I think we maybe miss the point with these excerises. Itâ€™s like what Carl Jung said about UFOâ€™s and how it is not nearly so interesting whether UFOs exist or not, but how tenaciously we cling to the desire to want them to be real â€” what I find fascinating about these photoshoppings (and I donâ€™t believe the Lazy Canuck for a second) is the vectors the artist takes attempting to anneal the â€œsource faceâ€ into the abstracted â€œperfected faceâ€ because it says something very important, psychologically, about the human perception of face features.
Consider the famous zen gardens, or the later paintings by Picasso, each of them studies into the neurocognitive reality, extracting essential details from the subject matter, enhancing and highlighting those details, arriving at not an image of stark mundane photographic exactitude, but at an image of seeing our way of seeing, of seeing vision, of seeing the mechanics of the way we humans turn the noise-laden reality of our bare senses into abstracted Platonic forms which we can readily remember and recognize.
IMHO, criticizing the photoshop artist is as lame a pasttime as criticizing the grammar of the person banging on your door to tell you your roof is on fire. You may not agree with their abstract/extraction of her â€˜essentialâ€™ features, and the sane response would be to present your own abstract/perfected view of her, but to put a blanket dismissal on the practice or to turn it upside down to assert that every woman is somehow trapped in a game of trying to be her own perfected abstract self is fodder for comic books, not a viable life strategy.
Thus the woman on the right is every bit the woman on the left, in the eyes of the photoshopper, and in the eyes of all those who find they would rather stare quixotically at the right image while finding it easy to pass the other image by. Those who know that woman on the left, especially those who are close to her, and ok, maybe the lazy canuk too, they probably already see that right-side image on the right every time they look at her.
mrG, I agree that itâ€™s not the Photoshop artistâ€™s fault. In fact, I appreciate the artistâ€™s breathtaking changes and creative touches. As you also mention â€œThose who know that woman on the left, especially those who are close to her â€¦ they probably already see that right-side image on the right every time they look at herâ€.
My only concern is the way these Photoshoped photos are used by beauty companies to portray the image of an â€œordinaryâ€ person. Photos in magazines have caused many people to lose their self esteem. I basically think this is wonderful art that belongs to galleries and not fashion magazines. Just my point of view 🙂