We are talking about relatively subtle changes that cumulatively add up to a much more attractive photo.
well, they look normal. I personally think they are beautiful but I’m sure lots of people will be very harsh about it. Normal. Not too big, not too little. That is the way I see them.
the 56 year old, it’s the hair, that makes her look older.
One thing Helen Mirren has going for her is that she has never had a baby.
“And Brain Games covered the mirror image issue a year or two ago.”
LOL. Coursework in physiology and neuroscience covers this much better than any made for the (big, small) screen stuff . 
“Are there subtle changes that can be made in an editing process that the model may not perceive without being told about them? Sure. But that is not what people are saying here.”
That’s exactly what we are saying here. Blanket denial that there was no editing… No one buys it. 
(My kid is a Photoshop whiz. It is a truly amazing program. One little touch here, one little touch there… Not a whole lot of changes, but the cumulative effect is mind-boggling.)
Seriously, I don’t see why everyone is arguing about the photoshop. If they did photoshop her, they could have done a better job. Every affluent suburban yoga and Pilates studio has 56 yos with way better bodies than hers!!
Hey, the last photo of me that I uploaded on FB, I had to Photoshop my teeth, because I was drinking red wine at a party and my teeth were blue.
As far as the plus-size model, I think the photoshop discussion is so besides the point. She is obviously larger than the usual models, and she looks great. And a tall size 16 could definitely not have the sags people are looking for, especially a pear like her (and me!) who carry the extra weight differently than a saggy tummy.
Highly successful plus size models always have “thin”-reading faces. By that I mean excellent bone structure without much adipose tissue in the face.
To the extent that is what you and others are saying, I am not taking issue with it. I have even said so myself.
But what I am taking issue with are statements like these (the second of which you liked so presumably you agree with it as well):
Maybe I am reading those statements wrong but I do not read them as just taking issue with her blanket statement. They are saying there is no way she could ever know of any editing to her photos. “Never” is its own blanket statement. And I disagree with it here.
And as I noted, I can understand why she made the blanket statement. No one will criticize a 5’10/125 llb model for being photo shopped. But talk about the 5’9/165 llb model being photo shopped and a lot of people will be quick to assume is was done to make her even barely presentable or for her not to look horrible, like a fat pig, etc. I don’t think that is true at all. I think she looks great in the SI pics and others I have seen of her online. But the standards/expectations are very different for typical and “plus-sized” models. So I get why she said what she did. And I don’t really fault her for it because its a statement in her own best interest. Pretty common for people in the media (and certainly politics). Doesn’t make her statement true. Just tells me there is a lot of work to go in terms of “plus sized” models and acceptance of them.
Here’s an example of someone seeing a photo of themselves and not realizing it was photoshopped. Ronda Rousey has presumably seen a zillion pics of herself too, although I suspect she doesn’t scrutinize them the way a professional model would.
Even seeing the side-by-side original, I can barely see a difference.
http://time.com/4230641/ronda-rousey-photoshopped-image/?xid=homepage
You are misinterpreting my statement. Someone quoted the young curvy model as saying there was no photoshopping. I only meant to say that she wouldn’t necessarily know because the effects could subtly improve the photograph without changing her basic features and shape. She wouldn’t necessarily have been aware of a small distracting shadow that got removed, or might not know that a natural highlight from on-set lighting was enhanced.
Sheesh! I hate it when I am misinterpreted. I have nothing more to say on the topic, which honestly is of almost no interest to me anyway.
PS Every here has said the young curvy model was gorgeous. If I had seem the photos before the discussion, it never would have occured to me to call her plus-sized.
Rousey may well not have known the pic was altered. It may also be the case that she did know and went with it for whatever reason (may just have thought it looked better). But someone may have called her out on it after the fact and now she is just playing dumb to avoid criticism. Wouldn’t be the first time.
From what I understand, Ashley (the young curvy model) is at/near the average size. Certainly at the bottom of the average and up range. Not clear the “plus size” label really applies (other than in the fashion industry). And some “plus sized” models are actually smaller.
My high school graduation photo has my hips retouched. It was in the Peggy Lipton days when straight bodies were in and I am sure the photographer thought it was a positive move. I am very tall and at that time I know guys thought I was smoking hot…but I am super curvy so I get the in shape curvy girls absolutely. I am also flumoxed by the size of boobs these days…doesn’t seem real given some of the models physical natural bodies.
I suspect what she means is that they didn’t change her shape, not that they didn’t manipulate highlights, soften an edge or make a freckle go away.
^That’s how I read it.
Please, you do not need to tear down one type of woman to build up another.
The “ideal” is moving towards no “ideal” shape; and we should support that rather than saying one type is better or more attractive. That does not move us forward as humans.
^ I don’t see it as tearing down one type of woman. It’s a criticsm of the fashion industry. which for decades has demanded of its workers self-starvation and promoted this as the essence of female beauty, and in the process done a lot of damage to girls and women.
Most is really an illusion. Most women do not have chests that big and thighs that narrow naturally yet the fashion trade lives by that image and can make it happen with image manipulation. The problem is that young impressionable women hold that image in comparison. At least in SI over the years they have portrayed healthier looking roundy women because that is generally what appeals to that magazine’s audience.
I looked through DH’s copy of SI because I need a size 16 swim suit. Unfortunately everything was either too big (falling off) or too small (didn’t cover everything). I’ll just have to keep looking…