What Unretouched Photos From Victoria Secret Look Like

What Unretouched Photos From Victoria Secret Look Like

Victoria Secret, the company famous for selling underwear, lingerie, and overall sex appeal, is also notable for their amazing models. By the time you see the images from their catalog or campaigns, they are always retouched. Do you ever wonder what the shots look like before retouching? Here are a set of unretouched photos of V.S. Angel, Doutzen Kroes, from a recent shoot. 

Victoria Secret released these shots on accident in a public area of the website.

These images were posted to a public area of the VS Web site (apparently in error). They come from the forthcoming September catalog, which explains why retouched versions do not yet exist for a side-by-side comparison. They were shot around July 21 in Turks and Caicos. Even without retouched images to compare, the raw shots are still interesting to look at. -Jezebel

Although the final shots are not released, here's an idea of what you can expect them to resemble.

How do you feel about the shots before retouching?

[Via The Fashion Spot via Jezebel]

Log in or register to post comments

153 Comments

Previous comments
Roman Kazmierczak's picture

I agree that in advertising of cosmetics they shouldn't manipulate the
picture. In ad of mascara you can clearly see that lashes are Photoshopped. I think in TV, News and Ads lying should be prohibited in a first place
:D Let's see how the world would look then!

 You are focused more about fighting the argument then thinking thru the facts. BTW It is one of the sources of the problems...
Guns are like a Pandora's box. Ones it is open it is there. You can't reverse it, but you can think how to deal with it. Prohibition of alcohol didn't stop people from drinking, just send more to jails. Drugs are illegal and I see people taking, buying and selling drugs every day.
Also, that you feel safer does NOT make you safe. It just makes you FEEL better, until you will get robbed or shot in place, that guns are not allowed. Do you think, if that Colorado shooter new, that people in the theater may be armed, would he even try to open fire? He didn't shoot to armed police officers...
Just think about it.

I was growing up in Poland. It is extremely hard to buy a legal gun there but I've met criminals with hand guns. Maybe junkies don't have easy access to firearms but still everyday someone is being terrorized with a knife, rapped or stubbed. And victims usually feel safe until that moment. These junkies know that these people are defenseless.

The point is, there is no easy fix. Prohibition doesn't work even with children.

In civilized countries people can read and write but they can't think for themselves.
BTW do you believe that RedBull gives you wings? :D Just kidding ;)

Tanja Schulte's picture

well i have never seen anyone with a gun here... except hunters and the police.

i don´t live in fear like most american that someone at work runs amok and shoots me. and yes ... i prefer to live without that fear.

we don´t have ~12000 homicides with guns a year.
we have only a fraction of homicides per capita caused by guns (compared to america).

so im not only feeling safer.. i am safer.

so why is that?

because we have less guns or because a lot of americans are animals that like violence?

not a great choice to make .. eh?

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

I wrote one replay and it disappeared.LOL 
I don't know where do you live and what are statistics in your region but what is the difference between murder committed with a gun vs knife or rope or rock?
Guns don't kill !! People do!

I don't like guns myself but it doesn't change reality. The point is, you can't fix this problem simply prohibiting guns. I wish it was that simple.

The same thing is with the pictures. You can't blame "industry" for peoples low self-esteem. These people have a problem with themselves in a first place. They learned from 1class that the pretty girl is getting more. Teachers treat her better.
It is a big subject. To big for this small forum. :) Fix education. Educate parents how to raise their kids... choose true educators for a teachers... It is long process but here is a problem end here it has to be fixed. If people from young ages will have a high self-esteem, no picture will make them feel bad about themselves.
You, and many like you, put their anger in a wrong place :)

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

"and now you walk around with a gun all day, in case you met a junkie with a gun? i doubt that!"
I want to address this.
The idea is not to walk around with a gun. The idea is to HAVE A RIGHT to carry a gun. If criminal knows that you may be armed he will think twice before he will attack.
If Japan had a nuclear weapon during WWII, USA would not attack Hiroshima or Nagasaki. That is why they never attacked Russia. Because they feared of counterattack. It is basic psychology of equal power. 
But this is far from the subject of conversation and I came back to the point in the post above ;)

Dan S's picture

Tanja, I am kind of amazed by your argument. I am trying not to take offense, but am kind of. Your very passionate, which is honorable. I am blown away by your hatred for my country. Unfortunately, I cannot blame you for your viewpoints in some ways. Our media is much to be desired and has given you a false portrayal of what is going on here. Its nothing like your thinking. The things you have said are completely not true and you should come visit to see what a great and peaceful (for the most part) country it is. Guns or not, its a great place.

 You are an idiot and history speaks for it self... Look at Washington, DC' violent crime rate statisticks when they had their hand gun ban...and look at Scotland...one of the top 5 most violent countries in the world (GUN BAN) Not too mention Mexico (GUN BAN)

Think b4 you speak!

