Louie
Mentor
Registered: March 31, 2009
Posts: 1,157
| |
Kathleen
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Posts: 214
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 06:54 PM | Reply with quote | #2 |
|
I agree with banning pro-ana sites. As an artist and photographer I strongly disagree with labeling photographs "retouched" All photos are edited and retouched. No matter what the subject is in a photo. Most people I believe know these images in magazines are retouched. I don't believe art should be required by law to have a disclaimer.
|
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 07:23 PM | Reply with quote | #3 |
|
I agree one hundred % in baning pro-ana websites But (sorry Kathleen, we have 3 artists and 2 photographer's in our family too) I agree if you take inches off someones waist and enhance their breasts and slim down their hips and thighs that there should be a disclaimer. I know and do not blame magazines for my d's condition but she wrote in her journal before starving herself that she just wanted to look like the models in vogue! when I explained to her that they had been airbrushed/photoshopped she said"no way mum vogue magazine wouldn't do that they have a good reputation! My son is an art/photography student he shows my d what he can do on photo-shop and still she believes these photo's to have been done with lighting etc.
We as mature,logical normal minded adults do know the truth but a young impressionable girl who's mind is still developing and becomes obsessed with these images!!? who knows,maybe if there is a disclaimer young girls would understand and maybe not be so impresed with the pretty picture!
I do know my son declares on deviant art everything he retouches because he believes people should know what photo's of his are real and which ones he has changed and he hates it when other people don't declare the changes.
Anyway just my opinion!
|
| Loading... | |
Kathleen
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Posts: 214
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 07:36 PM | Reply with quote | #4 |
|
This is such a borderline issue. I'm on both sides of the fence. As far as magazines, photographers are usually not the ones who engage in the photo manipulation that fashion magazines display. Yes the artist signs a release and at that point the editor and publishers can do as they please since they have all rights to the photo at that point. I think too much falls back on the artist.
g14 you are right in a lot you said. I am just a big believer in free expression when it comes to true art. Sorry to be a brute but manipulated high fashion shots are not art in my opinion. But who am I to judge.
I don't alter people. There is beauty in the human body the way it is no matter the color, size or shape. People are what they are. I do alter surroundings and environment to catch the eye of the viewer. I don't think disclaimers should need to go so far as to say the composition of this tree was altered etc. It seems absurd. If a person's body is altered to that of looking unhealthy then sure add a disclaimer. In my opinion that's not capturing a moment in time or any sort of beauty. It's making a digital robot on paper. If a person's body is altered with the subject's knowledge and approval to capture light better etc why a disclaimer? I don't know. My opinions. Everyone's entitled.
I don't mean this offensively to anyone but if your child wants to read a fashion magazine should it be the magazines job to tell them the photos are altered or the parents? If you go into a store should the store have a disclaimer for possible foul language or should the parents tell their child that word another customer said is bad?
-Kathleen
|
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 07:56 PM | Reply with quote | #5 |
|
Kathleen
I know it would be impossible and unnecessary to put disclaimers on every photo in every situation,but I would see no harm in Vogue for example having a disclaimer in the front section saying the photographs in this magazine have been digitally enhanced. We have told our d about magazines and the airbrushing etc. but to a child I don't think it makes any difference they will believe what they want to (Santa for example). I do think most people believe something must have triggered ed, a death, an illness or a magazine! that may not actually be the cause of ed but I know if I could do anything to change what my baby has put herself through I would do anything you can't change a death or an illness but you may be able to get girls to understand that the girls in fashion mags. are not always perfect therefore they don't need to feel like,they have to strive for that.
Xx Lynda
|
| Loading... | |
Kathleen
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Posts: 214
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 08:04 PM | Reply with quote | #6 |
|
Quote: but to a child I don't think it makes any difference they will believe what they want to (Santa for example).
I agree to disagree 
-Kathleen
|
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 08:29 PM | Reply with quote | #7 |
|
Lol ! I would point this disclaimer out to d every time she opened a magazine and say "see proof it is all lies, not her boobs or her waist!" and hopefully she would learn that way!!! .My d knows the disclaimer on dvd's off by heart! I didn't go on about magazines before ed too much, just the odd comment here or there "you know she doesn't really look like that" etc. I wish I had because my d was writing in her journal for 2 years before she worked out her plan to look like the models! If I had known all magazines would have been thrown out and no others bought.
