Years ago, before Photoshopping was mainstream, I was friends with a guy who worked at a company that did the digital photo re-touching for many of the major fashion magazines. In his position, he handled all the photos of top models and actresses that we see every day in print media. The models in the photos were beautiful to begin with, but even more so after hair, makeup, and lighting effects were applied.

When my friend received the photos from his clients, it was his job to make the women even more beautiful with the magic of computer technology. In fact, it was his job to make them perfect. Perfect in the eyes of his clients - the ad agencies and magazine publishers.

He called it “impossibly perfect”, because he said what his clients asked for was a distortion from actual reality that even the most highly paid photographers, make up artists and models in the world, couldn’t achieve.

“Impossibly perfect”, in fact, could only be attained with computer software.  My friend recounted stories of “enhancing” the photos of well known names and recognizable faces to the point that he felt they looked more like fake barbie dolls than real women.

His job wasn’t just to digitally improve skin texture by minimizing pores and hiding a pimple, mole, or wrinkle here and there, it was, at times, an exercise in complete transformation which included reducing the size of noses, enlarging the size of boobs, increasing the appearance of cleavage, adding volume to lips, minimizing the circumference of models’ legs and arms, as well as altering eye, skin, and hair color, sometimes all on the same person!

Nowadays, we know this is commonplace, but hearing this back then in my early twenties, was as liberating an experience for me as learning the phrase “He’s Just Not That Into You” was for Miranda in that episode of Sex and the City (which inspired Greg Behrendt’s book). Remember how she pranced around, so happy to know she no longer had to analyze a guy’s behavior and look for ego-sparing reasons behind his actions, because it was more cut and dry than she ever imagined? 

At 22, learning about digital enhancement in print media allowed me to see that it was a waste of time to aspire to the kind of beauty I saw in those magazines, because even the models themselves, didn’t look that way. As my friend said, it was “impossible perfection”, and impossible meant unattainable, and unattainable was freeing, because it meant “don’t bother wasting your time trying to emulate it, and put your energies elsewhere!” 

Photoshopping is so mainstream today, that as adult women we are very savvy to it. But we can’t assume that just because our daughters were raised on computers, that they fully grasp the pervasiveness of image distortion in the media that they view every day. Many young girls are comparing themselves to these false images without ever realizing how imaginary they are .

At a time when eating disorders are on the rise in America, and teens are requesting rhinoplasty and boob jobs on their holiday wish lists, it may be just the right time to give them the gift of liberation from unrealistic beauty standards. So if you have young daughters, nieces, or sisters, show them this video which epitomizes “impossible perfection”! And for any of you looking for a good cause to donate to this holiday season, consider Dove’s Real Beauty Self Esteem Fund for girls.

For an interesting read, check out this New York Times interview from 2004, with the creator of Photoshop, John Knoll, in which he discusses the pros and cons of his photo doctoring technology.