Difference between revisions of "Photo Editing"
(→Dove Campaign for Real Beauty) |
(→Ethical Implications of Photo-editing) |
||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
==Ethical Implications of Photo-editing== | ==Ethical Implications of Photo-editing== | ||
| − | Photo editing can have all kinds of implications. It can either be used to recover an important image that has been distorted, or it can be used to purposely distort reality. Any alteration on reality has dangerous implications, because it will create cognitive dissonance with reality. Photoshopping (another term for photo-editing) has become so advanced that most people cannot tell if a photo has been edited, and some people may be influenced to strive for and/or believe false information that the edited photo is displaying. When it comes to visual memory, it is the human mind's strongest memory component, meaning people are more likely to recall an event based on visual proof versus auditory story telling. <ref>http://www.unisci.com/stories/20013/0726014.htm</ref> | + | Photo editing can have all kinds of implications. It can either be used to recover an important image that has been distorted, or it can be used to purposely distort reality. Any alteration on reality has dangerous implications, because it will create cognitive dissonance with reality. Photoshopping (another term for photo-editing) has become so advanced that most people cannot tell if a photo has been edited, and some people may be influenced to strive for and/or believe false information that the edited photo is displaying. When it comes to visual memory, it is the human mind's strongest memory component, meaning people are more likely to recall an event based on visual proof versus auditory story telling. <ref>http://www.unisci.com/stories/20013/0726014.htm</ref> |
| − | Photo editing | + | Photo-editing can be harmful because it is a powerful tool that can be used to deceive people. The most apparent issue with photo-editing comes from the magazine industry. Celebrities, typically women, who grace the pages of media publications are usually photoshopped into the extreme ideal of perfection. In most women's magazines today, all of the models on the covers and advertisements are portraying a world with no blemishes, even skin tones, small waist, large breast, highly whitened teeth, and no body-fat. This type of content sets a standard for women that is impossible to maintain. Such physical representations can have negative psychological effects on women and especially on the youth. By applying the theory of social comparison, people will compare themselves with the photo edited image of their favorite celebrity or model and it may decrease their self-esteem and body satisfaction. Currently, 7 million women in the United States alone suffer from eating disorders and 50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 see themselves as overweight. <ref>http://www.state.sc.us/dmh/anorexia/statistics.htm</ref>. Having more photoshopped images could pressure more women and young girls to develop further and deeper developments of eating disorders to match the perfect body mass media displays. |
| + | Even when it is known that a photo has been edited, which is often the case when photos are used to mock individuals, the consequences can still be ethically questionable. For uneducated audiences, altered photos may take on the appearance of truth. This has the potential to cause problems when people use what they have learned from these pictures and apply it to real life situations. This type of photo editing is often times used to slander various religious groups, ethnic groups, and the LBGT community. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Photo editing programs such as Adobe Photoshop and other image editing programs within photo taking equipment, such as cameras, also have privacy implications. Unknown to many users, photo editing cameras and other programs are able to embed certain information within pictures and movies. For example, if a person were to take a picture with a camera, certain information about the owner can be put within the photo. If one were to get a hold of that picture, that person find this embedded information within the picture. This could leave to compromising information of the user being put into the public domain. This same thing occasionally has been found to occur in photo editing programs as well. When a picture is edited, information about the users is put within the photo. When this picture reaches the public domain through online sites such as Flickr and Facebook, other people can find and interpret this information. This leads to information of the owner being released, without the owner knowing. | ||
==Taking A Stand Against Photoshop== | ==Taking A Stand Against Photoshop== | ||
Revision as of 21:25, 13 December 2011
Photo Editing is the alteration of pixels (picture elements) in an image. These images can be altered by a computer software program or automatically enhanced by modern digital camera options. As computer software with altering abilities become more mainstream, more and more people have the opportunity to enhance pictures and to use the software creatively. On the other side, as it becomes more mainstream, it is becoming more and more difficult to distinguish between what is real and what has been edited.
Contents
History
1860
The first notable edited photo came in 1860, not too long after Niepce invented the photograph. The photo below (left) places President Abraham Lincoln's head on the body of John Calhoun's body.
1864
In 1864, there is a depiction of General Ulysses S. Grant during the American Civil War. In reality, three separate photos were combined to create the final product (right).
1865
This stately scene shows General Sherman with all of his generals. However, one of them was not in the original photograph and was added at a later date.
1942
In 1942, Benito Mussolini had his horse trainer removed from the picture to appear more heroic. [1]
1987
In 1989, Oprah's head was placed on a body from an advertisement for the gown. Neither the gown designer nor Oprah were notified about this ad before it went public.
2007
In 2007, the popular movie series, Harry Potter, released a promotional movie poster for The Order of the Phoenix, with the actress Emma Watson's chest enlarged.
