Makeup Companies Run Into Legal Trouble For Too Much Photoshopping… And Not Enough Photoshopping
from the damned-if-you-do,-damned-if-you-don't dept
There’s a story making the rounds about how the UK Advertising Standards Authority is banning certain cosmetics advertisements including Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington, because the images are way too Photoshopped.

Now, this story was interesting on its own, but what made it even more interesting is that another makeup firm, Estee Lauder, seems to be in a legal dispute, for the exact opposite reason. Ima Fish recently alerted us to the news that model Caroline Louise Forsling had sued the company for the following advertisement:

Either way, it should be noted that in both of these stories, they’re about supposed “anti-aging” products, and I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that digitally altering images is how such products are advertised, rather than showing any actual before and after shots, because I imagine “real results” are likely to vary from what’s seen in any of these ads.
Filed Under: caroline louis forsling, christy turlington, julia roberts, makeup, models, photoshop, uk
Companies: estee lauder, l'oreal
Comments on “Makeup Companies Run Into Legal Trouble For Too Much Photoshopping… And Not Enough Photoshopping”
*runs off to patent/trademark/copyright “photoshop anti aging cream”*
Really, Caroline Louise Forsling? The difference between the two face halves is so slight that it’s hard to see how one could “irreparably damage” a career but the other one couldn’t.
Re: Re:
You know, along those same lines, here’s another question:
Why can’t women just accept that they’re still hot as hell without the makeup?
Sincerely,
All non-retarded men everywhere….
Re: Re: Re:
Correction … they CAN be hot as hell. Some women really need that makeup …
Google image results for “with and without makeup”
Re: Re: Re: Re:
A lot of those pictures have more to do with lighting, pose, clothing, etc than they have to do with make up.
Some of those pictures are obviously comparing without to touched up/photoshopped images.
Some of those pictures I have a hard time believing that the “without makeup” picture is even the same person as the “with”, for example, Angelina Jolie. If the “without” is really Angelina, it’s her from a long time ago, before any plastic surgery she’s done. So again, make up isn’t the factor.
Re: Re: Re:
“along those same lines”…. perfect unintended pun
Re: Re: Re: Re:
God I wish it had been intended….
Re: Re: Re:
Amen. My wife pretty much never wore makeup (and as far as I know, still does not), and I was always happy with things that way.
The Ms. Forsling on the left looks quite attractive to me. Of course, I’m not trying to hire her as a model.
I guess the real issue is what sells, and real people don’t sell. Glitz and plastic sells. Unrealistic and distorted body images sell. Removing all signs of physical maturity sells. But real faces, real bodies? Disgusting.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That. Makeup is ok but a fresh natural girl/woman is also wonderful. Women in advertisements and magazines are virtual today. Most of them.
Reminds me of a collection of Playboy front pages I’ve seen recently. The older ones didn’t have photoshop and.. wow, they are the hottest.
Re: Re: Re:
If it were about impressing guys, 1 trip to the gym > all makeup and clothes in the world.
But makeup and fashion isn’t about impressing guys in the least.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Maybe not for all, but I’m sure for many, it is about that.
Re: Re: Re:
Here, here.
Also, what’s with the anti-aging crap? Why is it considered bad to look old when you are old? In other cultures it’s something that commands respect. But not us, noooooo. Even if I could look 20 years younger, I wouldn’t want to. It would be totally awkward and it usually looks that way.
Let’s suppose that a women wears makeup to make herself look attractive. However what she really cares about is looking attractive in a relative sense, compared to those around her. However, now all the women around her begin to do the same thing. What has been gained? Nothing. Between makeup and clothes, it just becomes a race to the bottom and that is exactly what is happening.
Photoshop
I always thought those pictures were just one picture with both sides photoshopped. I now know better.
Just confirms my thoughts...
that Julia Roberts requires photoshop to appear as a pretty woman. I think it’s the lack of a philtrum.
"She could have just as easily told people..."
Assuming TRUTH is of no consequence. — YES, I do consider it significant that MIke writes that casually.
Re: "She could have just as easily told people..."
Umm, her complaint is about the fact that a photo does not misrepresent her looks enough to make her as falsely-perfect as she wants people to believe. She has already established that “truth” is not an issue for her.
In the second case, you didn’t link to a story, but googling I find this: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/swimsuit_beauty_it_ad_nau_ea_dmi_3FAVKsgVT7MrN4spjXmu8M#ixzz1OD46GExu
And from that, it doesn’t seem that she’s saying that the left-side of the photo is untouched. In fact, she’s stating that the photo is digitally manipulated (obviously), but makes no claim about what specifically (or, which side) is manipulated.
“the so-called ‘dramatization’ of the product did not result from the use of the product by Forsling, but rather reflected [their] manipulation of a photograph.” So all they’re saying there is that the photo is touched-up. Where do they say that the left-half is untouched?
She’s saying she didn’t consent to that use of that photo, and that’s where she notes that it was just based on a test photo. So that just sounds like a disagreement about who owns what rights to the photo.
Re: Re:
you didn’t link to a story,
Oops! Added back the link that must have been cut out in the editing…
Well, of course it’s perfectly valid to use photoshopped images – these are intended to represent the reflections vain women see in the mirror after applying moisturiser with 1000% markup. Such delusions cannot be captured with a camera lens 😉
She could have just as easily told people that the right-hand side was the “real” image, and the left-hand one was digitally altered, and gotten on with her life
Or…
She could have just as easily told people that the left-hand side was the real image and that she looked great for her age and was proud, and happy, of the way she looked.
my wife asked me........
what the hell is make up? she always thought that was something you did after a fight
Hrm.
I think the real lesson here is that Adobe has a huge untapped market.
darned if you do, darned if you don’t.
Has anyone thought that the only way they would sell these things to women is to photo-shop if they saw the real results they would know they were a waist of money.