PetaPixel

Love Your Selfie: TODAY Show Hosts get ‘Fantasy’ Photoshop Makeover

In a bit of contrast to the RAW Beauty Talks portraits featured yesterday, today we have an interesting before and after Photoshop comparison of the hosts of the TODAY show

With the help (if you can call it that) of Cosmopolitan’s “Photoshop experts,” Matt Lauer, Savannah Guthrie, Al Roker and Natalie Morales were given a substantial post-production makeover.

Editor-in-chief of the magazine Joanna Coles calls the process of Photoshopping “tidying up,” but it’s up for debate whether adding hair, increasing bust size, changing clothing colors and making people taller — all of which was done in this particular transformation — is merely “tidying up”.

That being said, Coles did say that the final photo of the TODAY hosts would never get the go-ahead to be published in Cosmo because “this is sort of a fantasy version that you wouldn’t want to put out because no one would believe [it].”

today28n-1-web

Overlayed image showing the changes made courtesy of TODAY

NBC enlisted Cosomo‘s help to create this image for its “Love Your Selfie” series — a campaign that strives to improve self-confidence.

Oftentimes we see smaller campaigns attempting to do this, but seeing the hosts of something as popular as the TODAY show shocked with the “fantasy version[s]” of themselves will probably have a bit more impact than something like the no-Photoshop magazine Verily.

Most of us being fairly familiar with the software, the program’s capabilities and the lengths to which some publications use it to create unrealistic standards comes as no surprise. Still, it’s nice to see more and more shows, individuals and publications taking a stand against the kind of extreme Photoshop use that gives all post-processing a bad name.

At the top of this post you’ll find a video of the process, including commentary by each of the hosts as to what they thought of the changes. Coming in at 7:25 minutes, it’s a bit lengthy, but it’s a great watch nonetheless … plus it’s the weekend, so no excuses.

(via Today via NY Daily News)


Image credit: Photograph courtesy of NBC’s TODAY Show


 
  • Fed Up with weirdos like you

    Dear Petapixel…..perhaps you should find a way to ask readers what sort of stories they would like to read. I find this story and the people in it, repulsive. thank you very sincerely

  • oscario1

    Did you read the article or watch the video? It highlights an important issue – the dangers of photoshopping too much. You’ll find that the photo featured in the article here is the one the video refers to as ‘extreme’.

  • James

    It’s nice to see a “news casters get photoshoped” video where they don’t look like cartoons at the end.

  • Bingo

    This is total BS. It is nothing but a diversion tactic, ‘we just take the wrinkles out of the clothes’ e.t.c. They are just trying to justify their actions. I have worked on heaps of fashion magazine shoots and they completely change any feature they can to make the model look perfect. The magazine tossers like to kid themselves and say things like ‘we want her to look natural’ followed by ‘take out all the freckles and moles, make her thinner/taller/younger’. Total BS.

  • Elise Hagedorn

    I agree. Total B’s.

  • http://www.imajez.com imajez

    So what about if you have stylists tweaking clothes to make sure they hang right? Or a makeup artist/hairstylist that makes you look a lot better than when you got out of bed all crumpled and tired? Or the photographer lights you in a flattering way?

    You can make people look taller/thinner/younger/less freckly all before you get to post processing?
    Should these all be forbidden too?

  • Ashley Bell

    She keeps using that phrase “The light has distorted it.” “I don’t think it means what you think it means…”

  • Eport

    I think she knows exactly what it means. Feeding people angel food cake so they don’t feel fat about it.

  • http://currentphotography.com/ CurrentCo

    SO MUCH WRONG TERMINOLOGY.

  • Robbin Poh

    The editor has a really weird smile

  • Bingo

    I think you misunderstood me. My point was that this video is pretending that is all they do(fix clothes, stray hair e.t.c.). They are pretending to expose the truth of photoshop, when the reality of how magazines really use PS is nothing like this video. It is a diversion. I have no real problem with the PS done on this video, It does not represent what they do with PS when the cameras aren’t recording.

  • dustin dowell

    I’m skeptical about the part at the end where she said something like, “We wouldn’t include a photo this retouched in an actual magazine.”

  • Alan Klughammer

    it probably depends on the magazine. I have worked for a few, and what is desired/printed depends very much on the style of the magazine and the editor.

  • Alan Klughammer

    I think the few spoil it for the many. “Some” magazines/newspapers/publications overdo image manipulation (I hate the verb “Photoshopping”).
    I would argue that the problem is more rampant with amateurs who don’t know their software, or try too hard to “fix” a bad photo. In the hands of a skilled person, Photoshop and other programs can make a great photo even better, but nothing can make a bad photo good.

  • http://www.imajez.com imajez

    Indeed, just as the written contents of some newspapers/magazines is not to be trusted, the same with photography and how it may be [mis]used.