Skinny Betty
By Manolo the Shoeblogger
Manolo says, first the photoshoppers came for Katie Couric, and now they have reductified the luscious America Ferrera!
When will this madness stop?
Home | Manolo for the Home | Manolo's Shoe Blog | Manolo's Food Blog | Manolo for the Men | Manolo for the Brides | Manolo for the Big Girl | Teeny Manolo
Basement of the Bargains | The Consolation of the Shoes | The Gallery of the Horrors | Manolo's Forums | Super Fantastic Newsletter |Talk to Manolo!
September 6th, 2007 at 1:08 am
That’s not even *good* photoshopping.
September 6th, 2007 at 4:07 am
Looks like they stuck her head on someone elses body. So unnatural…
September 6th, 2007 at 7:37 am
This reminds me of a tv show where a fashion magazine wants to photoshop the images of a famous actress that has put on weight but the actress refuses, in part due to the principled stance taken by the quirky by intelligent secretary . . .
Hmm . . . what WAS that show?
September 6th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Stupid Glamour. Now her head doesn’t look right.
Ugh!
Luv
Poochie
http://www.shoedaydreams.com
September 6th, 2007 at 9:55 am
Stupid Glamour indeed. It looks downright freakish. She looks much better in the second pic.
September 6th, 2007 at 10:06 am
Her arms look like they’re straight off a plastic Barbie doll. The whole picture looks unreal.
September 6th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Egads, that is just horrifying! And what a lovely message it sends to the young ladies reading the magazine…
September 6th, 2007 at 11:37 am
You’d think they’d have at least given her a body with the same length arms as her real body!
September 6th, 2007 at 11:46 am
The slightly unnatural twist of the neck remined me immediately of Botticelli’s Venus, including the way her hair flows.
http://www.riversidebook.com/images/8botticelli.jpg
BTW, I don’t think it is a montage. The figure seems to have the same lines, only she is slimmer. Maybe she lost weight between the two photo sessions.
September 6th, 2007 at 11:59 am
Poor girl. How bad did that make her feel when she saw it? No wonder celebs are so screwed up. Makes you *almost* sorry for the poor dears. But not quite.
September 6th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
milimamma…oh the irony.
I just noticed it’s their “1st annual figuire flattery” issue!
Contents:
1. Pay for massive amounts of airbrushing and/or
2. Paste your head on another’s body.
There, now there is no need for a 2nd annual issue.
That looks horrible and makes me feel sad for her boobs. From a D+ to a small smooshed B in one fell swoop.
September 6th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Ayyy! If that is photoshopped then the lovely Miss Ferrera should take a leaf out of the book of the beautious Kate Winslet and sue somebody!
September 6th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
her arms look like bendy straws, or plastic tubing. so unnatural! just let her be her adorable curvy self!
September 6th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
How sad. This certainly isn’t what I want to see. We saw her in person at the Target in West Hollywood about 6 months ago and she was normal sized…perfectly normal. It’s sad they seem to think we want to see a lolly pop America.
September 6th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
[…] Via Manolo’s Ayyyy blog, we learn that this is a photo of America Ferrera as she actually is, with her super smile, beautiful skin, curvalicious bod, and aura of sweetness and confidence. […]
September 6th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
She looks like S-E-X. Sign me up for that diet!
September 6th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
This is just another disgusting example of what is “acceptable” beauty and what is not. ABC Network has deemed her attractive enough to be put on television, so why can’t Glamour put her, as-is, on a cover? I submitted a nasty comment to Glamour, and hopefully everyone else will too.
September 6th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
It seems that they missed the point of her TV show. I believe we call that dramatic irony.
Which is a shame too. America Ferrara looks great the way she is. It’s fairly insulting to imply that the paper-thin monstrosity on the left is an improvement
September 6th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Here’s the message it sends to all the young ladies who read the magazine:
“STEP. AWAY. FROM. THE. CHEEZEBURGER. SWEETHEART! Our artists are getting frikin’ carpel tunnel here trying to thin you folks up enough to actually publish your phatographs!
Aaaayeeee. Indeedie.
September 6th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
[…] Skinny Betty Filed under: Uncategorized — cleek @ 4:50 pm […]
September 6th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Good lord - there was nothing wrong with her to begin with. Stupid fashion magazines. Believe me, I know from fat, and fat is not what she is. She looks like a NORMAL PERSON, and they should have let her continue to look that way.
September 6th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
People:
Let Americans feel that they need to be skinny. A lot of you feel its ok to be fat!
