Sheesh. Calm down, people. This law was enacted because models are under pressure to make themselves alarmingly and unhealthily thin. There's no "demand" for that other than from male fashion designers who like their clothes to drape nicely over a pretty coat hanger so their pristine seams aren't muddled by a woman's natural curves.

They're just asking photographers not to make women appear so thin they'd basically be dead in reality.

Nobody's asking you not to retouch out wrinkles, bags, stray hairs or pimples.

If a "nanny state" saves young women's lives by forcing male designers not to starve them to death, then bring on the nannies.

Wouldn't this law do the opposite to what is meant to? Because if it won't be solved with photoshop, agencies will look only for bodies that suit their taste... with that forcing model to be dead in reality. Or staying without the job.

That was in reference to the fact that a bunch of men started whining in this thread about "nanny state" and not ever being able to retouch anything ever at all, which is certainly not the case with this law. I didn't see any female photographers complaining; rather they pointed out that the thread title was awful and why this law unfortunately has to exist. But maybe I was wrong. Perhaps the people I thought were women are actually men masquerading as women, and perhaps some of the "men" are secretly women. Doubt it, tho.

Sorry but that's just a bunch of BS excuses! When you write "Men.  " you are actually not just talking about the people in this thread. Please don't try to play innocent because I know you know better.

You're using their sex/gender as derogatory term and a form of criticism for them being from a sex/gender they were born in. And in the process include all men.

If you actually wanted to specifically refer to the men of this thread you could easily build a phrase to state that. But no, you simply stated: "Men.  "

All along my life I've heard a lot of comments just saying "women" in the exact same context and intention you wrote yours. It has always been considered an offense by all the women present and considered a misogynist and machist comment. And they didn't even need to be feminists to be offended by the "women" comment.

And I would bet a million dollars (if I had them) that you got angry all along your life when you heard the comment "women" in the same type of context your wrote yours.

So, I do not see how I can interpret your comment differently from the example above and not consider it a misandrist comment. And as I said it's not the first or tenth time you make comments in this line of thought. So I'm doubtful this was kind of slip, but rather a reflection of your reactions towards men.

Although I agree that the measure innocently wants to tackle a problem that is happening in our hyperconnected societies where fitness gods and goddess are pushed up in the social media altars, magazines tv shows etc the measure will backfire in many ways. I thinks these are some negative implication of this measure:

1-      The beauty trend of slim bodies is fortunately not going away from our societies. We are following again the classic greek aesthetics of body shapes and that is not going to change soon. And I am glad for it. As it has been already said western societies have a much bigger problem with obesity and overweight population than the contrary. It is all those images that are pushing millions of people to practice sports and eat better. Anorexia might kill some hundreds in Europe every year.....overweight kills hundred thousands. You cannot even compare the problem. You need a strong and regular will to do sport and to eat healthy. It is much easier to watch the latest tv show on the couch while eating some fries. But we don�t want to look fat we want to look in shape in our mirrors and here the influence of all those published �perfect� bodies is a strong incentive.
   
2-      Thank to photoshop the tyranny for the models to be a their 100% is over. A little overweight can be corrected without a problem at the push of a button. If this is not more possible photographers,agencies etc will look for even more perfect bodies. This will be much harder to maintain and I think a jump to surgery will be more common.
     
3-      Photography the same as movies drawing music is a form of artistic creation. It is wrong to impose arbitrary artificially limitation to it. Should we ban from the museums painter John Currin and only show Rubens. Should be forbid violence in movies because some idiot might be influenced and do so terrible act. Should be forbid rap music etc, where do trace the line ?

4-      What are the consequences for Getty. It depends. If all the other agencies follow this decision everything will balance out. But if other agencies do not follow this rule or for example use a button to just specify if image has been retouched or not they will have a competitive advantage. They will get images that Getty wont. It will not matter in a few months time but in a couple of years Getty will notice this disadvantage and will have to act.  I would think that to make clear if an image has been retouched (changed body form, nose,hair etc) would be much more interesting for buyers. The �no filter� trend is exploding and to know that an image has been altered or not at all would be for sure interesting for clients.

5-      The argument that Getty is taking this action because of the french law is a lie. They are taking this action because they want. There are many laws in dozens of nations that conflict with some images of the library but they don�t limit it, and they shouldn�t. Because if tomorrow Poland comes up with a law against nudes or Mexico forbids showing images of children will Getty follow. I don�t think so. By this new french law they are simply obliged to state if the image has been retouched or not. They went all the way to banning any body shape contouring. Of course they can do what they find convenient but to attribute it to the french law is not speaking the truth.

