So I just read an article today from yahoo about the amount of retouching Lady Gaga may or may not have under gone for the cover of vogue. In the article it does state and I quote, “An article at Buzzfeed asks, when airbrushing is this extreme, why hire photographers at all? They point out that Vogue might as well have used a fashion illustration.”
A lot people are believing it was too much and she’s barely recognizable. I believe it to be the other way for certain reasons. Number one the photograph being compared to the cover is even the same one. Secondly, as I look at the cover more and more it does start to look like an illustration, rather than a straight forward photograph.Lastly, taking a look at the behind the scenes for the photo shoot, to me at least she still looks a lot like herself. Yes, there have been changes to photograph, but it isn’t to the point where she may as well be a cartoon.
Well, I have stated my opinion on this subject; I want to hear what you think so comment below.
McMinn Photography 