This industry of celebdom has brought so much pressure on us normal people to be perfect! Perfect lips, perfect hair, perfect face, perfect body, personality...u name it. And if you haven't got the looks then you aint worth the time. Many young women grow up having low self esteem and having eating disorders because they want to be just like Beyonce and shake that fine a**! hi hi hi. Mara la bantu bana manga. Maaka a matala fela! What u c on tv and the magazines is not the real thing.
There's a little thing called airbrushing. I don't like this thing. I don't like what it does. I don't like what it says about a person's natural self. Why must they go to such extremes to show "perfection" in their own terms? Whatever happened to being naturally beautiful? Phela these days even the people u think are so perfect are not so perfect themselves. It's gotten so bad that when we see the real thing we're dissappointed whereas that realness is the beauty God created. It's because they've overrated everything it's so bad u can't believe ur eyes.
I personally have no problem with makeup or people who wear makeup. That's not what this article is about. This article is about how people have taken this beautiful thing called technological advancement and abused it to such an extent it's ridiculous! It's shameful. Take a look:
Let's start with my girl Monica
Now on these pics of Monica, notice how the cheeks on the first pic are more identified...how the nose is straighter...the eyes wider and whiter...eyebrow lines perfectly defined...won't even mention the pout. the chin too is somewhat different...
i don't know about you but i think this is airbrushing gone waayyy wrong!
gf looks old!
beauty at its best. see...it's true what they say...less is more!
Now i love this lady! Mara le airbrushing i fihla ubuhle bakhe ba nge mpela...look at how perfectly defined her eyebrows are on the 2nd pic...her skin looks silky smooth and fault free...teeth are whiter and straighter...eyes are whiter and shape is different...and the nose...just look at it!...check how the bones from her eyebrow to her nose is so defined in the 2nd pic...even the shape of her face is different!
now this is the beauty i love. nothing wrong with showing a few flaws like pimples. they are natural u know. and it shows gore ngwana batho is a true beauty.
nothing but the work of a computer buff
Rihanna Rihanna...cute as a bubble.
looking like the child she is
now let's c...i'll start with the eyebrow which u can clearly c on the first pic gore ngwana o Modimo ga a motima seriba but there's very little of that on the 2nd pic. then there's the eyebrow lines...clearly they have a mind of their own...the eyes are curvier, whiter, more colourful and they sparkle, hmm. nko eo yona bae fokoditse. don't forget the lips...that pout!
stop it with this "perfection" already!
beauty and...
i dunno who this is!
all i can say here is i don't know what to believe...i know girlfriend is a beauty but what are we left to think with this picture here???? everything is different: the nose, the lips, the cheeks, the eyes, the bone structure...e-ve-ry-thing! haaikhona!
ok now this is a really messed up photo shem i don't wanna lie.
now this is what we grew up believing...perfect nose,chin, cheeks, browlines...zonkebonke!
whatever life story she's going thru right now...i like this pic but... wait!
E-VOILA! everything's ala perfect...no lines...no spots, no wrinkles on her neck, perfect nose, skin, eyes, chink, cheeks, browlines...alles! even the hair is shinier and more luxurious. mara y ye?
Brandy
where do i start? how about the skin tone? then the tattoo. then it's the lips and teeth.and the nose. don't forget teh cheeks and eyes. the chin is smaller in the first pic. look (this is sooo natural!) at the side of her breast on the left pic...this must be the one thing they must've forgotten, the line running thru to her armpit.
The beautiful Ms Knowels
GOLDEN GIRL
even she has fallen prey to this abuse...
now i say this is a bad picture and has nothing to do with her beauty. musta been a bad day for our miss perfect. looking all hot and bothered!
now on the first pic is perfection like u've neva seen b4. she is golden! literally! they've fine tuned her eyebrows. her eyes are wider and brighter. u don't c that natural slant of the lip on the 1st pic. the chin is perfectly refined on the 1st pic....very well defined cheeks...aah, u don't even c any lines on her neck on the 1st one...her nose is straighter...the forehead absolutely glistens and is so attractive, more than on the 2nd picture.
I personally am pissed at all these "redifined" pictures. Whose idea of beauty is this?! It's so distorted. Most of these women are are gorgeous so y go to such lenghts? It's sickening!! U find that even their cellulite and stretchmarks are erased to create a "better" picture. This is rubbish! I hope here in mzansi we neva eva stoop so low! Tjerr!
______________________edit___________________________
i tried to google the word airbrushing but only found technical jargon which made no sense...i then found 2 articles that explain the term more clearly. the 1st was written in june 2004 by Helen Lewis and it's headlined Don't Touch Me Up (just a small sample) and the 2nd was a comment posted by a blogger named inkhead who claims to be a photographer. i've also inserted a pic as an added example.
Unlike newspapers, magazines are not bound by a code of conduct which forbids the use of "inaccurate, misleading or distorted material, including pictures". On the rare occasions that the airbrushing of celebrity photos is brought to public attention, it's because it has stepped so far past the borders of reality as to be unbelievable. Kate Winslet's GQ cover and interview photos (pictured left) are a good example. Accompanying an article in which Winslet proclaimed, "All I know from the men I've ever spoken to is that they like girls to have an arse on them", the pictures of the normally curvy Winslet were particularly hard to digest. Not only that, but in the most ridiculous picture of the set (bottom left) the reflection in the mirror clearly shows a normal sized person, revealing the extent of the alteration.