Basics of Photo Editing
Digital photos are stored on computers in a form of a grid containing elements, also known as pixels. Each pixel has its own information, and modern photo editing programs such as Adobe Photoshop or Corel's Paint Shop Pro are programmed to allow the users to change the information of each pixel individually or in large clusters. On a large-scale, this alters the entire image. These programs' algorithms have become so fine-tuned that if matched with a skilled user, it may be very difficult to detect any alterations of a photo.
Techniques
Cropping
Cropping is used to show a selection of the picture.
Color Manipulation
Image editing software allows user to change the color of a picture.
Color manipulation is used in popular media to lighten the skin tone of dark-skinned celebrities.
This cosmetic ad lightened musical artist Beyonce's skin.
Liquify
The liquify filter is one of the most powerful tools in Adobe Photoshop. It allows user to disorts pixels without losing quality. This filter allows us to push, pull, rotate, reflect, pucker, and bloat the pixels of any image. Changeable properties with the liquify filter are Forward Warp, Reconstruct, Twirl, Pucker, Bloat, Push, Mirror, Turbulence, Freeze / Thaw Mask, Hand and Zoom. [2] An example of the liquify tool can be seen in the 2007 Harry Potter example, where the artist bloated the chest area of the female actress.
Controversial Edited Photos
Photo editing is mainly used in advertisements to create a perfect picture.
University of Wisconsin at Madison
University of Wisconsin at Madison wanted to portray student diversity in one its brochures by inserting an African-American student in the crowd of white students. The original photograph was taken in 1993 and the additional student was added from a picture taken in 1994.
2006 Lebanon War Photographs
Refers to when Reuters, the news agency in New York, was caught publishing altered photos of the Lebanon War in 2006. Reuters fired photographer Adnan Hajj, who used a software editing program to manipulate many of his war photos. CAMERA, a pro-Israel media watch organization, said that the alleged photographic manipulations were used by the mainstream media in an attempt to sway public opinion and paint Israel as an aggressor, and suggesting that Israel was guilty of targeting civilians. [3]A film released on the YouTube video sharing website compares the two images, and appears to show striking similarities between the photograph used by Reuters on both July 24 and August 5. [4]
2009 Microsoft Photograph
In 2009, an image in a Microsoft Corporation advertisement has been edited to transform a face of a black man into a face of a white man. In the US Microsoft website, the photo features one asian, one black, and one white. In the Polish Microsoft website, however, the black man was replaced by a white man. This alteration in the photo triggered enormous amount of discussion in the online community. Online bloggers and commenters "wondered if the change was racially motivated, the result of poor judgment or both." [5] Some people suggested that the Polish image was changed so that the man in the photo would resemble their own country's people more.
H&M
H&M, a popular clothing store [6], has recently been under fire for their clothing ads. H&M has been using computer-generated bodies and using real models head. This head-body disconnet was noticed by a Norway company, Bildbluff, a site that identifies photos that have been edited. H&M has admitted to using these computer-image bodies and converging it with a model's head. They maintain that the reason for using this questionable practice is to steer the customers' attention to the articles of clothing and away from the model herself.[7]
H&M has recently issued a response, defending its decision to use digitally-generated bodies. They do not regret their decision, instead comparing the use of these virtual bodies to using mannequins in retail stores. [8]
Ralph Lauren
Ralph Lauren photoshoppers edited this distorted image of model Filippa Hamilton. The public has severely criticized the company for its' extreme use of digital manipulation on Hamilton, who is five-foot-ten and 120 pounds and not overweight. [9]. This ad sparked much controversy, because it presents a distorted body image view on a already thin woman. This can have negative implications of women and young girls in society in how they perceive their bodies.
Ethical Implications of Photo-editing
Photo editing can have all kinds of implications. It can either be used to recover an important image that has been distorted, or it can be used to purposely distort reality. Any alteration on reality has dangerous implications, because it will create cognitive dissonance with reality. Photoshopping (another term for photo-editing) has become so advanced that most people cannot tell if a photo has been edited, and some people may be influenced to strive for and/or believe false information that the edited photo is displaying. When it comes to visual memory, it is the human mind's strongest memory component, meaning people are more likely to recall an event based on visual proof versus auditory story telling. [10]
Photo-editing can be harmful because it is a powerful tool that can be used to deceive people. The most apparent issue with photo-editing comes from the magazine industry. Celebrities, typically women, who grace the pages of media publications are usually photoshopped into the extreme ideal of perfection. In most women's magazines today, all of the models on the covers and advertisements are portraying a world with no blemishes, even skin tones, small waist, large breast, highly whitened teeth, and no body-fat. This type of content sets a standard for women that is impossible to maintain. Such physical representations can have negative psychological effects on women and especially on the youth. By applying the theory of social comparison, people will compare themselves with the photo edited image of their favorite celebrity or model and it may decrease their self-esteem and body satisfaction. Currently, 7 million women in the United States alone suffer from eating disorders and 50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 see themselves as overweight. [11]. Having more photoshopped images could pressure more women and young girls to develop further and deeper developments of eating disorders to match the perfect body mass media displays.
