Did Vogue Go Too Far? Lady Gaga's New Dress Size

We all know that fashion and glamour photography can be controversial at times. First with Kate Upton's horribly retouched cover of Sports Illustrated, then with the leak of Victoria's Secret's untouched photos and their debatable over-retouch of Lais Ribeiro earlier this month. Well, now it seems to be Vogue magazine that's the culprit, and their celebrity of choice... the eccentric Lady Gaga. It seems the re-toucher might have been a little overzealous with the liquify tool in Photoshop, making our lovely pop-icon into a disproportionate Barbie doll on September's cover.

However weird it may be, it's likely this was a conscious choice. That said, how do you feel about the retouch? Did the folks at Vouge go too far, or should we just learn to accept this as industry standard?


Log in or register to post comments


Previous comments
John Godwin's picture

More than how I feel about the retouch, I'd like to stop being asked how I feel about retouches.

This isn't controversial, it's not a talking point, it's just a picture. A representation of a concept.

There have been a couple of dodgy ones in the last year or so, but that doesn't mean every single manipulated shot on the cover of a fashion magazine is open to the same scrutiny, as if every issue has throngs of photographers sharply drawing in breath.

Rather than going on scare-monger every time there's an extreme image in the media, how about we all ignore it, since we know that the person who retouched that image probably relies on that work to pay his bills.

We're supposed to be a community here, yet for reasons I can't fathom, some staff writers seem to demonise certain elements of the industry, without realising that they're potentially contributing to the future demise of it.

Lady Gaga is an HDR abomination. Her "cotton candy" hair makeup reminds me of Buckwheat on the Little Rascals when he gets scared.

Jon-Mark Wiltshire's picture

I think it's looks cool, well stylized.

It's fine, but it's not the reason why i went out and bought it. It's a very thick $7 issue with loads of imagery to study for my own personal work.

cartoons ... all fashion, film, celebrity, sports heros, when they are digitally dealt with, they become cartoons, simulacrums, approximations, "fake".

we consume images, not reality.

same with the senses, back in the old days, but we didn't know it then.

desiree's picture

The retouchers, here, did make her much thinner than she appears to be in the video. The stomach and chest area are much more well defined than it appears to be in the video. Also, the knee area has been thinned. All this, it seems, to accentuate the shape of the dress. When I saw this on the stands I honestly thought "wow, either Gaga has lost weight or has been over retouched." So, that's my take. I admire fashion photographers like Peter Lindbergh who cringe every time their images are retouched/over-retouched by the mags. Thanks for the post!