But the Winslet photos are only well-known because they took an actress famous for speaking out on weight issues, and presented her as a twiglet. Thousands - perhaps hundreds of thousands - of other images in magazines are more subtly altered. In the controversy, GQ's editor Dylan Jones admitted, "Almost no picture that appears in GQ... has not been digitally altered in some way". That seems staggering: an admission that all these celebrity photos are visual lies. But finding anyone willing to talk about the extent of digital alteration and the forms that it takes is extremely difficult. No one wants to break ranks and fall foul of PR companies and celebrity agents. I spoke to several art editors at successful men's magazines: all were extremely reluctant to discuss airbrushing, and refused outright to say if their magazines had guidelines over what level of airbrushing was acceptable. Dan, FHM's Deputy Art Director, said that it was a "sensitive subject" and couldn't give me any more information than the software packages used by the magazines. He did, however, let slip that the glamour shoots used airbrushing far more frequently than the fashion spreads: "they're all models. They look pretty good anyway." Think about the implications of that statement, and it's horrifying - the fact that magazine readers are looking at titillating images of people who aren't actually very attractive.
This is also where poor old Ruskin and his aversion to pubic hair comes back in. Collectively, these images are portraying a reality which does not, and will never, exist, and it harms us as a society to accept them. It's one thing to accept that celebrities in photos will have been styled, manicured and flatteringly lit. Perhaps they will even have undergone surgery. That's their right, and it is their business to look good. It's completely different to have been nipped and tucked inside some photo-editing software.
It can only ever harm relations between the sexes - because, let's face it, the vast majority of airbrushed images are of women, whether for male or female consumption. And the range of undesirable bodily attributes to be digitally removed is always growing, until some photos show women with barely any skin texture, knees or elbows at all. The effect of digital manipulation is to tell women that it's possible to be five foot two and have forty inch legs (as in a famously absurd photo of Emma Bunton); or to be a size six and not have visible ribs; or to reach forty without cellulite and with breasts round their necks; or to have no definition on their stomachs either of fat or muscle. Men are told that they can realistically expect these things in a woman, and can only ever be disappointed in the real women they meet.
Digital manipulation of photographs allows images of women to circulate which have no basis in reality, and although they may exert pressure on magazines not to talk about airbrushing, the phenomenon leaves celebrities no better off. In fact, it creates a dual market for photos. We are sold the impossibly smooth, glowing women of GQ, FHM, Vogue and all the rest, with perfect hair and skin and carefully chosen clothes, and their flip side, the 'candid' photos in Heat and the tabloids of Britney with a spot, or Christina Aguilera with a spare tyre, or Catherine Zeta Jones being minutely overweight two weeks after giving birth. Women simultaneously torture themselves by comparison with the impossible perfection of the glossies, and indulgence in the reassuring photos of the same stars looking, well, real.
And as if that wasn't bad enough, there's a more sinister side to airbrushing - the cover of Loaded pictured to the immediate left was originally a photograph of Mel B in a bikini. Whilst adding the bees, her bikini 'disappeared', and she threatened to sue. Melanie Sykes had a similar experience, as did Kylie, whose thong disappeared from a photo recreating the famous "Tennis Girl Scratching Her Bum" photo. Luckily, Kylie and Melanie took it on the chin, but I surely can't be the only one who finds something creepy about photographers and art directors removing women's clothes from photos (without their consent) for
use on magazine covers?
There's no way to return the airbrushing genie to his bottle, but the time has surely come for the conspiracy of silence about its practice to end. Unfortunately, as long as images of unnaturally perfect women remain a sure way to sell magazines, it's unlikely we'll be seeing realistic buttocks any time soon.
this woman took the thoughts out of my mouth and put them into writing
This is bull, this is an example of one photographer. I've spent years working in hollywood, and every single photo gets retouched, don't kid yourself.. celebrities in general get a percentage of photo approvals, for example, Pamela Anderson on a film session would get 25% approvals, meaning that she could kill 25% of all the photos the photographer took. Often in the contract it states that if Pam doesn't send her picks to the photographer in 48 hours, all photos are automatically approved.
I cannot keep track of the number of times we were called by a celebrities manager to remove "cough... cough.. down there it's showing to much..." aka removing camel toes..
lol... ALLL celebrity photos are retouched, not only that often we will take a no-name model, and photograph them after the session in the same poses so we have spare body parts, even going so far as to put the celebrities head on a body they don't even own!
If you ever see a celebrity in person, generally you will notice that most aren't over 5'5, even the ones that appear to be big, tough men in the movies are little twirps in real life. And most of them look really plan, even scarier the "supposedly" super-hot super models are GROSS, seriously if you've ever wondered why most supermodels are dating fat, old, rich white guys instead of leading men, it's because models look good on TV and film but not in real life, all their features are overdraw and they have giant UGLY heads
by inkhead
_______________________________________