For my topic, I will be addressing the ethics of the use of Photoshop in media. Many companies use the technique of Photoshop to alter images to the point that the subject being retouched does not exist at all. When these images that are altered are human images, it draws the question of how this may affect the people viewing it. The message that this conveys to the viewer may be that this is what the standard of beauty has come to and that it is perfectly achievable to get these results. The argument states that viewers are not gullible enough to believe that what they see in a magazine is real, but perhaps they are underestimating how powerful an image can be. There are many ways to undo these harmful effects, however it is possible to do more. …show more content…
Many companies who use Photoshop feel that using Photoshop is not a way to trick people into thinking the images are real, but a way to illustrate, exaggerate, accentuate, and improve upon their subjects.
People in favor of the use of Photoshop feel that disclaimers are unnecessary because we all are aware of what women –and men, really look like and are able to tell when what we are seeing is an exaggeration. They see these images as being more like illustrations of models rather than photos of them. They believe that they are giving people what they want: images of beauty rather than reality. They consider Photoshop a form of art rather than a tool to lie. They feel that to get rid of Photoshop would be to limit their artistic creativity. After all, are artistic achievements such as the sculpture of David or the painting of the Mona Lisa not exaggerations of what is considered beautiful versus what is
realistic? The use of Photoshop in the media needs to be controlled. The difference between an artist’s paintings of a woman versus Photoshop creating a woman from technology is that the source of media using Photoshop is using that photo to promote something, perhaps a hairspray or a summer workout. These are things that they want the consumer to buy, so they are trying to convince them that it can work. Using a technologically retouched image to go along with that insinuates that it is the possible result of buying this product, which results in them lying to the consumer. They are saying that that image is in fact attainable if one were to buy this product or follow that routine. In order to combat this, retouched images used in this way should require a disclaimer to them to draw attention to the fact that the images being displayed are not images of realistic, natural human beings. Another problem with this argument is that although an artist may depict a human in their version of a subject, and it may in fact not be an exact image of what they are like, it is not the same thing as what Photoshop in the media does. When an artist paints something, they are not claiming that their image is the “ideal” image that society accepts and strives to be. Media that uses Photoshop claims that they use it to depict what the audience wants. However, just as they claim that they should not assume that all viewers are gullible enough to believe that the images presented are real, they should also not assume that what they are presenting to the public is what the public and wants and that it is everyone’s standard of beauty. They need to admit that it is theirs. Although there very well may be a part of the public that in fact does prefer images retouched that way, it does not mean that everyone does. The media has no right to claim that the use of Photoshop is an artistic tool that does not lie to people about realistic images nor has the right to claim that they are just giving the public what it wants. My paper will focus on the effect Photoshop has on the public. This ranges from the models and celebrities being retouched and how they feel about it to regular people who are being fed these images. I think that in order to narrow my search I shouldn’t look for every single interview or biography of people in the U.S., but just a handful of each. I don’t think I should limit my search to Ohio because this is a topic that effects the nation as a whole and I need to find variance. The audience that I have in mind for this paper is for people in the public domain who aren’t really sure what the real issue with media retouching is. This is my intended audience because I think it is important for them to understand why Photoshop in the media can be harmful to society and why restrictions, like adding a disclaimer, can be beneficial. I want them to understand that there are uses for Photoshop, but the way it is used in media is not appropriate. I personally can say that I have experience with the negative effects Photoshop can have on people, and I know so many others who have had similar experiences. In my paper I would like to include articles and research studies that demonstrate information about the effect Photoshop in the media has on people. At the same time, I would like to include articles or information that argue for the use of Photoshop in the media. I believe the use of interviews or personal stories may help the reader gain a perspective of what Photoshop in the media may affect people.
