Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Targeting the "Real" Picture

Target recently came out with an advertisement that has stirred up lots of controversy. So much, the company immediately took down the advertisement. Target went a little too far with Photoshop. The model's underarm and thighs were obviously "touched up." 

The thigh gap is apparently and sadly the new teenage trend and concern for female's body images. A Target spokesman Evan Miller told “It was an unfortunate error on our part and we apologize. We removed the image from the site and we’re working to get a new image up there.” Even, if they were to post a new modeled photograph…wouldn't it just be photoshopped again, just better?Whoever was in charge of reviewing the final product of that photograph should be fire, but nonetheless it could have been out of spite of such a ludicrous trend in society. Perhaps, this person in charge of the photoshop job did this was being rebellious and did it on purpose to prove a point. Point prove, thigh gaps are ridiculous, and people shouldn't stress over having one or not, there's more important things in life to worry about.
[her thighs/pelvis were edited, ribs, and underarms]I think the representation of products on models is an interesting concept: if all images are photoshopped will consumers buying those products actually be buying those products? If the picture doesn't match the final product in stores, what is the point of even modeling it and editing the photo? The Targetswimsuit was photoshopped to the point where is would not look or fit the way the model wore it, so it would in theory do the same thing to the buyer.
After watching this video I DONT KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE ANYMORE!? I can't believe how much Photoshop can change a person. The alterations such as these I believe changes the person so much to the point where it strays away from their "real" self. If you end up looking like a completely different person in the  "after" picture then it isn't "real" as far as photography goes. If one is talking about "photoshopped photography" then yes, it is real, but no way could this original image versus the final product be considered the "real" original image.  

1 comment:

  1. I especially "love" the idea that these clothes are modeled so that you can ostensibly see how they look on a person, and, by extension, imagine how they would look on you. So interesting that it basically ensures that everyone who gets this swimsuit in the mail and puts it on is going to feel disappointed in how it actually looks when on a real body. How is that smart marketing? Makes me think that the power of the image/fantasy is so strong, it trumps even the underwhelming experience of putting on the clothes and having them look bad.


Need to add an image? Use this code: < b > [ img ] IMAGE-URL-HERE [ /img ] < /b > (make sure you have no spaces anywhere in the code when you use it)