So, this whole thing with digitally altering photographs just got weirder.  I read an article in the paper today about Cindy Crawford, a huge name in the modeling world in the 80’s and 90’s.  She was saying that she would never be hired today as a model because she looks “too healthy” with “normal thighs and toned upper arms.”  She said the industry isn’t looking for people like her.    On the other hand,  the article also said that Germany’s major woman’s magazine is fed up with super skinny models and won’t hire the professionals any more.  The reason?  They’re tired of having to digitally erase their protruding bones!

Digitally subtracting bones to make it look like the models have added weight.    Is this fashion or math?

I found an interesting article today that puts yet another spin on the whole issue of the media and body image.  It was mostly a really positive article, talking about Glamour magazine and how it has been using average sized models with great success.  This was great to read but the part of the article the really caught my eye was the part about a photo of Kelly Clarkson in Self magazine where she was apparently “digitally slimmed down“, even though Kelly is one of the few celebrities who has come out publicly saying she is happy with her “curves” .    According to the article, this is not an uncommon practice and celebrities should expect to be put on an instant ”digital diet”, whether they personally feel they need it or not.

More evidence that we really can’t believe our eyes!

http://health.usnews.com/blogs/on-women/2009/10/06/instant-body-image-boost-fuller-figured-models-in-glamour-magazine.html

(hard not to see a little irony in some of the articles advertised as well!)