September 6th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Red blooded guy input:
Girl on Left - yawn, bowl of Special K
Girl on Right - yowsa, hot tamale
Really; hand on the hip, shoulders back, grrrr!
September 6th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
Well, I am canceling my subscription to Glamour today! Oh wait, I don’t read Glamour.
Someone actually reads that schtuff?!
September 6th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
And people wonder why women have body issues?
September 6th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
huge improvement. lol
September 6th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
America is SO beautiful as she naturally is - why would Glamour do that? Until these photoshopped celebs to take a stance and refuse to allow “fashion” magazines to alter their looks in this way, it will never change. And thirdly, as scary as this whole ‘trend’ is, even scarier is the message that it’s sending to our already troubled youth - female AND male.
September 7th, 2007 at 8:28 am
Glad somebody posted about this. I was at the grocery store yesterday and my neck almost snapped in two as I whipped past the magazine rack. Sad commentary and as somebody else said, not even very good Photoshopping (is that a word?)…
September 7th, 2007 at 9:12 am
As a woman, I’m furious that Glamour thought they could make America Ferrera look “better” by digitally altering her appearence to make her look skinny. As a geek, I am horrified at the poor quality of the digital alteration.
September 7th, 2007 at 10:28 am
I sent the following email to Glamour:
Are you people complete idiots? America Ferrera is a beautiful woman and your obviously badly photoshopped cover picture is an insult. She does not have a giraffe’s neck nor plastic doll arms. She has a wonderful, curvaceous body with full breasts and hips. Real women have curves!!! What you have done is degrading.
Here’s their response:
Dear Cheryl,
Thanks so much for your letter about our October cover photo of America
Ferrera. Let me assure you, we did not digitally slim her; as she
mentions
in the interview, she wears a size 6/8 on the bottom, ten on the top.
You
are seeing her as she actually appears. That said, we deeply value your
feedback. Be sure to take a look inside at the photos of America and
let us
know what you think.
Sincerely,
Margie Guerra
Reader Services
Obviously Margie hasn’t looked inside the magazine.
September 7th, 2007 at 11:11 am
I got the exact same response as Cheryl, word for word… except, interestingly enough, mine came signed “Lynda Laux-Bachand, Reader Services Editor”, no mention of Marie Guerra. It’s clearly a stock reply, they must have gotten a few letters about it.
September 7th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
ang . . . thanks for noticing. The irony IS thick.
And your comment was hilarious. Viva la Photoshop! Now if we can just fix our live images . . . maybe we can hire people to walk before us with fun-house “skinny mirrors.”
September 7th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
[…] post of a few months back. Nothing like getting a peek behind the curtain, right? Well, here’s another one for ya. Poor America. Via Boing Boing. […]
September 7th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
If she’s size 6/8 on the bottom and 10 on top, then I am a chipmunk. BULLSHIT!
The cover lies with its image and she lies in words inside the magazine, so she can’t complain. NO WAY is she a size 6 or 8 on the bottom. LIAR!
September 7th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
I received the same stock e-mail from Glamour. I have never had my intelligence insulted like that in my entire life. It can’t be good business to treat people who comment on your magazine like morons.
I don’t read any of those fashions mags (what’s the need, with Manolo on watch?!?) but I am very concerned for young women who are influenced by them. I can only hope more people will be just as disturbed by these images and the lies about them and decide to speak out and take a stand.
September 7th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Her upper right shoulder and arm (left side when looking at the pic) look like they belong to a child - creepy.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:25 am
Glamour magazine,
Please run the original
un-retouched images from the America Ferrera cover
photo-shoot. The image you ran of her on the cover looks
absolutely ridiculous. She is already beautiful the way she
is, and you photoshopped her to look like a Frankenstein’s
Monster and a Barbie Doll. You should follow Dove’s lead, and
try “truth” in your publication and photography. Women are
beautiful naturally, and by smoothing out our wrinkles,
cloning out our cellulite, and blemishes you’re giving our
daughters unrealistic goals, and telling them they are not
good enough the way they are. Run the original shots, we want
to see her the same way your photographers did.
I got back the following response as well…
Copy/Paste:
Dear Marie-Claire,
Thanks so much for your letter about our October cover photo of America
Ferrera. Let me assure you, we did not digitally slim her; as she mentions
in the interview, she wears a size 6/8 on the bottom, ten on the top. You
are seeing her as she actually appears. That said, we deeply value your
feedback. Be sure to take a look inside at the photos of America and let us
know what you think.
