We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
CAN YOU SPOT the difference?
Well, here’s the answers. To start with, the lingerie model’s neck and arms have been slimmed down, under her eyes have been smoothed and lightened and her teeth and eyes have been whitened. But that’s not all. Her waist has been pulled in, her hands and underarms have been “tidied’ and her legs thinned. Stray hairs have been removed and skin-tone changed, smoothed and brightened.
To top it off, the beauty’s cleavage was also enhanced.
The images were released by Debenhams to highlight the practice of airbrushing in lingerie photography. The retailer said it was breaking ranks with other high street stores by using untouched images to encourage positive body image.
“The use of some digital photography techniques to create unrealistic body shapes and flawless skin can make men and women feel more insecure about their natural looks and size,” the company said in a statement.
“We want to help customers feel confident about their figures without bombarding them with unattainable body images,” continued Sharon Webb, the Head of Lingerie buying and design.
“As well as being a positive from a moral point of view, it ticks the economic boxes as well. Millions of pounds a year are spent by organisations retouching perfectly good images.
As a rule we only airbrush minor things like pigmentation or stray hair and rely on the natural beauty of models to make our product look great.
“The model is naturally gorgeous and doesn’t need any retouching.”
What do you think? Should all shops follow suit and stop photoshopping images?
I don’t know why they would anyway. Sure the girl’s a stunner!
The original photo is more attractive anyway
I prefer real women.
And people ask why young kids have issues about their weight?? Good on Debenhams, really is about time there was a reality check. The model is gorgeous
Ask us if it matters after 8 pints.
About time……
Not really. Way I see it is now they will pick super skinny models forcing them to have “perfect” body. Model industry just go even more judgemental with this
Great move and hopefully more will follow. When you see the photo’s side by side like that you can really see the wrongness in the touched up photo; the ratios are all off, she doesn’t actually look human.
This is a good move. As a fashion photographer I only ever apply minimal retouching to my images to remove stray hairs over the eyes, dodgy stuff from the background and things like that. Never do I alter the models shape, size or features because then you’re not representing reality if you do. I’ve actually lost business because I refuse to materially alter images and for that reason I am glad that a major retailer is finally taking a stand against impossibly perfect images.
Fair play Pat… is there any more acceptance of this stance in your field than previously?
This is fabliss, well done debenhams! About time someone took a bite out of the airbrush brigade. Personally I feel it’s well over due, reform in this practice….. Hopefully this will have a knock on effect on the mags, especially teen ones for both butts boys and girls
Oops boys and girls, haha. Autopsy stupid Swype keys….. o_O
Wish we could air brush the weather you know blue up the grey skies bit of sun
Well done, Debenham’s. Now let’s see women with more realistic figures. We’re not all a size 10, or even a size 16. And while you’re at it, don’t make me special order larger sizes from your online store. Put them on the racks in the store so I can shop like everyone else instead of hiding behind my monitor and hoping the garment fits when it arrives.
Define more realistic?
Do you mean how healthy, physically active humans are biologically supposed to look… Or what they look like as a result of neglect, self indulgence and lack of respect for their bodies?
Did you ever consider that this issue you have might not be entirely one sided with retailers, fashion designers, lifestyle companies, the media and publishing to blame… That you might bear at least partial personal responsibility for the situation at hand?
Andrew,
The way I read that lady’s comment was not to place blame on the retailer for her body shape but to ask for more size choice.
How she chooses to live her live is none of our business. Your comment was WAY off topic FYI.
Yes, Lisa, thank you. That was the meaning. More choice.
By not offering choices in store, it makes larger people (both men and women) feel shame and embarrassment, which is not a positive way to help people with weight issue. A person’s weight (men and women) are not always down to poor lifestyle choices. There are valid medical reasons for weight gain.
But that’s not the issue. The issue is that everyone deserves to be clothed, regardless of size, and if a shop offers larger sizes, they should be offered in the store, not secreted away on their website, or by forcing buyers to seek a shop assistant to order within the store.
I remember when Evans was the go-to place for larger ladies. Once they put Dorothy Perkins into Evans stores to share space, Evans sales went down. Nowadays, it’s Oxendales, which goes back to mail order only for larger clothes. Crazy.
