Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
GRAZIA MAGAZINE HAS admitted it did photoshop the front cover photograph of Kate Middleton on its 9 May edition.
But the Guardian reports that it was a mistake that happened during the production process.
The fashion magazine says that it digitally altered the original photograph of the Duchess from her wedding – in order to crop her husband out of the photo.
Its statement came after a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission about the image.
But in mirroring her left arm and placing it in the photograph to replace her right arm, her waist was unintentionally whittled, Grazia says.
In a statement the magazine said that it takes the issue of women’s body image “very seriously” and that it did not make any changes to the image with the aim of making the Duchess look thinner.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Was the husband standing on both sides that she had to slimmed down?
…And actually if the husband was being taken out, any distorted image left of her behind, would be filled in a cloning of another part of her image and transferred to the affected part – so there should be no slimming down.
If he was standing behind her, the would be easily erased out and a background filled in. If he was standing in front of her, the first actions mentioned in the first paragraph would take place.
…So their slimming down by accident excuse is a load of rubbish. You don’t ‘accidental’ airbrush two sides of a persons body perfectly like you just happen to fall over your computer, start up Photoshop and then use the mouse to do the rest!
Cobblers Grazia. Some of us actually also use Photoshop or similar – and are not that stupid to boot.
It says in the article it took a mirror image of her left arm for the right hand side. So only one side was airbrushed.. Or edited i suppose you’d say.
It’s a women’s magazine! They are all guilty of slimming down models and actresses. The sooner are law is enacted to label all photoshoped images the better.
Yawn!
I was testing to see if I could leave a comment. First time user. And nine people dislike my ‘testing’ comment ???
Sorry, what was that again?
Only kidding David, don’t take the internet to heart. United Person does, and its slowly driving him batty.
Watched the wedding and loved every single minute, but couldn’t give s Fu.k about this????
Testing
Sorry, didn’t catch that!
;)
I think cloning would be very difficult to do effectively on a lace dress, particularly the one she has here, with very large, symmetrical lace patched. I don’t see what benefit grazia magazine would derive from intentionally making Kate appear thinner.
Precisely, it was all about cleaning up the image. Dunno why they didn’t include Wills, though, or why it’s generating so much ranting.
Must be nothing on TV again.
looked at both images. this has to have been intentional. i think by doing this it actually made room for the arm that is not there as a mirror image.
it also would have effected the dramatic aesthetic if left as it was, see where the wavy line hit the waistline and the background colours.
this was not a mistake, it was very deliberate. thats what i think and that is what i believe.
yeh, mistakes are NOT made when doing a cover feature with strong images! remove a mole yes, a waistline, yes, yes yes…
I would cut the left arm out flip it horizontally stick it over and blend it. simples! no need to touch her waist what so ever…
David u get used to that, just ignore it, I certainly do!
have your say