Tanja Schulte's picture

i know you probably have only a public school education but look beyond your limited horizon...  look at other nations that are more civilizised.

i said it´s stupid to give free access to guns in a violent society. that some morons in america will then use knifes to kill.... i don´t doubt it. but it´s easyer to kill with a gun then a knife.

that there are other examples of violent societys.. well what a suprise.. you are a genius!!

that crime rate rised in DC.. well.... they rised in other US states too in that periode. because it was an overall increase in crimes and had nothing to do with the gun ban.
but the gun wackos in the USA believe everything the GUN LOBBY (NRA) tells them... they want too believe.

beside that.... im speaking about homicides caused by guns!!

but only stupid americans can think that more guns make a nation safer.. dumb rednecks.. but hey they voted for g.w. bush twice..... so what shall we expect?!   LOL

but hey it´s not my life that is in danger because of wackos carrying guns... i could not care less what happens in america. :)

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

 You are very angry person. Aren't you?

Tanja Schulte's picture

LOL.... well i hope you are a photographer not a hair model or psychic.... because you would make no money....   :D

if you care to notice.. she called me IDIOT.. but i guess you just ignored that because it fits you...

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

Call me an idiot and I will ignore you ;) "Only public school education", "your small horizons"... if insulting people makes you feel better, that means you're an angry person ;)

Marios Karampalis's picture

The problem with the possession of firearms in America is huge. The guns are sold like candy everywhere! And not just guns but weapons need a soldier on the front line! It's crazy to think that if you have a weapon not being robbed!
Chances are that if you have gun will rob and kill you! Did you know that in America most deaths
caused by guns in the family and not from thugs! 30% of deaths caused by accidents in the family! If you can not buy a gun so easily in America deaths would be reduced by at least 30%, i am not saying that it
would not be robbery, but it is certain that the deaths of legitimate weapons would be reduced. And 50% of deaths resulting from lawful weapons rather than guns from criminals!!! I live in Greece where lawful gun possession does not exceed 2-3%. I do not know anyone who has a gun and I have not seen or have never heard that a friend, partner, relative, neighbor, co-worker, was shot! I live in the capital Athens with 5,000,000 residents, 20 years!
The problem is that guns bring big money to large corporations. And the money in America always deserved and worth more than human life. At some point, the U.S. economy should no longer supported by the companies who get rich by weapons and war and change direction!!!!!

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

You replied in wrong place because here is no more room;)
Marios, I totally agree. It would be beautiful world if firearms would never exist. If you had read the posts before, you'd have understood the point.
BTW... In 2010 in US there were 31,513 deaths from firearms: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600. Did 19,308 people died because of the guns or is there a serious problem in society because people don't want to live anymore? Blaming the guns is just the easy way to dismiss real problems.

Marios Karampalis's picture

Surely the American society has serious problems in the last 30 years, I agree.

And that caused 19000 suicides! I shuddered when I saw the number! In Greece, with he economic crisis for 5 years now they have not even 1000 people commit suicide! This does not mean that the prohibition of guns is wrong. Certainly will not solve the whole problem but a part of. It's a start though. When the Americans expel the culture of the dollar and growth in culture of human will then solve the problem. I think the problem is that America is not a national status without the power of the dollar. Without the dollar America are small pieces of other nations that do not work do not communicate! We must find another glue to stick these pieces!

Marios Karampalis's picture

And it is the wrong place for this discussion!!
:-)

Dan S's picture

I am sorry you have such a tainted view of my country. Its nothing like you say. You watch to much news that does not tell the truth. Sorry, but many of your statements are false. And your perceptions of America are completely false. I don't know how so many people in this blog are trashing America when they or you have probably never been here. I say this nicely and with respect

Yes, because all us Americans are gun-toting sociopaths Hell-bent on destroying the world.

We need our guns so we can survive the zombie apocalypse. You think photoshopping supermodels is rampant and out of control now, just wait until the zombies take over! small horizons indeed.

Dan S's picture

Actually being from America, It is NOT a violent society like you saying. Actually, most of America is beautiful and peaceful. The states that do not allow people to own guns have the most crime. And the states that have very free gun laws and the very least crime. Your argument is completely false, coming from somebody living within America who has traveled all over. As a matter of the fact, the studies prove that all the countries with laws prohibiting people from owning firearms, have the most crime. Fact. I try to say this respectfully. Unfortunately, bullies only take a back seat when they are met with equal or greater force. Guns will exist in the hands of criminals weather you ban them or not. Thus, why crime increases when good people don't have them. Taking away firearms from good and decent law abiding citizens who have had background checks will accomplish nothing.

Totally agree with everything you said here. Yup.

Dan S's picture

Try not to blame America. What your saying is a generalization of Americans. The people creating what you referring to is a tiny, tiny portion of the population. And european photographers as well as other photographers around the world do the same thing. I tend to agree with your statement, But as an American and a commercial photographer, I would not create such images. And many share the same view. BTW, I agree on the gun argument.

Roman Kazmierczak's picture

Well, I wasn't blaming photographers nor America as a country. I think photographers and digital artist can and should modify and manipulate the picture whichever way they desire. What I mean in my statement is that, people should get more true education, instead of blaming everyone for problems they have. I want to point that the real problem is not in the pictures, and the solution is not as simple as policing what can be displayed and what cannot. We need to start to educate kids today, so they will be able to educate their kids, to not trust and fallow what the media show.
In USA, we have many generations that were raised by the TV and already few that are raised by the "social media". Parents forgot or don't understand that they have some responsibility. When their kids are obese or bulimic, or they become addicted to drugs and alcohol, or they shoot each other in the school, parents and the community point fingers at the media, photographers, retouchers, movie makers, etc, forgetting that they were not there when their child was 3,5,10 years old.

