The “beautification engine”
Will this be part of Photoshop CS 5 : Digital Face Beautification?
Here’s an article about yet another research/software to doctor images and a step towards “beauty” / looking better. (Luckily we also read that not all people came out more attractive after digital manipulation based on averageness of symmetry…).
A new computer program that uses a mathematical formula to alter the original form into a theoretically more attractive version, while maintaining what programmers call an “unmistakable similarity” to the original.
Studies have shown that there is surprising agreement about what makes a face attractive. Symmetry is at the core, along with youthfulness; clarity or smoothness of skin; and vivid color, say, in the eyes and hair. There is little dissent among people of different cultures, ethnicities, races, ages and gender.
“We have always had a huge industry to make people look better,” Dr. Etcoff said. “Everyone wants to look better. And we keep taking it further and further to all these images that have been doctored. There is a whole generation of girls growing up who think it’s normal not to look the way they really look.”
The New York Times | the Sum of Your Facial Parts
p.s. See my related posts filed under the category | http://judithdenhollander.wordpress.com/category/photoshop-manipulation/”>photoshop manipulation | the people vs the beauty industry.
Following my post of 20 September, here’s another video about photoshopped reality :
You Tube video
Here’s another one :
Since 2,5 years I have a digital camera and learning about (read struggling with) raw format, work flow and photoshop editing. I truly never had a clue commercial / fashion photography went this far with digital photo retouche/manipulation.
Should I follow part of the Dutch campaign and indicate on photos that I publish that body parts were not manipulated? That I only manage/master basic editing? Let me think about it…
Beperkt houdbaar (over the hill, limited usability, best before date) / the people vs the beauty industry. A documentary and the public responses, the reactions, debates and campaigns… Following a documentary that is about beauty and the beauty industry, a campaign “be honest about photoshop edited photos” was launched in The Netherlands. Aim of the campaign is to challenge printed media to be transparant about their published photos, to raise public awareness about photo manipulation and to start a debate about the -often by glossy and male magazines- created illusions. Nine Dutch magazines participate and commit in a campaign “be honest about photoshop edited photos”. Magazines that publish minimal edited photos will use a “photoshop-vrij” (photoshop-free)* logo to indicate so to their readers. Playboy initially said it would use a logo “gephotoshopt” (photoshop edited) but did not eventually…
Lees het artikel Photoshop-vrij actie op de website “beperkt houdbaar”.
See the videos. Also on the website : Manifesto in English
* Magazines that use the photoshop-free logo indicate that minimal photo editing/retouch is done. Normal colour correction is okay. Also removing a single pimple. But it is not allowed to remove wrinkles. Body parts may not be manipulated : no leg ‘extension’, smaller made waists, enlarged breasts etc etc.
We call upon advertisers and magazine editors to provide clarity in the murky unknown: accompany every manipulated too-good-to-be-true image with a fitting caption: “Pore-less thanks to Photoshop” or “This model was digitally narrowed and her neck was elongated”. This way, everyone will be able to tell fact from fiction in future.
Want to see some photo “retouch” : click portfolio, open a photo and move your mouse away from the photo
What’s wrong with this picture? “Pascal Dangin shrugs. “This world is not reality,” he said, fingering the print. “It’s just paper.”
Video NYT : Sex, lies and photoshop