viz. - image manipulation

(Re)Composing Bodies - Giovanni Bortolani's Fake Too Fake

Cate Blouke — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:30:00 +0000

Giovanni Bortolani, from the Fake Too Fake series

Using some seriously inventive (and at times disturbing) photoshop, Italian artist Giovanni Bortolani has created a series of photos about the composition of the human form. While the image above suggests a relationship between the body and the organic by superimposing a leaf skeleton on a man's back, most of Bortolani's photos in the series explore bodies in terms of that which is "fake" or constructed. The images in Fake Too Fake are jarring, but they ask us to consider what we're doing to our bodies in this age of plastic surgery and diet pills. NSFW (and somewhat gruesome) material after the jump.

Giovanni Bortolani, from the Fake Too Fake series

Though Joseph Ayoub from White Zine (a website about digital arts) argues that Bortolani's images "can sometimes be too trashy," I think that many of them make interesting and complex arguments about visibility and identity. Juxtaposing male and female, black and white, inside and outside, Bortolani questions how identity is constructed or shared. What is the relationship between inner self and outer appearance?

While the images might be rather risque for some classrooms, it would be an interesting exercise to ask students to come up with captions for these images, or to treat them like advertisements with slogans. The solitary, brooding model is reminiscent of the Calvin Kline underwear ads, and the arguments these images make would certainly fit the context of celebrity, body image, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. I can imagine several of these images as strikingly effective anti-drug advertisements which wouldn't be too far off from the scare tactics of current campaigns. Of course, that could also open up a conversation about rhetorical fallacies, but the images are unquestionably effective in terms of getting our attention.

Image Manipulation and Self Esteem

catherine_c — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:11:52 +0000

Image Credit: Rachel Stephens Photography, by way of the Nashville Examiner

At the same time that several European governments are considering trying to force advertisers and brands to include disclaimers on photoshopped promotional images for the purposes of bolstering viewers' (and particularly young girls') self esteem, American photographer Rachel Stephens has promoted the use of photoshop to her clients on the premise that image manipulation can function as a source of empowerment. Anna North's November 8th Jezebel entry "Photoshop Treatment Not Just for Models Anymore" includes an unsolicited email from Stephens forwarded by a reader of the site in which Stephens writes that "every woman deserves to see herself retouched."

Stephens' site (slightly NSFW) bills itself as "Photography for Women" and features the tagline, "Empowering Women Through Photography." The site features sample photographs, and testimonials. In an interview in the Nashville Examiner, Stephens explains that photography played a significant role in rescuing her from depression. She explains the premise of her photography and photo manipulation in terms of women's self esteem as being a response to a need she first felt herself: "Being someone who has struggled with her weight and the self image and self esteem fallout from that, I know first hand out amazing it feels to see an image of yourself devoid of the flaws you always hyper-focus on...Seeing myself beautiful was like allowing myself to accept good things in my life again...It opened so many doors for me to live life again" (Nashville Examiner).

Image Credit: Rachel Stephens Photography, by way of the Nashville Examiner

Stephens' photography presents a new side of the debate on photo manipulation. Rather than being used to promote the sale of clothing by presenting models who are digitally tailored to the clothes, Stephens captures consenting women who desire their images to be manipulated and corrects their flaws. One might argue that working toward accepting "the flaws you hyper-focus on," or at least an earnest attempt not to "hyper-focus" on them would be better long term solutions. Whether or not these pictures boost esteem in the long run seems to be a matter of one's personal outlook. Stephens' photography grants its subjects the right to look vicariously at manipulated images and to counter a world of manipulated images with the confidence that they too can be made to appear "ideal" or "perfect" through photoshop.

A number of Jezebel commenters defend Stephens' photography. One user suggests that there is no reason to approach Stephens' work with as much "negativity" as North does in her article and suggests that image manipulation, in this case, seems actually empowering. For my part, I wasn't able to detect "negativity" in North's claims that there is "nothing wrong with wanting a retouched photo of yourself if that's your thing" or in her reaction to Stephens' presentation of her photo manipulation on her site with "waist-whittling animations" that she finds "a little disturbing" (Jezebel). Some commenters point out that most professional photographers do some degree of image manipulation while others claim to be more reluctant to accept significantly altered images of themselves, preferring high-quality realistic images instead.

Image Credit: Rachel Stephens Photography, by way of the Nashville Examiner

In an age where some advertisers insist that the manipulations that lead to their presentation of an "ideal" makes their products more appealing to real women, Stephens suggests that making real women live up to these artificial ideals is a inroad to empowerment. While I remain reluctant to accept that the solution for a photoshop saturated world is more photoshop, particularly, as a commenter on Jezebel points out, when this "empowering" photoshop commits some of the same sins as the most controversial photoshopped ads including cutting down waistlines to unnatural proportions and occasionally erasing belly buttons, I am fascinated by Stephens' outlook on the power of image manipulation to affect self-esteem.

I'll conclude with one of Stephens' statements from the Examiner piece: "Rachel will show the women their photographs, during shooting, and "I always hear 'is that me? Who is that!' followed by girlish laughter and often times a few tears.' When her subjects leave, Rachel sees the women feel better about themselves than when they came in, 'and they earned it. It is no small task to strip down, literally, to you most vulnerable self and allow yourself to be photographed. I don't take that lightly and am very humbled by each woman who gives me her trust in this way. I strive to give them the gift of their true beauty and I hope that they allow those feelings to stay with them'" (Examiner).

Reboot: Photoshop Disasters by Tim Turner

catherine_c — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:20:56 +0000

Image Credit: Ralph Lauren, by way of Photoshopdisasters

As a followup to my post last week on the British government's plan to meet with health officials, fashion executives, and advertisers in October 2010 to discuss the legal status of the un-indicated use of photoshopping in advertisements, I would like to re-showcase a blog entry by Tim Turner from October 2009 when British and French politicians began discussing possible photoshop disclaimer requirements.

The above ad, in which the circumference of Filippa Hamilton's waist appears to be less than that of her head, is a prime example of photoshop abuses in fashion photography and the rationale for next month's meetings. View Tim's "Photoshop Disasters" entry reposted after the break, or link to the original post and the comments, which include a video interview with Ms. Hamilton.

Some of you may have seen this story on the Huffington Post about an apology issued by Ralph Lauren for the peculiarly skinny model pictured here:

The image was first noted by Photoshop Disasters, one of my favorite blogs about visual culture (other than Viz., of course). The images collected there are often hilarious and sometimes unintentionally tragic (as this super skinny model indicates). The blog itself is a terrific read, and a hilarious way to pass a few spare minutes. What's great about it, however--in addition to its delightfully relentless snark--is how it invites a deeper engagement with images. In many cases, the tragedy of the poor photoshopping is obvious, in an impossibly thin waist or a terrifyingly elongated neck. In other cases, you have to look harder and closer to locate the details. One of the unintended consequences of living in the age of photoshop may be an increase in visual literacy: spotting the falsifications sometimes requires a keen eye for close-reading.