Skip to content

Who’s that girl?

March 22, 2011

Good morning all!

As I was sitting here this morning eating a kick arse bowl of overnight oats, I was catching up on my online reading.

This headline on AOL caught my eye: Rimmel Edits the Face Off Zooey Deschanel.

Once I clicked on it, I couldn’t believe what I was seeing (more here too).  The photoshopped girl looked absolutely nothing like the Zooey who I’ve always admired for her unique look.  In fact, if the headline didn’t tell me it was her, I wouldn’t have known.

My immediate thought was, “What was the point of editing her face to a point where she is unrecognizable?”

And if the company didn’t find her attractive, they probably wouldn’t have even hired her on as a spokesperson in the first place, right? If she was so hideous that we couldn’t look at her until she was presentable, then why didn’t everyone run away in fear when she walked into the studio?

But I knew exactly why they photoshopped her to death.  It was because she isn’t perfect.  Gasp!  The Zooey who so many of us enjoy as a performer is unique, a bit quirky, and in my opinion, a refreshing change from the manufactured looking it-girls the magazines put on their covers.


As someone who was once obsessed with reading magazines, I know that somewhere in the world a young girl is looking at this ad (or any other makeup ad) trying to figure out how to get “perfect” skin with no pores, lines, life in their cheeks, or air holes in their nose.

And it makes me sad.

I’ll admit that I’ve often wanted to airbrush my entire body from head to toenails. But the world (much like the pages of our magazines) would be a very boring place if we were all airbrushed to “perfection”, wouldn’t it?

What are your thoughts on the airbrushing done in magazine ads?  Would you rather look at a perfect image or a real image?

I’m actually going to attempt to do some gardening today for the very first time.  Before I completely mutilate my yard, I’m going to start with some potted plants.  Baby steps… 🙂

Have a great day!

  1. March 22, 2011 11:40 AM

    I absolutely agree with you about how it sad it is that models are so airbrushed! It really does make girls wish for an unattainable body, face, and complexion. Showing real, imperfect woman would be so much more beneficial! 🙂

  2. March 22, 2011 3:12 PM

    Oh my GOODNESS! That photo-retoucher went to town! Shame on the ad agency, client or art director who chose that photo.
    Her nose and chin are entirely different.
    They could have just drawn a disney pixar character.

    I think it’d be nice if nothing was airbrushed. However reality is everything is so I feel lit is important for the graphic artist to be VERY judicious and have a high moral code.

  3. March 23, 2011 7:21 AM

    I would totally rather see the real image but it isn’t going to happen:( The other day I did see the first non airbrushed make up ad though! and guess what the model still look beautiful and she had an amazing natural glow!

    • March 23, 2011 7:59 AM

      Really? Which makeup line printed that ad? I’d support a line that showed models in their natural state!

  4. March 23, 2011 11:38 PM

    omg, she looks nothing like herself! She is such a cute person and the retoucher completely took that away.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: