girl that don't look like you

Who would have thought that even as photographic technology continues to become increasingly more cutting-edge and innovative that the actual pictures gracing the most sought after fashion magazines would remain virtually untouched? Zero-photoshop needed. The answer is, photographer Peter Lindbergh.
Lindbergh is no amateur. Nor, are his recent fresh faced photographs a product of recession cutbacks or a lack of time; rather, he is just sick of seeing a false representation of beauty and models who look mutilated and virtually transformed into creatures from other planets. In fact, Lindbergh is a leading fashion photographer and currently works with some of the best models in the business, shooting them for top magazines like Harper's Bazaar.
There has been a recent uproar after recent covers of magazines constantly chose to deceitfully depict their cover girls. When the latest cover of SELF magazine hit newsstands displaying a super-slim Kelly Clarkson, readers couldn't help but wonder, was this another miraculous celebrity weight-loss? Or, are the editors at SELF working overtime in the photoshop department?
[caption id="attachment_3689" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Would the real Kelly Clarkson please stand up?"][/caption] The correct answer... is the second choice. Clarkson's weight gain has been a common topic in the media for the past six months or so. She is not ashamed of it. From her concerts to late night talk shows and even magazines she has stated that she is proud of her new body, but also acknowledges that she is a curvier woman and chooses to embrace that rather than make herself go crazy over dieting.
The magazine's editor Lucy Danziger confirmed that the cover was in fact altered.
“Yes. Of course we do retouching (though it’s technically not Photoshop, but that is semantics),” she said in an online blog post on Monday. “We correct color and other aspects of the digital pictures we take and then publish the best version we can.”
It came across as a little ironic to many people that the magazine's main theme was about "total body confidence" and inside the pages Clarkson stated repeatedly how comfortable she was with her body, yet there was a a so obviously false distorted version of her body placed on the cover for millions to see?
The contradictions continued when Clarkson told numerous publications who asked questions regarding her weight that they are the only people concerned with her weight and she is not, rather she is "fine with it".
“We mark up the photograph to correct any awkward wrinkles in the blouse, flyaway hair and other things that might detract from the beauty of the shot,” Danziger wrote. “This is art, creativity and collaboration. It’s not, as in a news photograph, journalism. It is, however, meant to inspire women to want to be their best. That is the point.”
Danziger also told Access Hollywood that there are real "true" pictures of Clarkson inside the magazine, but the covers main job is to sell more copies. So is she saying that its job is basically, to lie to people? Because a chubbier Clarkson would turn readers away? After all, Clarkson's main job is to sing. She has no reason or requirement to maintain a size 0 or 2. She is not a runway model, she is a 27-year-old woman who stands barely 5 feet 3 inches tall. There is no reason for readers to expect to see her thin as a rail!
Photographer Peter Lindbergh is tired of this same issue being raised. He appreciates the real art of photography and capturing the true beauty of your subject, not creating it after the matter of fact. Sure a little retouching is part of any professional photographer's job. He admits that he may fix a wrinkle in a blouse, flyaway hair or a minor blemish here and there, but that is it.
For this month's September issue of Harper's Bazaar Lindbergh worked with a group of some of the most naturally beautiful women in the world, but they too have flaws. He wanted to do a spread of unaltered photos with models wearing no makeup, hair un-styled and simplistic clothing, that way their real beauty could truly be shown, without distraction.

Cindy Crawford, Amber Valetta, Helena Christensen and Claudia Schiffer were his victims of choice. The four lovely ladies were the supermodels of the 90s, but they know they're not in their 20s anymore. They've had children, been married, and are embracing their forties with the utmost confidence. Fashion magazines should take a lesson from photographers like Lindbergh and begin showing more realistic relatable versions of the celebrities and models young girls and guys look up to and adore. Obviously, those being photographed for major best-selling magazines have something special and are good looking enough as it is, so please show readers more of the real thing! We all know what a little (lot) of makeup, professional hair artists and computer programs can do. But, less always, always, always is more.