Andrew, I worked in retail for 25 years. I know how the game is played. Also, my cousin dates a major Hollywood designer so I’m very familiar with that end of the game too.
Have YOU considered that part of the problem is down to narrow minded people who continually find ways to blame everyone else for social issues like this? It’s not always down to what you say . . . “neglect, self indulgence and lack of respect for their bodies.” You might want to do some research there.
Rather than being self centered and prejudice, turn your statement around. Are you neglecting the larger picture here? Are you not respecting people for who they are but what they look like? Are you trying to place the blame elsewhere so that you can feel better about yourself? Are you judging with what they look like rather than who they are?
I could say you’re a self-centered, egotistical, jerk. But I respect your opinion. I just recommend you understand the topic before making accusations.
Andrew, not to pile on but your comment is pretty ignorant. Not all overweight people are that way due to neglect, self-indulgent and ‘lack of respect’ as you put it. In fact, you could nearly call that my lifestyle and I’m borderline underweight. You cannot discount genetics, metabolism, health conditions, social situation, etc when discussing people’s weight, but then it’s really not your place to do so anyway.
It’s not about looks in the slightest… Your body, is the only thing you actually own. People will question the values of someone who shows such disregard for the thing that allows them to continue to exist.
As is said…. Dis-moi ce que tu manges, je te dirai ce que tu es or in English… you are what you eat.
I am a size six in the waist. I eat lots of fatty foods and dont exercise. I find it almost impossible to find clothes to fit me. I have to shop high end in dublin or order online. There should be size choice i totally agree. Most shops ya go to cater for 8-10, 10-12 or 12-14 and thats it.. Andrew clearly has nothing else to do but weights and gym judging by his photo….
That’s a very ignorant belief, Andrew. I’ll give you an example why –
Did you know that one of the leading medical diseases in women is poly cystic ovarian syndrome? Did you know that ovary hormones control how a woman carries weight? And determines how easy or difficult it is for her to shed excess weight? How those hormones work is they act as if they’re preparing the woman’s body to carry a child, preserving energy stores in fat cells. The irony is most women with PCOS can’t have children because the cysts contain the eggs which can’t be released and usually die in the cyst. But the hormones are still active and the weight stays on. And it takes an incredible amount of exercise and food restriction to drop even a few pounds.
Those hormones also control another disease called endometriosis, which essentially when uterine tissue grows outside the uterus. It’s horribly painful and debilitating, as is PCOS. Between what PCOS does to the body and the significant pain that can cripple a woman for days, there’s little chance of that big workout from above.
So it’s not all about what you eat, or how much. These conditions aren’t the only ones. People on lifesaving medications often also carry excess weight. And women aren’t the only ones with hormone issues. Men get them too.
Do some research so you don’t come off sounding like you’re talking about things you know nothing about.
<<< Degree in metabolic biochemistry
You can sit home and google all the reasons it ain't yo fault but energy can neither be created or destroyed… If you don't eat it it can't appear on your thighs regardless of an individual's hormonal profile.
<<<25 year survivor of PCOS and endometriosis
So, what you're saying is you promote anorexia and bulimia for a woman to achieve what YOU perceive is body perfection?
FWIW, having a wider choice in sizes in the stores isn't just for overweight people. What about those surgically enhanced bustlines some women get to attract ignorant men? Do you think they buy off the rack for their, umm, racks? They have to buy somewhere or have their clothes tailored. If the clothes aren't available in the shops, they have to buy online or have their clothes made to fit.
You're kind of a hypocrite, considering your size. You can tell me you wear a small or medium. Or in your mind, do you think only women need to work on their figure?
Andrew, don’t back track. You responded with that ‘self-iindulgence’ spiel in response to a comment about a woman asking for models to represent more common proportions.
You weirdo, she doesnt say she has an issue with her weight, she merely states that she would like to be able to shop for her size. If we were made by computers then we would be uniform sizes but we’re not. What created your shape Andrew??
My sister in law has a degree in English and is a teacher.. she completely lacks empathy, compassion and common sense, cant spell either!
Your argument is invalid….
Andrew, you may have a degree but a little bit of common sense goes a long way.
