really solved if they simply find more naturally “perfect” people?
    The problem is not the ads but the consumers. I enjoy ads just as I do movies if they are clever or funny or even beautiful to look at. But even if they have all that going for them, I would never buy what they are selling unless it stands up to scrutiny and I need (or really want) it. People are easily duped into buying things they don’t need or that don’t work. To get truth in advertising, consumers must demand it by buying intelligently rather than emotionally.
  - March 10, 2014 at 8:39 am
    
    KaNisa
    
    Yeah but most people will never fit the model of buying things intelligently…they just aren’t wired that way. Check this out : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J85SUZFXNM
    
    It’s why I use my UX powers for good (making software people HAVE to use for their jobs a more enjoyable experience vs selling products and ideas to convince people of something). I have moral issues doing it for most public facing projects…
    
    Also in related news…is this bad too? http://bossip.com/891713/makeup-sorcery-a-gallery-of-shocking-beforeafter-photos-pt-2/
  - March 10, 2014 at 11:08 am
    
    Patrice
    
    I like that video. I think we can still buy intelligently from a business that employs all those principles. There is a difference between presenting a product in an appealing way and lying about what it can do. The intelligent side of us should be able to minimize falling for the latter.
    
    Deceptive, yes, but I don’t think those before and after pictures are bad if they are personal pictures. People can do what they want with theiir pictures.