Kim akimoto's picture

 hah? only USA? how about Asian countries like Japan, South Korea, Thailand, etc? those eyelid, rhinoplasty, named it.

Corey Melton's picture

nooo, she's pretty perfect. Im certain this unretouched model puts a lot of pressure on the same women that cry about retouching in a magazine. Its because she is beautiful, thats all. It isnt the industry's fault that woman just tend to be insecure about their appearance

Jennifer Pursey's picture

Women tend to be insecure because men, like you, obsess over the one percent of females who won the genetic lottery.

Corey Melton's picture

nah, it's just part of most women's emotional makings. and I am glad you have me so figured out ...

Graham Marley's picture

I've noticed, through first hand observance, that women tend to be much harsher on each other when it comes to looks. Watching awards shows with females, some of them self-professing feminists, there's a constant barrage of "Her boobs look weird." or "Ew, she looks ugly, what's wrong with her?" commentary, while the men usually just think "Uh, she's pretty hot." Not a hard and fast rule, and men can be brutal no doubt, but we don't have the monopoly on shallow nitpicking.

I'm not looking to fight or anything, but who says women don't do the same? I know TONS of women who droll all over Abercrome models, Actors such as Ryan Reyonlds, Ryan Gosling, etc... Aren't they part of the 1 percent? Are men also not expected to have six packs and bulging biceps and dress in immaculately tailored clothing because of the same media women are pressured by? The difference is that men's insecurities aren't brought under a social spotlight because men are stereotypically (and falsly I might add) "emotionally stronger", and "don't care as much" or however you want to put it. :) Just a thought.

We're all under pressure, but its how one deals with that pressure that makes us who we are, and we ALWAYS have to accept ourselves. I'm KNOW women check out guys JUST AS MUCH as men check out women. You don't get attracted to someone's personality from across a room when you've never spoken to them before :P We're all superficial to a certain extent so we may as well accept it and try to present ourselves in the best way possible rather than complain all the time about how society is creating this pressure to look like genetically gifted individuals. I like it, I think it is because of this social pressure that I can look, act, and a work as the BEST VERSION OF MYSELF. Seeing all these "perfect" depictions of people is what fuels me to better myself every day.

Calli Walton's picture

Genetically as humans we're attracted to people who would make suitable mates to reproduce with. For instance, men are usually attracted to wider hips and bigger breasts because they suggest fertility and successful childbearing. Women who are ovultaing are generally attracted to a more "buff" hunter type (to breed strong, verile kin) whereas those in non-ovulatory phases of their cyle are primarily attracted to men who may be less muscled but gentler and more stable looking (ie. good husbands/fathers). Obviously this isn't saying that men who work out can't be good providers for a family or vice versa.

However, the shameful thing in all of this is science has learned to stack the genetic deck with cosmetic surgery and photoshop.

If I may point out how drastically the "ideal woman" has changed over time, look at figure a) the Victoria's Secret model above as a rough ideal of present time. Please examine figure b) "The Birth of Venus" from 1486. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_Venus_%28Botticelli%29) Obviously not a photo due to a distinct lack of cameras, but widely portrayed as the ideal woman of the time and for quite a few centuries afterwards. In this day and age she might be looked at as fat and small-chested. Possibly even undesirable due to having red hair (we've all heard of kick a ginger day).

The ideal man at the birth of our genetics is very similar to the ideal mate of today. Toned, tall, thick hair... all the various signs of healthy testosterone levels (ie. more chance of impregnation due to a higher sperm count). However the ideal father for those children has subconciously changed in the underlying psyches of women as the "desk job" was invented and men no longer had to kill food with their bare hands in order to feed their young.

I do feel the need to point out that women's standards for an ideal man have changed mainly due to the evolution of the homo erectus into the homo sapiens you see now, who are a far more civilized bunch (or so I'd like to believe). Men's standards for women have changed for their own sexual purposes as opposed to reproductive purposes. One would think that as we progress on the evolutionary timeline that it would be harder to decieve a man with implants and liposuction, but alas my hopes for the men of mankind are dashed once again. Photoshop is merely a more seamless, less expensive, less noticable method of crafting women into something ridiculously far from the evolutionary core of where we're supposed to be as far as health is concerned.

Tanja Schulte's picture

yes.. because this is what the media shows us.
and believe me MALES care!!

look at how the look and behavior of males changed over the last 40-50 years.

what kind of men shaved his chest or armpits 40 years ago?
sure none of the now 60 year old men i know.....

Calli Walton's picture

 One could argue the same for women. What women shaved their legs in 3000 BC? One could also argue from a hygene and comfort perspective as well... But I do see your point.

sorry, but that is total bullshit. I do a lot of retouching and I think every final photo ought to be retouched to some extent but you are ridiculously ignorant.

More comments