Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-05-2012, 10:13 PM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,284,457 times
Reputation: 5565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
I don't believe there will really be a moratorium on the use of Photoshop in the publishing/advertising business. As a matter of fact, I know it won't happen. Airbrushing will still happen and I don't see anything wrong with it. Even having your portrait taken includes some photo editing. IMO, it's silly to believe a make up company is going to advertise a cover-up and use a model with zits visible.

I think a better approach is to teach our children to be smart consumers. If that means "developing a thicker skin" to some participants on this forum, so be it.
There never will be a complete abolition of it however it is nice to see a young person get involved and push for change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-06-2012, 04:58 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,310,566 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
There never will be a complete abolition of it however it is nice to see a young person get involved and push for change.
Absolutely!

I don't begrudge this young girl's efforts. She has a concern and fought for it. That's very admirable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 06:39 AM
 
Location: Arizona
563 posts, read 1,499,168 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
I don't believe there will really be a moratorium on the use of Photoshop in the publishing/advertising business. As a matter of fact, I know it won't happen. Airbrushing will still happen and I don't see anything wrong with it. Even having your portrait taken includes some photo editing. IMO, it's silly to believe a make up company is going to advertise a cover-up and use a model with zits visible.

I think a better approach is to teach our children to be smart consumers. If that means "developing a thicker skin" to some participants on this forum, so be it.
I'm sure the pledge the staff signed does not envelope the ads they put in their magazine for makeup, but purely the content they are creating for the magazine - articles, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 07:26 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,310,566 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaMommy View Post
I'm sure the pledge the staff signed does not envelope the ads they put in their magazine for makeup, but purely the content they are creating for the magazine - articles, etc.
I highly doubt that. Most of the articles created for magazines use stock images. The magazine cannot control whether stock images are photoshopped or not. Plus, it is such an industry standard to use photoshop, along with other programs, that it's almost like telling a doctor not to use a scalpel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 08:07 AM
 
1,072 posts, read 2,973,982 times
Reputation: 1311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
I don't believe there will really be a moratorium on the use of Photoshop in the publishing/advertising business. As a matter of fact, I know it won't happen. Airbrushing will still happen and I don't see anything wrong with it. Even having your portrait taken includes some photo editing. IMO, it's silly to believe a make up company is going to advertise a cover-up and use a model with zits visible.

I think a better approach is to teach our children to be smart consumers. If that means "developing a thicker skin" to some participants on this forum, so be it.
I don't think there will ever be a moratorium either and I have no problem with them touching up a zit, fixing a stray hair, changing the lighting or even deciding the model would look better in a different shirt, but I do have a problem with the massive changes made to models and celebrities. There is a tremendous gap in what the public thinks a model looks like based on photos that have been altered and reality. I don't think it's health for our society (girls and boys, and adults for that matter). I would like to see that type of photoshopping curbed or stopped all together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 09:01 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,284,457 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
I highly doubt that. Most of the articles created for magazines use stock images. The magazine cannot control whether stock images are photoshopped or not. Plus, it is such an industry standard to use photoshop, along with other programs, that it's almost like telling a doctor not to use a scalpel.
Are you sure? Because i was under the impression a good portion of the photos are done by the magazines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 09:21 AM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,183,567 times
Reputation: 32581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
Plus, it is such an industry standard to use photoshop, along with other programs, that it's almost like telling a doctor not to use a scalpel.
Absolutely true.

And judging by the photo in the link Seventeen hasn't put a moratorium on wind machines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 09:28 AM
 
Location: Austin
2,162 posts, read 3,365,930 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.K. View Post
now, if all the rest would follow suit, we'd be set!
I know at one point Vogue promised to stop using tiny models, but I haven't seen the proof of that. Has anyone else noticed a difference?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 09:31 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,284,457 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvet709 View Post
I know at one point Vogue promised to stop using tiny models, but I haven't seen the proof of that. Has anyone else noticed a difference?
I think they arent using models under 16 is all anymore in the main mag.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2012, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Austin
2,162 posts, read 3,365,930 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
I think they arent using models under 16 is all anymore in the main mag.
That sounds right. They all still look pretty "size 0" to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:30 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top