I too agree to disagree 
|
| Loading... | |
Kathleen
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Posts: 214
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 08:45 PM | Reply with quote | #8 |
|
Not to make a joke at of what you are saying at all. I understand all situations are different. But I do think at some point society needs to stop parenting and let parents parent. Anyway, I was thinking of the shampoo bottles that say for external use only... So many things are just going over board. Hand sanitizer that says for external use only. I figure if it says hand sanitizer it's sanitizer for your hands and last I checked hands were not internal organs? Anyone who would ingest these things is probably already unwell (which the disclaimer does no good) or too young to read(in which again, the disclaimer does no good) I feel once something starts it's not good enough and if a disclaimer is put in the front of a magazine the next step will be a group feeling a disclaimer needs to be added to every page. Ok, I am really done.
|
| Loading... | |
distancia
Registered: Aug 30, 2009
Posts: 116
|
| | Dec 03, 2009 at 10:20 PM | Reply with quote | #9 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by girl14
...but to a child I don't think it makes any difference, they will believe what they want...
I don't know about the rest of you, but there is a facet of my child that is still stuck at age 6. Althoug she is almost 17 and very intelligent and mature in most areas, she has a dreamy side that refuses to give up a few fanciful, childish perceptions. Her therapist calls them cognitive distortions, and they are beliefs that she maintains to protect herself from the imperfect reality we call life.
I am curious to know if these distortions ever dissipate, or if they persist into mid-life and beyond.
|
| Loading... | |
Colleen
Moderator
Registered: May 15, 2008
Posts: 1,611
|
| | Dec 04, 2009 at 12:22 AM | Reply with quote | #10 |
|
Lydia once linked us to this:
cognitive distortions
When I read this, I had an 'aha' moment. My d's struggle with food ended abruptly, but her thinking was still so incredibly...different. I couldn't put my finger on how to describe it. When I read this, I thought, BINGO.
Cognitive distortions were not present before she started starving. They are still there...but they are getting better.
I don't know if this will improve for your daughter if this has always been how she thinks. In some ways we can't expect them to be better than they were before ("Doctor, will I be able to play the piano after this surgery?"). But just keep repeating this mantra: Why would she NOT continue to improve? |
| Loading... | |
pennysgirlUSA
Mentor
Registered: Nov 06, 2008
Posts: 1,783
|
| | Dec 04, 2009 at 12:23 AM | Reply with quote | #11 |
|
Here is what happened when I showed my D an article about photoshopping several months ago (before the Ralph Lauren model incident):
I came across and article inadvertantly and it was written by a highly regarded photographer who admitted that parts of a model's body were often trimmed in order to fit the outfit. Example: The dress the model wore said "feminine" so the biceps and thighs were trimmed because of the muscle mass. (What? so a woman can't be both strong and feminine???)
My D was soooo happy to see it written that it is TRUE TRUE TRUE that every photo we see in a magazine is retouched (like a hundred times accord. to the article.) She went to bed smiling. Me telling her this wasn't good enough. She had to see it in print. She had believed her eyes when she saw photos and she would only trust her eyes to find out she had been fooled!
My brother (passed away at age 40, suddenly) was a photographer and he appreciated real, raw, honest beauty. I remember him thinking that a model was sometimes too perfect and therefore, boring. Loved hearing that!
I think it is great that photos can be retouched. I like having my d's acne removed from her school pics... b/c I don't need her to remember that she had a zit that day... I just want her to know what she looked like. Would I allow them to change the color of her hair or the shape of her body? No, of course not. I think there is a difference between having a photo enhanced and changing the integrity of the picture.
I also think our children should not be allowed to watch every thing on T.V. We have disclaimers on movies, cd's, and tv shows to give everyone a 'head's up' about what we are watching. I would like to think my kids should 'know better' than to believe everything they see... but often they don't and they need protection from some of the stories, images, and sounds that they might see and hear that they can't decipher on their own is real or not.
Just MHO!
|
| Loading... | |
basrplay
Registered: Feb 11, 2009
Posts: 620
|
| | Dec 04, 2009 at 10:40 AM | Reply with quote | #12 |
|
there is a really great video on dove website campaign for beauty.com and it shows exactly what is done to makeover a model before the photos go public. There are several really good videos there.
It is excellent and may help your kids understand.
I watched it with my dd and she gets it. BUT she still thinks celebrity is a goal and that celebrities and everything you read about them is SO COOL and so we still battle this and I do think it creeps into her own self-image/body image thoughts since most of them are, or appear in the photos to be, on the thin side. So we just try and try to counteract this by pointing out when we see it, and trying to share role models that maybe are not of that build and pointing out that the TALENT is what counts.....
|
| Loading... | |
Colleen
Moderator
Registered: May 15, 2008
Posts: 1,611
| |
pbutts
Registered: April 18, 2008
Posts: 61
|
| | Dec 04, 2009 at 11:44 AM | Reply with quote | #14 |
|
This was subject to connection for me in two ways today:
My fifth grade teachers were just talking about this kind of thing this morning and they always try to take time to talk about body image when they do the mandated reproductive health unit. I wonder if they would be able to use this then?