Sincerely,
Emilia Benton
Reader Services Intern
September 11th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
It is the angle of the shot and the cut of the dress. She looks great and Glamour obvoiusly has great photographers that know how to make someone who is already beautiful even more beautiful. I don’t know how lumpy you gals are but I bet a great photograph might even make one of you look good. As for the response from Glamour, how many different ways do you have to have it put?
September 11th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
…Somone needs to introduce Lora to a pair of spectacles. A different angle doesn’t cut someone’s arms by half, narrow their shoulders, lengthen their neck - seriously, look at that photo on the right where she’s holding her head up - shrink their boobs, make their chin pointier, their hair and skin tone entirely different shades from real life, etc.
I make clothes. I’m a photographer. No clothing or camera in the world will do any of that.
Oh, and here’s the clincher. When their skin looks like glossy plastic, there’s been a lot of photoshopping going on.
September 11th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Nuts.
Glamour clearly needed to have a stock reply, judging by the three separate people who have replied using the exact same words.
September 11th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
So Glamour expects me, a woman with a chest area almost exactly the same size as the version of America on their cover, to believe that she’s “a size ten on top” in that photo? Really?
I’m going to assume that their version of her jives with the version of America on the right, and just say — oh, WOW! I have bigger breasts than I thought I did! This is great! Having small boobs must just be some weird optical illusion I never knew about! I should probably thank Glamour for that alert.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m just going to go wrestle my surprisingly enormous 34B girls into the biggest bra I can find, since apparently they’re so much bigger than they look. No, really! Glamour says so!
September 11th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
I also can make clothes and take pictures Heather but I would hardly claim to be at the design level of those at Glamour magazine and it doesn’t sound like you are either. You need to look at the poses also. In the cover shot her arms are in front of her and her leg is raised which puts her hips back opposed to the second shot where her arm is behind her and her other arm is on her hip pushing it out. Her shoulders look narrow because the lines of the straps in the cover shot come come in at an angle opposed to the other ones which are at the widest part of her shoulders which make them look broader. Also, her hair is big and blowing in the cover shot which also makes her hips proportionally smaller. Besides the magazine is called ‘Glamour’ not ‘Dumpy’….I expect some art and design in the photographs.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
[…] the shit out of her. Francesca will not go into the horrible quality of the photoshopping. Please go to Ayyyy and read the comments in which Manolo’s noble readers wonder aloud just how freakish are […]
September 12th, 2007 at 1:19 am
If anyone has any doubts about what’s possible in Photoshop, go watch this video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DZDHQ9b9fbo
September 12th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
“Besides the magazine is called ‘Glamour’ not ‘Dumpy’….I expect some art and design in the photographs.”
The fact that you think the lovely curves in the right photo are “dumpy” and that she’s not glamorous already isn’t exactly making your opinion seem all that strong.
And how are you not seeing how jarringly unflattering that Glamour cover is? Does she still look pretty and skinnier? Yes. But photoshopped or not, whatever was done to the cover makes her look so vastly unlike herself that whatever tricks might have done with hair and makeup and wardrobe and (gasp!) maybe even airbrushing don’t make her look NORMAL. This does not look like the gorgeous curvaceous woman who stripped down proudly to her underwear in “Real Women Have Curves”. She looks like any other Hollywood starlet in that photo, and that’s the problem because she doesn’t in real life.
It doesn’t look like art or design at all. That so many people have seen it and think it looks like bad photoshopping if it isn’t says a lot about the quality of the photo or lack thereof. It takes a beautiful woman with sexy glamorous curves and makes her look flat, plastic, and common.
September 12th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
I don’t think it’s a Photoshop job, other than the minor retouching they always do on any such photo. I do agree the picture looks a little weird.
Ms. Ferrera’s hair is draped over her left shoulder, obscuring part of her neck and tracing out a path that looks like a droopy shoulder. This might be causing a slight optical illusion that her body is significantly skinnier than it actually is.
If you cover up the right side of the photo and look just at the other half (i.e., looking only at Ms. Ferrera’s right side, which faces our left), then the picture doesn’t look quite as strange. Her right arm is still a bit scrawny, and that might be the product of a small bit of retouching, or else a shadow on the inner side of her upper arm.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
They clearly airbrushed away her collarbones, which is weird since collarbones usually are a symbol of thinness. In addition, the entire shape of her face is different, but absolutely not better. What a disgrace!