Unfortunately, a lot of females fall into those traps and do not consider themselves beautiful unless they’re a certain weight or have their skin a certain way. Nobody embraces their bodies and their looks besides those that society gives you a perception of something that doesn’t exist to be “perfection”. And in the Dove commercial which I used in my presentation to state the image society has given women shows the wonder of photoshop. It showed how an average woman was changed into someone with a skinnier neck, perfect hair, and flawless skin all with the magic of technology. And by using real life human models it given women the perception that if they look like that then I can
... role in the process of critical thinking, how imagery whether through television, billboards, books or magazines has a profound impact on how we view the world and that we have been bombarded with images, whether positive or negative, to a point where we become oblivious to the underlying messages these images are conveying to us. They suggest that images define who we are and what we do, for example, a beautiful model wearing a designer pair of shoes in a magazine conveys to us that we too can be a beautiful, confident woman if only we had those shoes. Another example, on the negative slope of imagery is an advertisement for alcohol or cigarettes, these advertisements are designed to sell, and we are willing to buy. The editors make it clear that we need to be subjective when viewing these images, to go beyond the immediate and look for the underlying message.
Throughout the course of the semester so far there has been many ethical questions that we have talked about. One is about Jacob Riis and how he adopted a rhetorical position that made him sound like he was agreeing with his audience when presenting the photographs in his book How the Other Half Lives. Jacob Riis used a rhetorical strategy where the text would contradict what the image is portraying. “Its existence was designed to draw the audience’s attention away from the manipulations of the creator and the distortions of the medium, to lull viewers into believing themselves witnesses to an unrehearsed and untagged confrontation with the raw grit of a previously hidden world” (hughes 6). Riis also almost supported the stereotypes that were
Media is one of the biggest factor in shaping our identity and how we see ourselves. In “killing us softly” Jean Kilbourne explains the meaning of the advertisements and how women can never achieve the scale of perfection that these advertisements set. Jean explains that these advertisements are saying that you will be beautiful and all the men will love you if you look this certain way. The problem Jean mentions is that they can never look like the models shown in advertisements because not even the models themselves can look like that. During the film/speech she shows how digital editors Photoshop all the photos to fix the model’s flaws and then you see that the models in the ads are a completely different creation. The digital editors even showed the process of creating a complete perfect non-existing being. By that they mean that the models shown in some ads are actually a combination different facial features of 3-4 models. These fake beings are setting standards that are an impossibility to obtain. This type of media is affecting how we see ourselves. ...
To continue, the development of new technologies, such as computers and image editing software, has increased and redefined the nature of false advertising. Programs such as Adobe Photoshop have made the digital manipulation of images possible. One of the functions of this software is “airbrushing”, which in this context refers to the technique used to conceal, eliminate, or alter the appearance of flaws. Image editing software has facilitated the “re-touching of photographs related to any characteristics directly relevant to the apparent ...
McIvor, Sarey Martin. “PHOTOSHOPPING OUR SOULS AWAY.” darlingmagazine.org. Darling Magazine, 01 Nov. 2011. Web. 20 Jan. 2014.
In modern society there is more and more digital editing without the knowledge of consumers. Currently there are various reasons for why women develop negative body image, low-self-esteem and eating disorders. According to Naomi Wolf in her novel “Beauty Myth”, one of the many reasons women obtain concerns with their bodies is due to the universal images of young female bodies presented through advertisements in fashion magazines. Advertisements in magazines are altering and shaping the desires of men and women. Magazines sell viewers images of beautiful, skinny, flawless confident young women. When people are constantly antagonized with the magazine industry’s ideal of “perfect beauty” the viewer’s then, subconsciously believe these images to be true and begin to form biases about what they themselves should look like and what other people must also look like. People who view magazines get mislead by advertisers because they are unaware that all the images displayed are digitally altered through Photoshop and airbrushing. Today’s magazines are formed completely on false ideals of flawless beauty and unattainable body images, to prevent women and men from falling victim to the magazine’s deceitful images we as a society need to become aware and educate ourselves.