Even when it is known that a photo has been edited, which is often the case when photos are used to mock individuals, the consequences can still be ethically questionable. For uneducated audiences, altered photos may take on the appearance of truth. This has the potential to cause problems when people use what they have learned from these pictures and apply it to real life situations. This type of photo editing is often times used to slander various religious groups, ethnic groups, and the LBGT community.
Photo editing programs such as Adobe Photoshop and other image editing programs within photo taking equipment, such as cameras, also have privacy implications. Unknown to many users, photo editing cameras and other programs are able to embed certain information within pictures and movies. For example, if a person were to take a picture with a camera, certain information about the owner can be put within the photo. If one were to get a hold of that picture, that person find this embedded information within the picture. This could leave to compromising information of the user being put into the public domain. This same thing occasionally has been found to occur in photo editing programs as well. When a picture is edited, information about the users is put within the photo. When this picture reaches the public domain through online sites such as Flickr and Facebook, other people can find and interpret this information. This leads to information of the owner being released, without the owner knowing.
Taking A Stand Against Photoshop
Recently, several groups and companies have vocalized their discontent with photoshopped images. In response, they have come out with magazine covers, photo editorials and clothing advertisement campaigns featuring celebrities, models and people who are not photoshopped. In 2009, American Glamour Magazine ran a un-retouched photo starring model Lizzie Miller. The photo shows Miller sitting with her stomach and "a small roll of fat" displayed. It has received positive responses from many women. [12]
British Law
After a beauty ad showing a wrinkle-free Twiggy, the British lawmakers announced that they wanted to ban the use of photoshop for image retouching on ads that were geared towards those under 16. "Today's unrealistic idea of what is beautiful means that young girls are under more pressure now than they were even five years ago. Airbrushing means that adverts contain completely unattainable perfect images no one can live up to in real life. We need to help protect children from these pressures and we need to make a start by banning airbrushing in adverts aimed at them." [13]
Keira Knightley
In 2004, Keira's breast for the movie Pirates of the Caribbean were digitally enhanced. She was quoted in an interview saying "Those certainly weren't mine," for King Arthur in 2006. In the next Pirate's movie, The Duchess, she told the producers that she will not have her body altered in anyway for promotional movie posters.[14]
Domino's Pizza
Domino's has started a Totally Real Talk Campaign, that exposes the process of what pizzas have to go through before getting photographed for promotional materials. Some companies have staged their photos with nails, blowtorches, or steam guns on there pizzas before shooting. Dominos has announced that they are only going to be photographing pizzas that come straight from their ovens, with no staging or altering. [15]
Dove Campaign for Real Beauty
In 2004, Dove launch a marketing campaign titled Dove Campaign for Real Beauty. The purpose of the campaign was to help build self-esteem for women to be comfortable with themselves and to celebrate the female body no matter the shape or size. Dove released a commercial showcasing the power of photo editing and stating "No wonder our perception of beauty is distorted" in the video.
Some of the pictures that were included in the campaign were argued to be believe as photo edited. A spokesperson from Dove replied to the controversial statement,
- “We have made the commitment not to distort any of our images to create an unrealistic or unattainable view of beauty. As we have said, this does not mean we do absolutely nothing to the images to make them suitable for printing. There is always something that needs a bit of adjustment to meet professional standards - even in the best run photo shoot with the best photographers. Removing or correcting these things does not mean that people don't see the woman as she really is and does not change our commitment to real women.” [16]
References
- ↑ http://www.cracktwo.com/2011/05/famous-doctored-photographs.html
- ↑ http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-tips/a-comprehensive-guide-to-photoshops-liquify-tool/
- ↑ http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=2&x_article=1175
- ↑ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJ5Rj4yBGdU
- ↑ 11 Photo-Editing Flubs: Ralph Lauren Ad Sparks Controversy
- ↑ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/05/hm-fake-model-bodies_n_1129864.html#s520429
- ↑ http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3981561/HM-under-fire-for-using-completely-virtual-models.html
- ↑ http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2011/12/clothing-giant-hm-defends-use-of-virtual-models/
- ↑ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/filippa-hamilton-ralph-la_n_320396.html
- ↑ http://www.unisci.com/stories/20013/0726014.htm
- ↑ http://www.state.sc.us/dmh/anorexia/statistics.htm
- ↑ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1210814/Lizzie-Millers-Glamour-magazine-shoot-How-models-picture-shook-world-flabby-tummy-all.html
- ↑ http://jezebel.com/5328736/british-lawmakers-take-stand-against-photoshop
- ↑ http://news.brothersoft.com/keira-knightley-takes-a-stand-against-photoshop-44374.html
- ↑ http://www.theawl.com/2010/07/dominos-taking-brave-stand-in-the-war-against-photoshop
- ↑ http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2008/05/an_experts_anal.html
