Photoshopping Ethics
- Posted by: Andrew Price
- on April 8, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Complaints about the unattainable, unnatural, or unhealthy standards of beauty perpetuated by the fashion industry aren’t new. But in Britain, fashion photoshopping in particular is facing new scrutiny. A group of British media associations are considering adopting “‘a voluntary code covering the use of digital manipulation [in photography].’ Publications could…be asked to declare if an image had been altered.”
As Amy Odell points out “If magazines follow this voluntary code, every picture would bear an ‘airbrushed’ stamp because every picture is digitally enhanced in magazines.”
How about the opposite tack? What if unaltered images had the right to carry an “authentic” stamp?
Via PSFK.
DISCUSSION: 2 Comments
It’s never good when your blog post resemble Tyra Banks Show “hot and completely irrelevant” topics.
How about an option for i don’t give a damn.
Perhaps by now, as most people know fashion photographs are manipulated to the point of the model being a mere inspiration for the eventual image, we no longer have to classify this as “unnatural”. The next step in this process is a fully computer generated “photograph”, which interestingly enough seems not at all subject to the same criticisms that this type of image manipulation receives right now, simply because the “source person” was never born. Also think about make-up effects and image manipulation in movies… Gollum…CG actors in games…etc.