When Buzzfeed posted a side-by-side comparison of Lady Gaga's behind-the-scenes, unedited Vogue video and the September issue's end result, we were shocked, indeed. Sure, the Marc Jacobs origami dress that Gaga wore distorts easily, and she is moving, and camera angles are always tricky. But take note that the original image and the one that Vogue published are two totally, totally different things.
But, if we may, is that so bad? Buzzfeed's Amy Odell wisely comments, "Sometimes I wonder why people bother with the original photography anymore when the end result is basically just a photo illustration." Perhaps, that's the point — Gaga (and Vogue, for that part) has never intended or purported to represent the real woman, but instead a fantasy-imbued, lush, and imaginative world of high fashion. So, if a cover girl does look like an illustration, is that untrue to the image?
The point is tricky — obviously, anyone who understands the dynamics of female bodies knows that Gaga is not a perfect hourglass shape, but on the other hand, the video so perfectly emphasizes that what we see as a finished product is so far removed from the original. But when Photoshop is used as a more artistic medium, is it as problematic as when it is used to "normalize" or perfect photos? (Buzzfeed)
Photo: Via Vogue