Who’s that lady?

A lament by Samantha Escobar at The Gloss:

Sometimes, I wonder if the people editing these photos even know what the celebrities they are doing Photoshop work on actually look like. If they did, they would probably not remove all their facial texture or turn them into triple-jointed aliens.

She offers the example of Shailene Woodley (Divergent) on the cover of the April Marie Claire, which is category A: “remove all their facial texture.”

Shailene Woodley on the cover of Marie Claire

For reference, a red-carpet shot of Woodley:

Shailene Woodley at the Independent Spirit Awards

Now that’s probably closer to, if perhaps not entirely, “unfiltered.”

Woodley’s on the cover of InStyle for June, and I adored the Dolce & Gabbana dress and the orange Prada shoes, but something seems a bit off here too:

Shailene Woodley on the cover of InStyle

Is it my imagination, or is one arm distinctly thicker than the other?

Addendum: InStyle has released a Behind the Scenes video for this shoot. (Warning: brief commercial plus interstitial survey.)







7 comments »

  1. Bill Peschel »

    10 May 2014 · 6:49 pm

    I’m sorry they had to break her right ankle to get the foot to look like that.

    Once you see how much they PhotoShit everything, things like People magazines “beautiful people” issue can be easily ignored, since nobody in there looks as they do in real life. Altering photos is as old as the camera (and one Hollywood book I have “Flesh and Fantasy” showed how they did it in the ’30s and ’40s), but the software makes it so easy that everything is fake.

  2. CGHill »

    10 May 2014 · 7:08 pm

    Score one for the triple-jointed aliens, then.

    Given the generally deleterious effect of the extended wearing of high heels, I suspected that they might have cleaned up her foot a bit — debunioning or something like that — but I admit to not noticing the weirdness at the ankle.

  3. jsallison »

    10 May 2014 · 7:58 pm

    Didn’t notice the foot, first started wondering how the knee got to where it is. And yeah, arm A doesn’t seem very similar to arm B.

  4. jsallison »

    10 May 2014 · 8:00 pm

    And on removing facial texture, that would be the blank face look. Not worth talking to until their face looks lived in.

  5. Nicole »

    10 May 2014 · 8:30 pm

    That entire last photo looks strange to me. Angles, thicknesses, face, feet..

  6. Tatyana »

    11 May 2014 · 7:14 am

    Inside spread with her @InStyle looks distinctly different – but even there she’s not quite human-looking

  7. CGHill »

    13 May 2014 · 10:53 am

    Fug Girl Heather on that InStyle cover:

    Lots of pretty colors on this. But it makes her foot look ENORMOUS — also, y’all, PLEASE stop and think before you do something that looks like you digitally removed all traces of her left leg — and the whole pose looks like her direction was to act like she was thinking, “My stars, I have just twisted my ankle at this garden party and I must immediately alight on this patch of grass. But ATTRACTIVELY.”

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a comment