September 12th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
I see a tremendous difference in her face. The photo on the right shows a soft, round, natural face. The one from the magazine is much thinner, harder and angular. It’s the same face, but reflects a body that is easily 60 lbs. lighter than the cute, curvaceous America.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
why not just come out in the open and admit it’s been retouched. There’s no way in hell that is her real body. We’re no fools
September 12th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
America Ferrera is a beautiful young lady and the picture taken just doesn’t look like her. Come on…when I got the magazine in my mail I looked at the cover and instantly noticed that something did not look right! She’s perfect the way that she in, why change it Glamour?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Did you all fall off the planet yesterday??? How can you be so judgemental of a person? Not just this fine actress, but all who are in the spot light day in and day out. It’s like we are here to pass judgement on others because our life is so f__ up. Who are you or me to judge these people. We spend our days hoping and praying that others will not judge us and yet MOST of us sit there and judge. Get a life - judge yourself for who and what you are before you attach others. Personally, I have enough issues in my life that need my constant attention that I don’t have time to pass judgement on others. They are stars and actors not god - give them the same blind eye that you give to your neighbor, childs teacher, cleaners, check out clerk at the grocery store - when you can look past yourself and your ignorance then you can judge people and their lives. When you can pay attention to those closest to you - then you have the right ot judge - I personally will probably never make it to the point where I can sit in judgement - I would never want that job. Why do you think you can have that job when only one is entitled to that and that is the one that you totally disregard when you bash his/her children. Wake up people - stop bashing people to make yourself feel better - take responsiblility for your life and quit judging other people (PS don’t comment on my spelling - I know it isn’t good)
September 12th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
this image has been retouched for sure any one can see that.
September 13th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Please!!!!!!!!!! What do I tell my pre-teen daughter when magazines like Glamour can’t even let a real person be real! How dare they photo enhance her picture. What is wrong with being real these days? She is a beautiful girl and does not look like herself on the cover. I will not have this magazine in my house! They lost a customer! They have done this before but this is a girl my daughter looks up to and they “Hollywoodized” her.
September 13th, 2007 at 1:31 am
This makes me very upset. America is an actress that takes pride of her body and accepts her beautiful curbs. This is why Hollywood is so messed up; they keep on putting images of extremely unhealthy actresses and label them as “beautiful.” But when the have a beautiful “real” woman, Hollywood screws it up with unrealistic and unhealthy images, such as this. I wish they would have showed her beauty as is.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:20 am
I don’t think anybody is judging America, but more so judging Glamour Magazine for 1) assuming we’re idiots, 2) assuming we only buy magazines with emaciated models on the cover and 3) helping perpetuate an impossible body image to our daughters.
I won’t buy this issue.
My two cents.
September 13th, 2007 at 4:09 am
she is sexy without photoshop why would they do THAT…
September 13th, 2007 at 8:57 am
The chest area is a dead giveaway that this is two different bodies,,,,,,,
Why would they do this,,,,,,, She is a beautiful woman,,,,,, Show her natural self,,,,,,
I personally would be happy to see natural instead of airbrushed,,,,,,,
September 28th, 2007 at 2:33 am
[…] the cover of the new issue of Glamour is a totally noticeable (and horribly done) photoshopped picture of America Ferrera. It also says “1st Annual Figure Flattery Issue” and “the secret reasons women […]
November 6th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
i have been into photography forever now n i can say i have a pretty good eye for telling whats real n whats fake n i can tell u right now that the picture of America .F. r fake it seems to me that all they did is phtotshop her head to someone elses body. I think it is totally wrong for a magazine to tell their reader that what they c is what it really is because we all know in real life noone is that shiny n no one is that small unless they r close to death n ik America is not close to death she is a heathy young lady that is a role modle for lil kids around the world n America even said in a interview that she would never get that skinny ass the picture shows in the magazine i think these magazine people should send letters to America n all readers apolgizing for their inapporiate manner on this n should re do the pictures the way they REALLY look! but hey thats me its not like a “big all mighty” magazine author will listen to a young adult!
Heather
November 9th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Ugh. That’s one of the worst Photoshop jobs I think I’ve seen, and I mean “worst” in every possible way.
November 24th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Its not okay to be fat either though… its bad for youre health. its not “normal”
January 7th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Actually that IS America’s head put on MANDY MOORE’s body!! It was announced somewhere that someone tried out what it would look like if America would be stick-thin. And put America on Mandy. So to speak ^_^
March 9th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
She looks so much better in the ‘real’ photo!