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 27, 2017, 16:50

That was in reference to the fact that a bunch of men started whining in this thread about "nanny state" and not ever being able to retouch anything ever at all, which is certainly not the case with this law. I didn't see any female photographers complaining; rather they pointed out that the thread title was awful and why this law unfortunately has to exist. But maybe I was wrong. Perhaps the people I thought were women are actually men masquerading as women, and perhaps some of the "men" are secretly women. Doubt it, tho.

Sorry but that's just a bunch of BS excuses! When you write "Men.  " you are actually not just talking about the people in this thread. Please don't try to play innocent because I know you know better.

You're using their sex/gender as derogatory term and a form of criticism for them being from a sex/gender they were born in. And in the process include all men.

If you actually wanted to specifically refer to the men of this thread you could easily build a phrase to state that. But no, you simply stated: "Men.  "

All along my life I've heard a lot of comments just saying "women" in the exact same context and intention you wrote yours. It has always been considered an offense by all the women present and considered a misogynist and machist comment. And they didn't even need to be feminists to be offended by the "women" comment.

And I would bet a million dollars (if I had them) that you got angry all along your life when you heard the comment "women" in the same type of context your wrote yours.

So, I do not see how I can interpret your comment differently from the example above and not consider it a misandrist comment. And as I said it's not the first or tenth time you make comments in this line of thought. So I'm doubtful this was kind of slip, but rather a reflection of your reactions towards men.

Men. 

Quote

And if you don't agree with the rules and the laws of the country hosting you, you are always free to go to live elsewhere� Baciami il culo e arrivederci�

If I made a list of pros and cons about Italy, the pros would outnumber 5:1! 

Brazil would be the other way around I think!

I agree.
I could add that if it was not for some of the cons, some of the pros would not even exist

Men. 

You love us. 

There are MILLIONS of slim girls out there, and people here talk like they are an endangered species! Incredible!

The truth is, for some people on this forum the use of the word "Slim" actually means anorexic and even alien with impossible long legs. You are just masquerading your actual preference with a "political correct" term. Not different from obese people wanting to be called plus size, or BBW or whatever.

Anorexic girls with visible rib cages, protruding collarbones with a non-existent stomach and sucked in faces are NOT slim! Stop calling them that! As I said, there are MILLIONS of slim girls out there. Hit the gym at any hour and you get to see more slim girls than in any model agency casting. Those are slim girls, not anorexic ones you try to pass as slim.

As for the nanny state comments they are simply absurd. Unless you live in a civil war zone, you all live in nanny states. One more than others, but all states are nanny's. We all have to comply with thousands of rules and laws created to protect people from others actions.

To take in such disregard the health of younger generations by neglecting the education through positive row models, good examples and best practices is absurd.

Put it in your heads, young boys and girls are very easily influenced. They tend to follow what is considered cool with extremely limited critical spirit. So, like parents need to educate their young, the society as a whole (through state) also needs to take some measures to educate and protect their young.

That's why the consumption of alcohol, driving, and thousands of other examples are restricted for younger people. All this commotion about a couple stupid clicks in photoshop is absolute non-sense.

This has nothing to do with the promotion and acceptance of obesity as normal. That's another war altogether. And I agree with all the criticism here about the way obesity is starting to be seen as normal, and even beautiful and it's almost forbidden to criticize it. But it's another issue.

The truth is, if you're complaining about not being able to make a couple adjustments in photoshop, that means that the girl you've photographed is already beautiful to the point you only need a couple adjustments! Just leave it be.

It's not like you're photographing a 300kg woman to make her look 50kg! This is absolute non-sense.

"Anorexic girls with visible rib cages, protruding collarbones"

The only reason for those bones not be visible is severe obesity. For your ribs / rib muscles not show you have to be really-really fat my friend. You and others need to catch up on human anatomy and standards of health. I guess his is what happens to people when they grow up in a society where obesity is the norm. Prime example is women (usually misandric ones) going around showing pics of Marilyn Monroe saying, " look this the true normal for being hot, she was size 'M' ". Then someone comes in and reminds them that Marilyn's size "M" clothes would be "XS" now, as the size charts adopted to most of society becoming FAT. Even the BMI chart got modified, os it doesn't bother people so much in the process of eating themselves to death. Meanwhile Obesity is the biggest, most tragic epidemic in the world.

I grew up in a communist country. This whole thing straightforward reminds me of what the commies did to art and portrayal of people in art and commerce. It was the proletariat, the "workers paradise" so on almost all depiction, especially public statues and painting, they hand to be these chunky, robust characters with cubic heads and large thick hands, women having the same large thick hands as men. Sad to see the total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration in western ppl, probably coming from near zero history education, not noticing what their culture is sliding into ever more rapidly. It will be sad, bleak and painful, believe me.

