Comments on: Exclusive! Dove Real Beauty Campaign Statement

By: Gordon

Gordon — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:39:08 +0000

I have worked as a photo retoucher on photos of models for advertising in the past — including some models who needed almost nothing done to them, and some models that have required 8–16 hours to look “perfect.” (Hey, don’t hate me: I like natural looking women, myself. I did it for the money.)

The photos in the Real Beauty campaign show nothing that could not simply be make-up, lighting, and flattering poses. Real, natural, unretouched women CAN and DO look as beautiful as the women in those photos. I see many, many women every day that look that beautiful, just walking down the street.

It’s the point of the whole campaign, and it would completely undermine their point if they had to resort to retouching. There is no reason to doubt when they say they removed dust and did minor color correction.

By: JEMi | Tips for Life, Love, You

JEMi | Tips for Life, Love, You — Tue, 20 May 2008 18:48:24 +0000

I think the Dove campaign has stayed true to the image that they are trying to portray. A little color correction isn’t screaming flawless airbrush work!
I love that campaign and I do think this thing is being blown out of proportion

By: Hypocrisy in the Beauty Industry | Beauty Secrets Blog

Hypocrisy in the Beauty Industry | Beauty Secrets Blog — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:17:51 +0000

[…] while they do exactly the same thing except with chubbier, less attractive models. Of course, the company is mostly denying it, but what else can they do? Close-up photographs of real people never look as good as ones that […]

By: Hypocrisy in the Beauty Industry | The Beauty Brains

Hypocrisy in the Beauty Industry | The Beauty Brains — Sun, 11 May 2008 14:52:42 +0000

By: RD

RD — Fri, 09 May 2008 18:54:20 +0000

I don’t see any cellulite where there would be or bruising or normal flaws. The way they are presented conforms to the idea that that’s a natural shape for them, rather than they are actually fat and may have rolls of fat, etc.

They were Photoshopped. I think Leibovitz and Edelman are harping on how the ProAge campaign was not retouched. Wasn’t he talking about the original Real Beauty ads. I think he may not have “technically” worked on them, but he did work on them.

By: Summer

Summer — Fri, 09 May 2008 17:40:03 +0000

We’ve seen these women “in person” as well - in commercials, in their appearances on TV shows, etc - and they appear to be as lovely and natural in print as they do in person. If there was retouching, I do not think it altered the appeal and statement of the ads themselves.

By: Kristen

Kristen — Fri, 09 May 2008 17:36:24 +0000

hey Nadine,
I felt like something didn’t seem right with that article. To me, the whole thing regarding the Dove campaign within the New Yorker piece was really vague but then the news media blew it way out of proportion, even though it was never specified within the article what was actually retouched. that’s kind of shoddy reporting/fact-checking on the New Yorker’s part….

By: j

Fri, 09 May 2008 17:33:49 +0000

I still think they portray women more realistically than the glamazon, waifs, and over made up models etc we get in other magazines and ads.
Even if they did a little retouching, from our eyes, it’s plain to see that they didn’t compromise the goal of portraying women as we really are, not an unrealistic over made glossy images we are so used to.

I’m glad they are trying to change our perspective, or rather, fix our mistaken perspective on what a beautiful woman should look like.

Hooray for real beauty!

By: Tamara

Tamara — Fri, 09 May 2008 15:42:42 +0000

I agree as well. While I understand that Dove wants to maintain the integrity of such a program, let’s face: we’ve seen the ads and the models have not been retouched to look like the size zero, flawless models in other ads. They still look like real, beautiful women to me even if minor Photoshop adjustments were made.

By: Girl-Woman

Girl-Woman — Fri, 09 May 2008 15:16:08 +0000

I would like to be an airbrushed real woman! At any age, isn’t looking the best you can be the point?

Jeez, I had to cancel my trip to the Summit! Darn. I would have loved to meet you.

By: YvetteRene

YvetteRene — Fri, 09 May 2008 12:12:10 +0000

I don’t mind touchups that fix blemishes or stretchmarks or stuff like that. What upsets me is when magazine deliberately take inches off of a model’s (or actress’s) thighs, waist, hips, etc to make the rest of us feel like we can never live up to the “ideal.” Whatever that is.

By: Dove: Retouched Photos « Lipschtick

Dove: Retouched Photos « Lipschtick — Fri, 09 May 2008 02:22:56 +0000

[…] Dove’s under fire as of late because of a photo retouch scandal! Annie Liebovitz is stating, firmly, that no bodies/photos were retouched. Thanks to Jolie Nadine for the full story here. […]

By: beauty in real life

beauty in real life — Fri, 09 May 2008 02:13:56 +0000

Frankly, there is bound to be some minor retouching here and there. As long as they still continue with their same message and don’t extremely alter the photos, I don’t think that there is anything wrong with it.

By: Dove’s Statement About Retouched Real Beauty Photos

Dove’s Statement About Retouched Real Beauty Photos — Fri, 09 May 2008 02:02:05 +0000

[…] just hooked me up with the details on Dove’s press release for tomorrow, since she got an exclusive advance copy today (and got invited to the annual Step Up Women’s Network Inspirational awards - jealous!) […]

By: Marsadie

Marsadie — Fri, 09 May 2008 01:31:46 +0000

I agree with you, Nadine! I don’t think a tiny bit of airbrushing would hurt the campaign nor the message. Whether you’re thick or thin, minor photo touchups are fine and even expected in my opinion. *shrug*