Dove’s “Real Beauty” isn’t so real afterall!

Friday’s Creative Review for Graphic Designers

This just makes me sad. By now, you’ve probably figured out that I generally don’t believe in much of anything these days that’s in print.

I know, as a graphic designer, that E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G is retouched. However this blew me out of the water. I didn’t even think to question if the new Dove ads that are dubbed “Real Beauty” were in fact “real”.

As usual, it all starts off with a comment (or perhaps a gloat?)

Annie Leibovitz who shot the ads hired Pascal Dangin, a photographers/photo retoucher, is claiming that they were retouched. Pascal who works for Box Studios in New York, told The New Yorker (click here to see article) he worked his magic on the ad photos.

“Do you know how much retouching was on that?” he asked. “But it was great to do, a challenge, to keep everyone’s skin and faces showing the mileage but not looking unattractive.”

Unilever didn’t comment on the statement, but a spokeswoman for the agency who created the ads did:

“We are unsure right now what he did,” the Ogilvy spokeswoman said. “He works with Annie Leibovitz, the photographer. And we don’t have any record of him actually working on any of the Dove campaign.”

“There was no retouching of the women,” she said. “If there was a hair that was up in the air, that might have been the kind of retouching that was done. But until I know what he actually worked on, I can’t comment on it.”

Statement from Dove about The New Yorker Article

9 May 2008, 4:45pm — Dove’s mission is to make more women feel beautiful every day by widening the definition of beauty and inspiring them to take great care of themselves. Dove strives to portray women by accurately depicting their shape, size, skin color and age.

The “real women” ad referenced in recent media coverage was created and produced entirely by Ogilvy, the Dove brand’s advertising agency, from start to finish and the women’s bodies were not digitally altered.

Pascal Dangin worked with photographer Annie Leibovitz (Ogilvy has never employed Mr. Dangin on the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty), who did the photography for the launch of the Dove ProAge campaign, a new campaign within the Campaign for Real Beauty. There was an understanding between Dove and Ms. Leibovitz that the photos would not be retouched – the only actions taken were the removal of dust from the film and minor color correction.

“Let’s be perfectly clear – Pascal does all kinds of work – but he is primarily a printer – and only does retouching when asked to. The idea for Dove was very clear at the beginning. There was to be NO retouching and there was not,” confirmed Annie Leibovitz, commenting on the ProAgecampaign.

Mr. Dangin responded, “The recent article published by The New Yorker incorrectly implies that I retouched the images in connection with the Dove “real women” ad. I only worked on the Dove ProAge campaign taken by Annie Leibovitz and was directed only to remove dust and do color correction – both the integrity of the photographs and the women’s natural beauty were maintained.”

T A K E A W A Y :

How much Photoshopping is too much? Removing a pimple here or there, smoothing out skin tones, and removing wrinkles that’s acceptable? But more is not? And then how many pimples, wrinkles, and bags under the eyes removal is acceptable?

Do we really need to retouch so much???

What’s “real” and what isn’t anymore? Can we trust anyone, anymore?

As Cindy Crawford said, “Even I don’t look like Cindy Crawford in the morning.”

Technorati Tags: Pet Peeves, Production, Swipe File, The good, the bad, & the ugly

Is the idea more important than the design?

Friday’s Creative Review for Graphic Designers

When I was working a printing company, I noticed there are three characteristics of jobs that project an amateurish or unprofessional image (other than the design itself, of course):

1. Printing
2. Bindery
3. Finishing

It’s all about the presentation

Now, I love a good ad.

Let me show you how the concept behind a MADD (Mother’s Against Drunk Driving) ad campaign is perhaps more important than the design itself… I think it’s rather brilliant.

The ad as it is printed is no big deal. It’s a car that has a broken windshield with tire marks on the ground.

However, once you see how it’s supposed to be presented (the finishing), it’s a different story… However, when viewed as it is presented, it really grabs your attention and is has great impact.

What do you think? Would the ad have such an effect if it were presented as it was printed?

Check out the other ads in the series. These can be found in the swipe file on Design and Thrive

Q U E S T I O N:

Should printing, finishing and bindery be a vital part of the design process?

Technorati Tags: Creativity, Design, Production, Swipe File, The good, the bad, & the ugly