Despite this incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history, I still don't see why it is so hard recognize the severe threat when you such ideologies rapidly invading every field of life, flooding everything with dictates. When you see that either push back as hard as you can, or if you can't.... run!

I'll have what you're smoking!

Quote from: topol on September 28, 2017, 07:40

I grew up in a communist country. This whole thing straightforward reminds me of what the commies did to art and portrayal of people in art and commerce. It was the proletariat, the "workers paradise" so on almost all depiction, especially public statues and painting, they hand to be these chunky, robust characters with cubic heads and large thick hands, women having the same large thick hands as men. Sad to see the total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration in western ppl, probably coming from near zero history education, not noticing what their culture is sliding into ever more rapidly. It will be sad, bleak and painful, believe me.

Despite this incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history, I still don't see why it is so hard recognize the severe threat when you such ideologies rapidly invading every field of life, flooding everything with dictates. When you see that either push back as hard as you can, or if you can't.... run!

I'll have what you're smoking!

12yaerold's copy paste answer.  "Am I cool yet? Am I cool yet?" This isn't youtube.

As for the nanny state comments they are simply absurd. Unless you live in a civil war zone, you all live in nanny states. One more than others, but all states are nanny's. We all have to comply with thousands of rules and laws created to protect people from others actions.

Yes, we all live in states governed by governments. 

It's true that we all have to believe in written and un-written rules and regulations to facilitate trust and cooperation between members of society. But we should always be alert and speak-up against unnecessary and excessive rules and regulations, impacting our freedom.

In some states, bureaucrats believe they know better how much Coke I can drink in a restaurant, to be healthy.
In other states, bureaucrats tell you who you are allowed to love.
In other states, bureaucrats jail you for growing or smoking pot. They take money away from small farmers only to give it to Big Pharma to end-up with a massive opioid crisis.
In other states, bureaucrats fine you for walking in a park, after sunset.
In another state, wearing a bulletproof vest while committing or attempting to commit murder is an offense 
In France, bureaucrats regulate how to use Photoshop.
...
And I can go on forever with dumb and dumber laws imposed on us by strangers who know nothing about our lives.

So there is nothing absurd in demanding decency and common sense when it comes to regulations, in demanding respect for our freedoms.
There is nothing absurd in fighting against the abuse of power and the arrogance of strangers who believe they know better what is good or bad for us and coerce us to obey their beliefs.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on September 28, 2017, 08:02

Quote from: topol on September 28, 2017, 07:40

I grew up in a communist country. This whole thing straightforward reminds me of what the commies did to art and portrayal of people in art and commerce. It was the proletariat, the "workers paradise" so on almost all depiction, especially public statues and painting, they hand to be these chunky, robust characters with cubic heads and large thick hands, women having the same large thick hands as men. Sad to see the total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration in western ppl, probably coming from near zero history education, not noticing what their culture is sliding into ever more rapidly. It will be sad, bleak and painful, believe me.

Despite this incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history, I still don't see why it is so hard recognize the severe threat when you such ideologies rapidly invading every field of life, flooding everything with dictates. When you see that either push back as hard as you can, or if you can't.... run!

I'll have what you're smoking!

12yaerold's copy paste answer.  "Am I cool yet? Am I cool yet?" This isn't youtube.

I'll have you know, I typed that all out myself; thank you very much. I'm just curious how Getty Images no longer accepting retouched body shapes, and people's comments on the situation... is down to 'total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration', 'near zero history education' and an 'incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history'? That's maybe a little bit extreme! 

Not retouching already thin women to look skeletal is a stranglehold on people's rights in a nanny state dictatorship which will inevitably lead to a communist dystopia...the mental gymnastics in this thread are hilarious.

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 28, 2017, 10:09

Not retouching already thin women to look skeletal is a stranglehold on people's rights in a nanny state dictatorship which will inevitably lead to a communist dystopia...the mental gymnastics in this thread are hilarious.

Why do you make it only about women and thinning?

Justin Bieber wants his penis and hands enlarged, not thinned!
Same goes for women wanting their breasts enhanced. Again, it is much better to use Photoshop, than a scalpel to achieve such wishes.

The law is applicable to all, not only to what fits your ideological agenda.
Let people do it, even if you arrogantly think you know better what is good for them!

If you knew the history of what's going on in modeling, especially in the epicenter of the fashion industry, Paris, you'd understand why the law was passed.

This law was passed in 2015 and also bans extremely thin models.

And instead of being obsessed with women having huge breasts, by either photoshop or surgery, why has it not occurred to you that perhaps society should accept that women have different breast sizes?


Edited to correct some inaccuracies. I didn't realize one law covered both topics and was passed two years ago.

https://petapixel.com/2015/12/22/france-bans-too-thin-fashion-models-demands-that-photoshopping-be-labeled/