Design Observer

About
Books
Job Board
Newsletters
Archive
Contact



Observatory

About
Resources
Submissions
Contact


Featured Writers

Michael Bierut
William Drenttel
John Foster
Jessica Helfand
Alexandra Lange
Mark Lamster
Paul Polak
Rick Poynor
John Thackara
Rob Walker


Departments

Advertisement
Audio
Books
Collections
Dear Bonnie
Dialogues
Essays
Events
Foster Column
From Our Archive
Gallery
Interviews
Miscellaneous
Opinions
Partner News
Photos
Poetry
Primary Sources
Projects
Report
Reviews
Slideshows
The Academy
Today Column
Unusual Suspects
Video


Topics

Advertising
Architecture
Art
Books
Branding
Business
Cities / Places
Community
Craft
Culture
Design History
Design Practice
Development
Disaster Relief
Ecology
Economy
Education
Energy
Environment
Fashion
Film / Video
Food/Agriculture
Geography
Global / Local
Graphic Design
Health / Safety
History
Housing
Ideas
Illustration
India
Industry
Info Design
Infrastructure
Interaction Design
Internet / Blogs
Journalism
Landscape
Literature
Magazines
Media
Museums
Music
Nature
Obituary
Other
Peace
Philanthropy
Photography
Planning
Poetry
Politics / Policy
Popular Culture
Poverty
Preservation
Product Design
Public / Private
Public Art
Religion
Reputations
Science
Shelter
Social Enterprise
Sports
Sustainability
Technology
Theory/Criticism
Transportation
TV / Radio
Typography
Urbanism
Water


Comments (3) Posted 11.26.10 | PERMALINK | PRINT

Jessica Helfand

Pretty Pictures, Bad Judgment




Now that the new iPhone 4 gives you the option to photograph yourself without holding the camera in that bizarre, stilted position known to teenagers all over the globe, we can say goodbye to a kind of picture-posing that will, in future generations, read as an early twenty-first century visual cliché.

But it doesn't make a huge dent in the bad judgment people use when taking and posting, pictures of themselves.

I've begun creating an informal taxonomy of the kinds of visual tropes that find their way to the screen, of which the duck face may be the most horrifying. If you're old enough to remember the plastic-surgery train wreck known as Jocelyn Wildenstein (pictured above, right), then no amount of pouty pictures of Angelina Jolie (above left) are likely to lure you into the botoxsphere any time soon.

On the other hand, a recent story in The New York Times revealed that parents frequently pay to have their childrens' school photos doctored. A facsinating debate: does doing so boost confidence, so that a kid with an ill-timed blemish or two doesn't go down in history as having catastrophic acne, or are these parents sending the wrong message — reinforcing the idea that you're only as good as you look?

Which brings us back to bad judgment. If a picture's worth a thousand words, a publicly broadcast picture is amplified, multiplied and cast out into a world where it can go anywhere, be seen by anyone, a virus in the making. Broadcast pictures can be brutal, even lethal. Even the iPhone 4 can't fix that.
Share This Story

RELATED POSTS


From the Archive: Graphic Metallica


Signs of Labor


The Lost Graves of the Morganza Floodway


Keld Helmer-Petersen: Pioneer of Color


Imperfect Beauty



RSS Subscribe to Comment Feed

Comments (3)   |   JUMP TO MOST RECENT >>

I don't suppose you've read t stoppards view on the matter?
oli
11.26.10 at 06:20

I am guessing they've been doctoring images on yearbook photos for as long as there has been yearbook photos. As editor of my college yearbook way back in 1977, I recall a trip to the company that we had contracted with (a big slimy business full of backroom dealing and probably illegal perks BTW) and saw how the photos were retouched with pencils and brushes to eliminate zits, yellow teeth and girlie mustaches.

Just because Photoshop and digital photography has made the practice ubiquitous, and the school photo companies have made it a price point instead of a service doesn't mean it is new.

Besides, these photos are for posterity, removing a blemish or a scab isn't the same as making celebrities appear preternaturally young nd thin, a regular occurrence in most consumer magazines.
Robert Sugar
11.27.10 at 04:40

Part of the problem isn't that they are simply removing blemishes (which has been going on forever) but we're talking about the option to slim and accentuate features. Similar to what happens in the fashion industry only on a smaller scale. No child needs that kind of retouching.
Riley
12.02.10 at 10:22



LOG IN TO POST A COMMENT
Don't have an account? Create an account. Forgot your password? Click here.

Email


Password




|
Share This Story



Jessica Helfand, a founding editor of Design Observer, is an award-winning graphic designer and writer and a former contributing editor and columnist for Print, Communications Arts and Eye magazines. A member of the Alliance Graphique Internationale and a recent laureate of the Art Director's Hall of Fame, Helfand received her B.A. and her M.F.A. from Yale University where she has taught since 1994.
More >>

DESIGN OBSERVER JOBS









BOOKS BY Jessica Helfand

Scrapbooks: An American History
Yale University Press, 2008

Reinventing the Wheel
Winterhouse Editions, 2002

Screen: Essays on Graphic Design, New Media, and Visual Culture
Winterhouse Editions, 2001

Looking Closer 3
Allworth Press, 1999

Paul Rand: American Modernist
winterhouse Editions, 1998

More books by contributors >>