Photoshop Ethics

For many years, images have been manipulated, altering the portrayal and viewers conceptions of the image. Image manipulation can be practised for many reasons, whether to portray an unreal event, to depict a story or to enhance beauty. The ethics of photo manipulation will vary, due to the purpose and effect of the manipulation i.e. editing an image obviously, to depict a scenic, not otherwise accomplishable;

 

Like this image, it would be otherwise un-accomplishable if it wasn't for image manipulation software, due to the contrasts, shades, tones, colours and more importantly the bodiless head. In this circumstance, the use of photo manipulation is widely accepted, due to the obviousness in which it is portrayed, it has not been made to fool the viewer or to manipulate or evoke negative emotions in the viewer unlike that of the use of editing beauty;

It is largely controversial, manipulating the natural beauty of a person, discreetly, without intention of allowing the viewer to realise this i.e. removing skin defects, reshaping the body; slimming, adjusting curves and any other prominent features, even down to hair colour, eye shadow and clothes. This is very controversial in numerous ways:-

1) The 'debatably' low amount of photographic talent needed; when lighting, exposure imperfections and other defects of the photographers skill, allowing the photographer to solely rely on their photoshopping abilities as opposed to the natural photographic skills of the photographer, allowing more and more people, lesser in knowledge and talent get to the same stature as photographers with education and perseverance behind them.

2) Manufacturing insecurities within people, due to the 'perfect beauty' portrayed in models, 'raising the standards in which people think they should look like i.e. creating insecurities within people, thinking they aren't attractive enough, like being overweight (or assuming so, purely on the basis that the commercial world of beauty is thin or curvaceous, or that the standards in which commercial beauty is a standard for that in real life) envying disorders like anorexia, bulimia and any other disorders, lowering the self esteem of a person, striving for a standard of perceived beauty that is completely urn obtainable due to the fact that it is manufactured.

Below are 2 examples of the same image basis;

The left image is the original, note the saturation in colour, the blandness of tones, the amateur lighting and the imperfections in the skin.

The post produced version of this image is vastly different, colour casts have been adjusted, enhancing the oranges, reducing saturation, heightening contrast, darkening hair colour, smoothing out the skin, adding a stronger tan and reducing evidence of tights being worn. These factors contribute to the argument, the sloth or inexperiences of the photographer i.e. careless lighting, relying on post production processes to correct laziness or lack of skill, removing the tights, deciding or not bothering to do so while composing the original shot. It is is also arguably down to these factors that insecurities and a heightened conception of perfection in the human form is made apparent in the mind of the viewer i.e. the 'idealisms' of how the human body is supposed to be, making the viewer believe that they are not equal, raising the standards of the viewer and the opposite sexs opinion of what is normal and what is naturally to be expected. Due to the fact that the subject is photoshopped, this idea of beauty is false and unobtainable, making the viewer ever uncomfortable and insecure, struggling to achieve full satisfaction in their natural form.