Franklin S. alerted us to the fact that someone at Complex magazine goofed. Our reward is another peek into the re-touching process that shapes nearly every image in our lives. This time the subject is Kim Kardashian. Animal made the find:
We spotted this image (left)… this morning in their “web exclusive” gallery, but by afternoon she was looking recognizably altered (right) and then removed from the site completely.
See all of our re-touching posts here.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 13
A — March 28, 2009
Peek.
Vettekaas — March 28, 2009
wow... she looks... whiter x-(
Anonymous — March 28, 2009
I don't think she looks whiter, but her skin does look more even, and much fewer veins are visible.
Franklin S. — March 28, 2009
Check out the Gawker post (where I originally saw this) which includes an animated gif comparing the two images and a list of changes.
http://gawker.com/5184270/14-ways-photoshopped-kim-kardashian-was-made-hotter
Elena — March 28, 2009
She's also gotten a tummy lift and a liposuction in her thighs, and her arm and back (compare the empty space between arm and torso) have also lost some fat.
CJ :) — March 28, 2009
I think she does look like they lightened her skin using light effects. That's pretty sad. I mean, all of it is ridiculous, but why did they feel the need to make her look lighter? *sigh*
Chilligan — March 28, 2009
Yeah, legs look whiter, and generally the skin tone is more uniform. Its getting to the point that its too obvious these days... that you look at it and think 'fake' rather than 'man, s/he looks great.'
thewhatifgirl — March 30, 2009
I initially thought she looked whiter too, but when I examined the rest of the picture, I realized they lightened the whole thing (the reason why is most obvious, I think, if you look at where the belt is - it's hard to see it in the untouched photo but more defined in the touched-up photo - but you can also tell just by looking at the background). There is an ideal light level for photographs that means this kind of all-over lightening is often required, even with the prepared studio work. (Lightening also has a tendency to wash out certain very tiny "imperfections".)
Which is not to say that there aren't problems with these photos but that skin color is probably not one of them.
Whit — March 31, 2009
Why is it a problem that she got whitened, but not de-"fat"ted? Srsly.
Just passing through — April 1, 2009
Skin color IS one of them. I do not think it would be that difficult to figure out how to lighten the background without lightening the person. The fact of the matter is that our society favors people with lighter skin, lighter hair, and lighter eyes. Our society is racist through and through, but these are much more subtle than the racism of 100 years ago, or even 60 years ago.
Just passing through — April 1, 2009
Whit, both of these are a problem. But the fact that people are denying the fact that she is lighter is why it is getting more discussion. But yes, both those issues you brought up are problems with this picture.
People Asks, “Has Heidi Montag’s Plastic Surgery Gone Too Far?” | Jack-Booted Liberal — January 20, 2010
[...] who can blame her? Magazine covers regularly Photoshop already stunningly-beautiful people (link link link link) to further “enhance” them into completely fantastical realms of physical [...]
Sociological Images Update (Feb. 2010) » Sociological Images — March 1, 2010
[...] we updated one of our posts about retouching with two examples of a photoshopped Demi Moore. var addthis_language = 'en'; Leave a Comment [...]