I just saw [that they photoshopped out my leg.] Maybe it’s two legs together? Maybe it’s the pose? I was like, ‘Oh my God.’ I think Photoshopping is OK until something like that happens. You don’t want to lose one of your limbs.
One of the thing's I've always admired about Coco Rocha is her ability to say no to certain things, especially in an industry which is often all about about saying 'yes'. Nudity or partial nudity is one of those things so when when this image of the model on the cover of Elle Brazil surfaced, many were surprised but it looks like Coco felt the same way.
Today the model took to her Tumblr to explain that she was actually wearing a flesh coloured body suit under the dress, which has has been photoshopped away without her authorisation:
As a high fashion model I have long had a policy of no nudity or partial nudity in my photo shoots. For my recent Elle Brazil cover shoot I wore a body suit under a sheer dress which I now find was photoshopped out to give the impression of me showing much more skin than I was, or am comfortable with. This was specifically against my expressed verbal and written direction to the entire team that they not do so. I’m extremely disappointed that my wishes and contract was ignored. I strongly believe every model has a right to set rules for how she is portrayed and for me these rules were clearly circumvented.
Coco has been an avid supporter of empowering models to take informed choices through her work on the board of the Model Alliance so her response is completely justified. We can only hope that more models feel confident enough to follow suit as when something like this happens.
Last week Grazia made the headlines but unfortunately, not for the right reasons. Readers of the magazine complained to the British Press Complaints after the magazine published a picture of a skinnier than usual Kate Middleton from her wedding day back in May.
The magazine have since released a statement arguing that although they did photoshop the image, their intention wasn't to alter Middelton's size. They allegedly attempted to crop Prince William out of the image which led to the unintentional alterations, and we believe them. The Duchess of Cambridge has been criticised across the board for her dramatic weight loss over the past year making it unlikely that the magazine would intentionally attempt to make her any thinner than she already is.
Cristiano Ronaldo's girlfriend, 24-year-old model Irina Shayk, is at the centre of the latest Photoshop controversy - as she's considering legal action against GQ Spain for allegedly altering images of her to make her look nude. Despite wearing underwear for a shoot for the December issue, Shayk is depicted naked in three pages of a 14-page spread. In addition, GQ Spain placed a headline on the cover to capitalise on the model's alleged nudity, writing: "Want to see the most beautiful creature in the world nude?"
Elite Model Management signed the contract for Shayk to do the shoot and reportedly negotiated rights to the model to see the story, images and cover before printing. However, an Elite representative says Shayk was denied final approval and only saw the materials when they hit stands. We think that must have been quite the shock...
We all know magazines go through rounds of Photoshopping - sometimes heftier than others - but we usually don't get a situation like this. In the September issue of Vogue Russia, Alessandra Ambrosiois looking perfectly trendy in her camel and khaki. That said, she's probably wondering what happened to her left leg, which has disappeared from the knee down. Maybe that's what Coco Rocha is contemplating in the picture.
In January, Australian Marie Claire promoted a healthier body image by putting model Jennifer Hawkins on their cover - naked and completely unretouched. Following in the footsteps of their Aussie counterparts, French Marie Claire have gone one step further, by publishing their entire April edition without retouching, except advertisements.
However, just because Marie Claire can boast unretouched images, don't go expecting to see flaws galore on the women that grace the magazine pages. In fact, the au naturel issue makes us wonder why these women ever did need a little help from Photoshop?
Even though Madonna is no longer the face of Louis Vuitton, it seems her Fall 2009 campaign pics are still very much of interest. The Queen of Pop, who is known as much for her music as she is for her taut abs and (scarily) toned arms, appears to have become the latest victim of the dreaded Photoshop retouching debate. Although the true source of the leaked images is still unknown, speculation has mounted concerning the authenticity of the final image, which became the subject of LV's ad campaign.
Sassybella questions the reality of the 'before' images, though professional retouchers have informed The Cut that the 'before' shot looks real. We too are struggling to come to a definitive conclusion, but given that Madonna's trademark sculpted biceps are very much on display in the 'before' image, we're starting to warm to the idea that it might actually be the original unretouched image. True or false? You decide.
A member of the French Parliament, Valerie Boyer, has recently proposed that retouched images used in advertising and magazines should be labelled as such. The 47-year-old mother of three explained to the New York Times why she proposes that Parliament ought to take a stand against this issue, saying: "If someone wants to make life a success, wants to feel good in their skin, wants to be part of society, one has to be thin or skinny, and then it's not enough - one will have his body transformed with software that alters the image, so we enter a standardized and brainwashed world, and those who aren't part of it are excluded from society."
She raises a strong argument. Of course we're all too aware that the long-limbed, gorgeous specimens that grace the covers of the magazines and star in ad campaigns are likely to look that good due to the magic wand that is Photoshop. This said, however, retouchers and other industry experts are quick to remind everyone that behind most photos is a lot of time and hard work spent erasing jutting bones and other such tell-tale signs of emaciation, replacing them with a plumper, healthier look.
Ralph Lauren’s Blue Label advert, featuring the 5ft 8inch, 120 pound Filippa Hamilton–Palmstierna with a distorted, unrecognisable body, was probably the result of an overzealous Photoshoper. Although the team at Ralph Lauren has taken responsibility for the image, saying: "We have learned that we are responsible for the poor imaging and retouching that resulted in a very distorted image of a woman's body…”, the second ad on the right, from Australia, has also been shared around various social blogs, sparking off more bad press.
And to make matters worse for the American brand, in April, Hamilton-Palmstierna was sacked after four years with the firm, for, according to her, gaining too much weight. Ralph Lauren, however, claims she was fired "as a result of her inability to meet the obligations under her contract with us." As Hamilton-Palmstierna apparently put on no extra weight from when she initially started, it’s debatable who’s in the wrong… we’ll let you decide.
Kelly Clarkson's cover shot for the September issue of Self magazine was Photoshopped - editor Lucy Danziger admitted as much last week. When the internet took up the debate over Clarkson's retouching, Danziger blogged to defend the magazine's choice.
She likened the digital enhancing to tossing out bad vacation pictures. "I keep the pix that show us all happy and glowing and laughing and playing, not the ones where we are scowling or hungry or tired," she wrote. Danziger then admitted that, when she ran a photo of herself five years ago after completing a marathon, she had her hips trimmed because her body didn't look the way she wanted in every shot.
It's not news that magazines alter celebrity images, but we'd like your take on this vacation-photo analogy. Is that a fair comparison, or are magazines doing it for another reason?