The modern world is full of photographs. They are used for ads, political campaigns, and magazines. However it can be hard to tell whether or not a photograph is real. Many are ‘doctored’ or altered in some way. These doctored photographs can be seemingly harmless, such as advertisements, but they can misrepresent a product or person. There is a fine line between what is ethical and what isn’t for doctored images. Photographs should never be altered in order to deceive individuals, damage someone’s reputation, or when they have a strong negative impact on self-esteem. However if doctored photographs are used for art or for minor touch-ups for advertisements that don’t misrepresent a product then
Video is one of the most compelling forms of communication of this time. Over the course of the past few years, the gradual but sure drift from analog to digital in video technology has not only improved the abilities of visual communication media to distribute data, but has also improved their abilities to manipulate the data that they distribute. Digital video technology has advanced to the extent that still image manipulation has been usurped by more powerful technological developments that allow elements of a video image to be manipulated in real-time. That is, objects or persons in a video image can be edited out or edited in while the image is in broadcast without the slightest glitch to suggest that some change has occurred; everything would look “real.” The advantages that this technology opens for visual media are extensive. Similar to some technologies, however, it opens up an exploitive edge. Pixels are plastic (can be changed) and using them to distort or manipulate reality is an opportunity open to all users of video manipulation tools. The ethics of such uses and the social considerations of how copyright laws would deal with a technology which manipulates digital works of authorship, works to which copyright automatically attaches, are issues worth considering. This paper explores the possible and actual, reputable and less reputable uses of this technology in an attempt to stimulate discussions about how “well-intended” technologies can be utilized by users in unethical and harmful ways. The paper also attempts to see where possible infringements of copyright’s fair use doctrine has occurred or could possibly occur through use of this technology.
When using Photoshop on a person to “perfect” the image the editors get quite drastic; in a recent cover for Rolling Stone Katy Perry was shown sitting on a bed in just a bra and underwear, seems like the average cover right? Well yes it is like every other magazine except this one had its pre-photoshop cover leaked as well. In the above picture we can see that the editors of this photoshop slimmed Katy down, enhanced her breasts, removed moles, made her skin look glossy, and even removed the sock on her right leg. Its this nit picking that causes harm to our society and to our communities. It seems as though everyday we hear of another young girl committing suicide because she felt worthless.
In today 's society, people have a very skewed perception of beauty. People are exposed to so many advertisements and pictures that are photo-shopped each day that many do not even realize what they are looking at. They are seeing an image of something that is not real; something that is not even possible to obtain. Photoshop has an outrageously negative effect on men and women in society, creating an unattainable image of perfection.
The top most entertainment in Magazines could be putting society at risks. Photoshopping or image software editing of models or celebrities for publication are creating debates of issues with an unrealistic body. Although models are edited for entertainment purposes, they should give warnings that explain photoshopping because it causes eating disorders, creates false body images to humans and influences models to meet measurements.
Manipulation in photography editing uses tactics to deceive the audience of a given photograph. Editing software programming,such as Adobe Photoshop,is used by artists to have the tools needed to exploit the image to develop specific messages. The resulting photograph is different from the original. The photograph is being digitally manipulated. However, most often the editing goes unnoticed by the targeted audience Editing in advertising results in contributing to gender stereotypes. Manipulative editing in photography reinforces gender stereotypes conveyed in American culture
Alexandra Scaturchio, in her article “Women in Media” (2008) describes the media’s idea of beauty as superficial. She supports her argument by placing two pictures side-by-side; a picture of a real, normal-looking woman and her picture after it has been severely digitally enhanced. Her purpose is to show young teenage girls that the models they envy for their looks are not real people, but computer designs. She also states, “the media truly distorts the truth and instills in women this false hope because…they will live their lives never truly attaining this ideal appearance”. Scaturchio wants her readers to realize the media’s distorting capabilities and feel beautiful about themselves, even with flaws.
A great number of works of art, it is universally claimed, are aesthetically precious. Some philosophers have even argued that providing an aesthetically pleasing experience is their only proper function. The truth is that some of these artworks display or invite us to adopt an immoral point of view. Even worse, they even seem to make immoral situations delightful and appealing.