Photography, Identity and my belly.

Looking a today's title you may think that the stress of moving and my father's surgery have finally pushed me off of the edge. But actually, no. Despite that very real stress I am coping rather well, which means there must be some other explanation. If you have been following my posts on my Facebook Page then perhaps you have seen links to blogs and articles geared towards fashion photography and its detrimental effect on self esteem.

Most of us go through periods where our feeling of self worth crashes through the floor. Usually we can look back and link those periods with times of trauma or stress. Yet what if our self esteem takes a daily nose dive, and we have just become so accustomed to it that we have stopped acknowledging the happening? It doesn't mean that we don't still feel like crap! We've just stopped realizing that everytime we pass a fashion magazine or a billboard or see a commercial, our sense of self worth drops a little bit.
Which is why the above image (from pg. 194 of the Sept issue of Glamour Magazine) created such a frenzy of positive reactions. No way?! Stretch marks and a real belly? It is almost sad that this has to be so "revolutionary." Men, did you even notice the belly and the stretch marks? Or did you simply see one foxy lady sitting there?

Here is the issue I am striking at - photography has become an accomplice in a grand marketing scheme. Make the consumer feel terrible about themselves and they will continue to consume in hopes of appeasing their own negative self image. But it's a vicious cycle.

Let's take a look at what I mean:
Ralph Lauren has to be joking right? This image doesn't make me want to buy his jeans. They makes me want to go eat a whole medium pizza by myself! Heck, make that a large!
But the next time I look in the mirror this image will be burned in my consciousness. Maybe I don't look sexy enough in my jeans. Is there something that I could buy to make me feel better about myself? There must be!

In a sense photography that is used to market to us isn't photography anymore. Yes you could argue that once upon a time there was a photo in there somewhere. But this image is more reminiscent of those Steve Madden cartoony images of the earlier part of the decade.

As a photographer and someone who has to do basic retouching for a living, I am appalled. Now, granted, this is an extreme example. After all, we all know that nobody looks like this unless they have been forcibly starved. Even then, it seems to defy anatomy. Where would her internal organs go? Does she transport them in some trendy couture suitcase ?

My purpose in making this post is two fold - first it is to create awareness. Once upon a time I wanted to be a fashion photographer too. Then I read an article in New Yorker Magazine about how much retouching those "photographs" get. Check out this before and after. The first is "realization" by the premier retoucher of fashion photographs Pascal Dangin; the original is the actual photograph by world-famous Patrick Demarchelier.

How many differences can you spot?
After

Before

Silly me! I am a proponent of a specific style of retouching which is pretty simple: let's try to mimic what the eye sees. Especially with digital photography, we can now capture every single pore in perfect detail. So instead of going in there and making you look 20 years younger and 30 lbs thinner (a common request, I kid you not) I will do my best to mimic how one would see you in real life. Which means that certain details which become stark and harsh when photographed are softened and made less prominent.

Retouching is nothing new. Painters often portrayed their subjects in portraits with a slightly favorable look as opposed to perfect realism. I am not fighting for photographic purism at all. But what about people that look like people? Belly and all!

For more, check out these articles and videos:

The Belly Project

Dove: Evolution

NY Times Op Ed - Sex, Lies and Photoshop