Sunday, June 29, 2008

Extremely fascinating read about Pascal Dangin, "the premier retoucher of fashion photographs".

Art directors and admen call him when they want someone who looks less than great to look great, someone who looks great to look amazing, or someone who looks amazing already—whether by dint of DNA or M·A·C—to look, as is the mode, superhuman. (Christy Turlington, for the record, needs the least help.) In the March issue of Vogue Dangin tweaked a hundred and forty-four images: a hundred and seven advertisements (Estée Lauder, Gucci, Dior, etc.), thirty-six fashion pictures, and the cover, featuring Drew Barrymore.

Read on at The New Yorker here.

After my stint in publishing, I gained a whole new perspective on the images we see in magazines, ads, everywhere. Suddenly, I was always skeptical. Photography skills can manipulate your perception of the subject and then, there is digital retouching to shield reality behind rose-tinted glasses.

But still, it's not that I mind. I do like looking at beautiful pictures. And obviously, the real face of Sharon Stone with all her scary lines and sunken, crepey eyes on Dior ads wouldn't sell many moisturisers. Although I think making her look like a smooth, skin-plumped and unlined 27-year-old is way too deceptive. I've had an issue with her ads ever since I first saw them years ago but I guess it's no longer important now that she has lost at least half her market value by shooting her mouth off.

But I digress. I remember a local female title's covers from a few years ago. The models' faces always looked like pools of melted wax, having lost all dimension thanks to heavy-handed digital work. It was so consistently bad I went to ask my boss then why in the world the editor of that title allowed the magazines to go out like that month after month. She told me that's a question I'd have to ask that editor. And I concluded that either she didn't think it was appropriate to agree with me or that she didn't think it's bad and the problem actually lied with me.

But really, it was bad.

No comments: