The Ethics of Photoshop

Hey everyone! We're here today to talk about a pretty controversial topic in the photography industry. It's something that has been debated for years by the media, consumers and photographers. It's the ethics of Photoshop.

Before we get into it, I'd like to provide some background information as to how most photographers use Photoshop. Generally when people think of the ethics of Photoshop they think of major magazines slimming models to the point where they look like walking skeletons however, there is so much more to Photoshop than that. For me and most photographers, we use it to soften skin, highlight key facial features and remove acne, clothing wrinkles and miscellaneous objects from the background of my photos. As a professional photographer, I use Photoshop on almost every photo I take although clients may not even realize it. Below is an example of a photo that is unedited versus Photoshopped and a time-lapse video. (Please keep in mind that Blogger does compress photos.)

Edited using Lightroom and Photoshop By: Kelly Shea

Unedited "Raw" Photo By: Kelly Shea

As you can tell in the photos and video above, there is a drastic difference from start to finish. Her skin is softer and brighter, her clothing is darker, her eyes pop and the backdrop is smooth. None of this would be possible without Photoshop. Overall, this is a tool that should be used as a means to make your subject look their best, not alter what they actually look like. Another way that Photoshop is used is to remove unwanted objects or people from the backgrounds of photos, which you can see below.

Unedited "Raw" Photo By: Kelly Shea

Edited using Lightroom and Photoshop By: Kelly Shea

In this photo, I removed a person who was standing in the background of the photo to keep focus on the dog. When I was shooting this, I realized that I needed someone to throw a frisbee directly towards me to capture good reactions from the dog. While shooting, I decided that I would have to Photoshop out the background. While this is a major edit, I believe that it makes the photo significantly better.

With all of this being said, there are some examples of bad "Photoshop Etiquette" and major brands like Victoria's Secret are at the epicenter. In the example below, the model was thinned using a variety of tools but her shoulders were missed.

Photoshop "fails" like this give a bad connotation to a program that can be so helpful and can create negative body images for young men and women. Based on my experience, I think photographers and editors should be responsible for what they do with the software. Just like any other profession, we have an obligation to not abuse the tools that we work with and we should be expected to depict our models in their best way but not an inaccurate way.

Something else that must be kept in mind when discussing Photoshop is real alterations to a person. A Victoria's Secret photo editor was interviewed anonymously by Business Insider and they talked about industry secrets that most people do not know about. According to "Sarah"-the anonymous name that they referred to the editor as- extra fabric and padding are sewn into the garments models wear and often times they will wear two bras at once. She also said that all of the models wear hair extensions. While this is not directly Photoshop related, it is definitely information that should be considered when evaluating post-shoot editing. 

The world as a whole is slowly combatting the issue of unrealistic body standards. Israel and France passed laws that a photo must be labelled that it was edited if a model was altered to look smaller than they are. As pushback against major photo edits ensues, many countries are considering creating similar legislation. What are your thoughts on this? Let me know in the comments!