If they don't I might. I just finished a couple of days on Internet safety issues with the 5th graders and one of the issues we talk about is online manipulation and advertising.
|
| Loading... | |
Louie
Mentor
Registered: March 31, 2009
Posts: 1,157
|
| | Dec 04, 2009 at 04:07 PM | Reply with quote | #15 |
|
| I like how this debate has continued... My H is a fashion and beauty photographer, he does his own photoshop, he is highly skilled. My D knows first hand what manipulation is done in post production. She knows the models, there is no mystery to her. A disclaimer would mean nothing to her. My problem is....she thinks that models are better than other people. Yet she knows the models are just kids like her (although a bit older) It is not a question of a disclaimer on an art piece, it is a question of marketing and our culture of consumerism. The feeling that you would be a better person if you bought this product, got rid of your frown line, made more money, had smaller hips, wore $1000 shoes, drove a luxury car. This is what I disagree with. Through time, people have always celebrated beauty...it has just escalated these days because of media and the multiple marketing vehicles. With photoshop the physical characteristics are often softened, a bench mark of beauty has been set. I am drawn to people who have unusual facial characteristics, I don't want everyone to look the same, I don't want children or adults to feel ugly because they don't fit in with this very narrow point of view. I don't want people to feel a failure because they don't drive a certain car, or don't dress a certain way. The Dove campaign has been sent around, it is no eye opener to me. I also know that it is not always the photographer who is to blame. The clients are very picky, very negative about the models. You know what I don't understand....when we see actors, we appreciate an honest, brave, gutsy performance. We can forget who they are in "real life" if they immerse themselves in their role. I would like to see more honesty in the fashion industry, more celebration of individual beauty.
|
| Loading... | |
lynneUKmum
Registered: Dec 24, 2008
Posts: 133
|
| | Dec 05, 2009 at 10:49 AM | Reply with quote | #16 |
|
I feel I have to add to the mix here because I am an art director and have worked in the magazine industry for over 20 years now. You are all right in a sense that the photographers are not always to blame for retouching their subjects. I think the blame usually does lie with the editors and the art directors. It all boils down to the ruthless quest for sales and the age old pursuit for perfect beauty. Believe me I know that these 'perfect' beauties in real life are very far from their perfection on paper. I have seen them in the flesh and believe me they just look like you and me, no different at all. Thankfully for me I like to think that I used to work at the nicer end of the industry in the parenting sector. Even here though we would retouch snot, food, ezcema and dribble from babies' faces. Its a question of perpective really. Would you buy a baby mag if the baby didn't look fresh faced and clean? Magazines simply don't sell if their covers are anything less than perfect and that really is the bottom line. I have been freelance now for just over a year, working wherever mags need extra help and I am now seeing retouching happen on a huge scale. Far more than I ever got involved in.
Celebrities who endorse weekly mags are routinely retouched to slim them down and get rid of their double chins. When these celebs come into the offices, they in no way look like they do when printed up. Unfortunately for them when they then appear on tv and look twice as big as their 'paper' selves, people start to ask questions.
I agree with Louie that I would like a return to more honesty with in the industry. Last year there was a really good documentary on TV here in the UK by Alicia Dixon (for all you non UK people) she was in the girl band Mystique, won Strictly Come Dancing/Dancing With the Stars (whatever your countries' version is called) and is now a judge on this years series of Strictly.
She is absolutely stunning girl of black origin and is not a skinny minny. She was appalled at how pictures were manipulated by magazines. She highlighted the Kate Winslet cover as an example, where Kate was stretched and slimmed down and created merry hell when she saw it! Alicia then did a shoot with a magazine and had three different covers printed up. One was completely unretouched. One was mildly worked on with some facial work and leg lengthening and slimming etc and the last one was subjected to the 'full works' and really didn't look like her at all.
She then took these pictures into a school to discuss with some fifteen/sixteen year old girls how they felt about themselves, which picture of Alicia they preferrred and to get them to talk about their bodies and to try to get the girls to understand how unattainable their desires were because of the extent of which the industry can and does change things. She wanted the girls to see for themselves how different she was in real life to the pictures and to try to get them to realise to accept themselves for what they were and not to have unacheivable desires. She tehn called on several high end magazine editors in a bid to appear on their covers without any retouching at al!!! She managed to appear on a Sunday supplement's front cover and did still look beautiful but we did also what the art director intended to do the picture if allowed to do the retouching!
