The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) has forced a magazine to apologise for printing an altered photograph of the Duchess of Cambridge. Grazia magazine published a picture of the duchess in her wedding dress that appeared to make her look thinner, according to the complaint the PCC received. The PCC is a self-regulatory …
well that's a relief
"Grazia takes the issue of women's body image very seriously and we would never 'slim down' a picture of a female role model," the magazine said"
Phew, I don't need to cancel my subscription in protest at the shabby treatment of our future queen. That's a huge relief.
Do i detect sarcasm? Nah, brits dont even know what that means...
As a TOG...
...and looking at the before and after, I reckon the Mag's telling the truth.
Often finding myself removing people, random legs/arms and stuff like this happens. If her righthand side (as you look at the pic) wasn't so slim itself, this wouldn't have happened! They would have had to spend time actually fattening her up to compensate!!!
So what had Will done to upset them?
Fancy cutting the groom out of the wedding photos.
Lose five kilos overnight!
Just chop your arm off.
Any effect on waist completely incidental.
Good thing that humans are always perfectly symmetrical when walking.
Why did they feel the need to reflect her waist as well as her arm (which I can understand)
She has her weight on one hip, so her waist if offset to her right at the time the photo is taken. It's a pretty easy mistake, but one that should have been obvious to the people doing the edit. Are they really so focussed on individual pixels that they never look at the photo?
Quite possibly: http://www.psdisasters.com/
The problem is not so much the waist as the bouquet. If they had just reflected her left arm, then it would not have been long enough to reach behind the bouquet. They would have probably needed to jig both arms and the bouquet around so that she relatively symmetrical arms, or the pose would look wrong. Of course, they could have just mirrored the left arm and increased the size of the bouquet to cover the mess.
There seem to be no pics with this story.
I'll call it....
Pics, or it didn't happen.
Google is your frie... oh wait.
They made her look slimmer?
Surely the Photoshop path of least resistance to airbrushing Wills away would have been to make her considerably wider????
Some posh bint marries a prince and all of a sudden she is a female role model??? Really is this what qualifies as a role model in the UK today? She's hardly Aung San Suu Kyi
Looks like a rushed job to me and I'd accept Grazia's explanation; cock-up or oversight rather than by design.
There's definitely been more dishonest, blatant and deliberate, photoshopping elsewhere which is designed to deceive and that's what we need to weed out. Grazia got their wrist slapped; fair enough, time to move on.
It's not much of a story is it. Maybe if instead they had photoshopped Harry to make him look like he's related to the rest of the family...
Grazia is still wrong
...whether they are telling the truth or not... their basic position is ;-
"We wanted a cover picture that does not exist, so we altered existing images to suit our needs".
I wonder if the PCC has anything to say about Apple fattening up the Samsung Galaxy in their latest photoshoot
Words and Letters...
Some pics of Pippa wouldn't have gone amiss in this article I feel
The reason its important is we have enough little girls with massive self image problems, without adding to it by saying thats its possible to be impossible thin like this picture. Of course you understood this becuase you are human and not just a mssive geek lives in his mums basement.
calm down LPF
FYI I don't live in my mum's basement and I have a teenage daughter so I understand the issues very well. Put your simpering self-righteousness back in its box and you will be doing everyone a favour particularly yourself.
So their excuse...
Was that they were trying to photographically eliminate the second-in-line for the British throne.
Methinks that's an even dumber action than the one they were accused of in the first place.
I just saw both images side by side, and the evidence does not support Grazia's story about mirroring the arm. Everything in the image has been thoroughly adjusted, including the Duchess's waist (much smaller), boobs (bigger), face and dress.
I guess all magazine pictures are essentially cartoons now, ie entirely synthetic and exaggerated images. Even the event is fake. The duchess never occupied the posture depicted. I hope this is just a passing fashion, and mags go back to showing real, actual pictures.
Was she not skinny enough already? Every time I see a picture of her I think she needs to be stuffed with a few more pheasants.
We are reaching the point...
when magazine will forfeit photos entirely and go back to hand drawn images.
Not just Kate Middleton...
The other Kate (Moss) has this plastered elsewhere: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/kate-moss-daughter-photoshop_n_928681.html
Her daughter's fingers went missing.
- Product Round-up Smartwatch face off: Pebble, MetaWatch and new hi-tech timepieces
- Geek's Guide to Britain The bunker at the end of the world - in Essex
- FLABBER-JASTED: It's 'jif', NOT '.gif', says man who should know
- If you've bought DRM'd film files from Acetrax, here's the bad news
- Microsoft reveals Xbox One, the console that can read your heartbeat