why do magazines edit models skin to look like barbie doll?

why do magazines edit models skin to look like barbie doll?

is that the trend for glamour?

Do you guys edit models in the same style as the magazines?

It is not a trend when it has been done from the inception of the medium. It is the standard of how it is done. Sure there are examples of it not being done, but they are exceptions, as a whole that is just how it is done.

I dont edit that way. But would have no problem with it if I was hired to shoot a campain for a magazine.

Then the next question presents itself: Why was it done like this from the beginning?

Jonta wrote in post #13413133
Then the next question presents itself: Why was it done like this from the beginning?

To make women feel inadequate so they spend money.

the models images are way over edited to a ridiculous level. it looks absolutely synthetic. A person skin looks like latex.

how did this trend started ?

Numenorean wrote in post #13413151
To make women feel inadequate so they spend money.

Exactly the point... but it is usually stated from the other side.... It is asperational to show what you might be able to look like if you buy the product. Although, at its core, its the same thing.

It started when ads were still hand drawn. Nobody drew in pimples, scars, moles, freckels etc...etc... They drew a perfect face. Then comes along photography... And you had to compete with the perfect face that your competitor was still useing. So you had to "fix" your model so she was just as apealing. And it only grew from there.

Dove evolution comes to mind.

Why do they feature models who have to starve themselves to look like they do? (even before they get 'retouched')

Why do consistently feature people/models who look anything but 'average'?

Why do they do anything?

That's what sells. That's the bottom line...and really the only thing that matters at all (to them).

I personally want to chuck up every time I see a photograph of a model with her skin blurred till it looks like plastic and ultra white eyes and teeth ...... if you want to shoot a blow up sex doll, go and buy one, I like REAL people, instead of this conveyer belt of homogenised plastic. Some of these photographers would smooth Jack Nicholson's skin, I think it is a drug and it needs to be stamped out!!!

magazines such as Elle loves the barbie doll style.

picard wrote in post #13405010
is that the trend for glamour?

Nah, it's just bad editing…

You ask the question on a subject that some are trying to see that laws are passed to prohibit.

http://www.dailymail.c​o.uk …hop-laws-advertising.html

"The Advertising Standards Authority in the UK banned two ads, starring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington, following complaints launched by Lib-Dem MP Jo Swinson. She argued that airbrushing creates a false impression of beauty."

GrendelKhan wrote in post #13476586
You ask the question on a subject that some are trying to see that laws are passed to prohibit.

http://www.dailymail.c​o.uk …hop-laws-advertising.html

"The Advertising Standards Authority in the UK banned two ads, starring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington, following complaints launched by Lib-Dem MP Jo Swinson. She argued that airbrushing creates a false impression of beauty."

I find that the law is unlikely to be passed in the UK. The rest of the world still use this barbie standard.

Jonta wrote in post #13413133
Then the next question presents itself: Why was it done like this from the beginning?

I was not there to know the exact reason. But if I were to take a common-sense guess, it would be that it's the photographic and print counterpart to why women put on makeup.

picard wrote in post #13413619
the models images are way over edited to a ridiculous level. it looks absolutely synthetic. A person skin looks like latex.

how did this trend started ?

I prefer the natural, "girl next door" type of woman.
However, most of the products I buy come wrapped in plastic right off the shelf. They are neatly organized, perfectly packaged and labeled to promote their worth over the competitor's inferior product.

For most magazines the girl on the cover is just that - a product to be sold.

As a photographer I'd be annoyed that the perfect portrait will undoubtedly be destroyed to make a buck. As a graphic designer or digital artist I could appreciate the time and effort it takes to transform a great photo into a work of art.

As a magazine editor I'd just pray that the magazine sells without causing a backlash among my female readers.