I feel as an industry insider that we have to do our jobs to the best of our abilities and to put out the absolute best covers we can. However I am in agreemant that retouching should only be done to enhance what is already there and not to change the model into something she never was in the first place, if you know what I mean!
It is going to take a massive change across the industry before digital enhancement is reduced or abandoned altogether. I do understand how the industry influences young girls particularly Rachel, my own daughter who is an aspiring model herself. I only hope that at some point editors and publishers start to take note of the negative publicity and begin to slowly make the changes necessary to their covers.... I think that this may be along time coming however....
Love lynne
x
|
| Loading... | |
pennysgirlUSA
Mentor
Registered: Nov 06, 2008
Posts: 1,783
|
| | Dec 06, 2009 at 12:31 AM | Reply with quote | #17 |
|
My gosh I would hope people don't blame the messenger (photographer!) There are so many aspects to the art of photography and pleasing the client has to be an art in itself! The trouble lies with the generalization theory. 'In general' people want to see models as perfection... so the people in charge of choosing the photos that represent their product want the models to be as perfect (for the item they are selling) as possible. If only they would realize that the 'general' public forgot who was selling what ... b/c their ad doesn't stand out anymore. I wish I could tell them all that I bet we would be more likely (as buyers) to appreciate and remember their products if they realistically tried to sell it to us using real people! Not just face wash... (thank you Dove!) I would like to see short models wearing skinny jeans and older models selling makeup! I couldn't care less for an ad that shows a perfect looking girl selling a product for acne or wrinkles!
But... I am probably in the minority (and likely we - at ATDT - all are!) People who have faced really tough stuff in life tend to see things more realistically and be annoyed by fake-y type selling tactics! Chalk it up to experience. How many of us here ATDT are dreaming of perfect hair tonight! LOL! (a perfect uninterrupted night's sleep maybe...)
|
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 06, 2009 at 01:33 AM | Reply with quote | #18 |
|
I would like to not only see the pro anna sites banned but my d's journal was on a site called Polyvore(fashion) every second girl on that site has an ed or suicidal tendencies and this starts as Innocent fun design your own fashion spread! Then you start looking at the other designs and there are some very sad and depressed girls on this site. Now I have to work out how to get my d off this offensive site without her knowing I know!!
|
| Loading... | |
pennysgirlUSA
Mentor
Registered: Nov 06, 2008
Posts: 1,783
|
| | Dec 07, 2009 at 12:14 AM | Reply with quote | #19 |
|
Or... you may have to consider letting the cat out of the bag and just plain come out and tell her how you feel. I am not you and your d is not my d... but for me the stress would be worse if I tried to tiptoe around an issue than it would be to just come out with it. Again, I am not saying YOU should handle it this way... but please do consider what method for you would cause the least of the stressors. In any way... I am sending you a huge hug! I know you will handle it quickly and get her off any site that is harmful! |
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 07, 2009 at 12:44 AM | Reply with quote | #20 |
|
Pg
She actually told me last night she goes on the site but does not have an account! so I thought give it a day or two and I would tell her I had looked at the site and found it offensive and did not want her on it anymore,that was my plan. Problem is I can ban it from my home computers but d has a government issued laptop that she uses for school and I have no say in it's security and that is the computer she uses!! so I will contact the school tomorrow and ask how they can ban sites, but another problem is the kids are overriding the security at school to get onto sites they are not allowed to so I really don't know what to do. I was thinking because she mentioned it last night I might show more interest and at least be able to point out things like "oh yay "vomitgirl is on line and annawantstodie!" these are some of the names girls use and maybe that way I can slowly get her to see how wrong this site is and if I show interest it may lose some appeal!!! Help.
hugs back to you pg XX
|
| Loading... | |
girl14AusNSW
Mentor
Registered: Aug 23, 2009
Posts: 1,708
|
| | Dec 07, 2009 at 03:17 PM | Reply with quote | #21 |
|
I just wanted to add and I know my d is an and her thinking is distorted at the moment but in her first journal she wrote how she wanted to look like the models in Vogue!
Written by my d 30.11.2009
"Everyone says magazines and models don't cause an but I think they might, I soooooooooo desperately want to look like a model and be as perfect as they are that I would do anything, even stop eating!"
I know the logic of this not being a reliable statement due to her state of mind, but it does give me an insight to her way of looking at it and it hasn't changed in months!
|
| Loading... | |
Click to read inspiring messages from this community's members
