One Publisher Defends Cover Model Retouching
Self editor-in-chief says cover art isn't journalism.
On the heels of Kim Kardashianâ€™s unretouched photos being released on Complex's Web site only a few months ago, and New York and Rolling Stone's blatantly airbrushed images of the Obamas during election season, magazinesâ€”womenâ€™s titles, particularlyâ€”have taken an endless beating for having a heavy hand when it comes to airbrushing and Photoshopping their cover subjects.
After receiving a great deal of flack for an airbrushed and color corrected (but not Photoshopped) September issue cover featuring Kelly Clarksonâ€”and admitting late last week to the alterationsâ€”Self editor-in-chief Lucy Danziger used her Self.com blog to issue a response to the airbrushing "controversy," which has ended up as a kind of defense for magazine cover retouching.
In addition to confirming her â€śyes, we airbrushâ€ť statement, Danzinger wrote that Selfâ€™s portraits are not meant to be unedited or true-to-life snapshots. She even admits to asking her art department to shave a little off of her hips on a photo of her running the marathon for an editorâ€™s letter a few years back. â€śI am confident in my body, proud of what it can accomplish, but it just didn't look the way I wanted in every picture,â€ť she wrote.
Of the hundred or so images snapped at a Self shoot, she stressed, there are outfit changes and lighting adjustments, and hair touch-ups and fans blowing, making a perfect picture hard to come by. â€śThis is art, creativity and collaboration. It's not, as in a news photograph, journalism. It is, however, meant to inspire women to want to be their best. That is the point,â€ť she wrote.
Do you think Danzinger makes the case for retouching?
Post Comment / Discuss This Blog - Info/Rules