Like Lisa, I’m overweight. It’d be nice to be able to buy clothes that fit me in shops, rather than having to rely on the internet and hoping it fits. My apologies for having PCOS and battling (hopefully beating) an eating disorder. Also, my apologies for breaking my ankle when I tried to lose weight.
Some people annoy me.
There are some times when the thumbs go the way they should.
Andrew, someone can LOOK entirely healthy as a weights lover too and not be.
Being underweight is just as dangerous as being overweight.
But this is about neither situation anyway – it’s about an industry that is actively influencing people to aspire to their definition of “beautiful”.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. People won’t change until they want to. All I do is refuse to pander to the delusion.
The denial is evident… 30% of society is overweight, a further 30% is obese. If you can’t fit into clothes in a store, if you need an extended seat belt on a plane. The world is designed for at least the 90th percentile, excluding the 5% smallest and 5% largest. You’re not ‘a larger lady’ or ‘a tad overweight’ your category 3/4 morbidly obese
Andrew,
Your continued and purposeful argumentativeness is not appealing. Do some research. Your figures, and your math, are way off.
By your criteria, you would be obese too if you’re really packing around all that weight in your picture. Sounds to me like you’re being a hypocrite.
Degree or not, you’re proof positive that just because someone has gone to college it doesn’t make them an expert.
Just in today’s news –
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2085226/PLUS-Model-Magazines-Katya-Zharkova-cover-highlights-body-image-fashion-industry.html
I’m done with you.
Ughhhhuh… Wow Awkward…. Wasn’t really trying to be appealing to… That is to say I’m not quite attracted to that end of the spectrum
Just trying to offer some perspective on the situation at hand.
The arms on the right image are alien looking.
Debenhams are right but in the real world there are photographs which do need slight retouching..As a technique it should be used sparingly. I took a lovely shot of a wedding recently where the bride and groom were walking into the hotel lobby and a complete random stranger walks in between them in the back ground…Those are the sort of things that photoshop is essential for. I see models now so painfully thin that it really sends the wrong message to young vunerable women that this ultra slim image is what they should be aiming for and I suppose anorexia is the end result.
There’s a massive difference between editing a randomer out of a background shot and thinning out a model. I know what you’re arguing but the situations are totally different, nobody is calling for using Photoshop on an image to be banned. They’re just pledging not to use it to propogate unrealistic body images in advertising.
My real name is Brad Pitt, and I’m sick of being so airbrushed no one knows me from my films and ads! No more i say…..
I think the fatter one looks better…………………………………………
Fatter one?? Seriously??
Don’t take the bait Siobhan!
Resist Siobhan …resist !
I thought the overdoing of the full stops would have hinted my sarcas……. i was joking ladies. Silly pictures.
Not get what I was getting at? Seriously???????????????
I got it – it just wasn’t funny.
They legally shouldn’t be allowed to retouch photos. Even a disclaimer wouldn’t be good enough.
I hate having to go to Debenhams, even though its only to the Elizabeth Arden counter. What they do to baby manikins is a disgrace. Dressing 1′s for 4/5yr olds in lingerie. Bra’s and G-strings like… I have seen them mentioned in surveys for this. My fella brought it up with a member of their staff on 1 occasion and to no avail. They still have this sort of thing on display.. How many others think this is just wrong ??!!
I’d love to know how ppl are putting thumbs down to this comment. And their reason for thinking dressing babies in thongs and bra’s is OK ???
So you’re saying they have child size manikins in Debenhams dressed in thongs and other lingerie, find that hard to believe, is no one complaining?
Its the truth. I saw them and was embarrassed when my fella flipped. Im not the sort for confrontation. But to be fair he made a very good point. And believe it or not, you can buy bra’s and thongs for 5yr olds and up.. disgrace!
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2309590/Probe-over-shops-selling-sexy-kiddie-bras.html
This is link to piece done by the Sun. This is the sort of stuff on kiddie manikins in debenhams.
Hannah, I completely misinterpreted your comment when I first read it. I thought you were implying they were using child-size mannequins for adult lingerie. But yes I agree with you.
Hi there, my name is Paul and i am Hannah’s partner. This is completely TURE, i was outraged when i seen this as i think this is a disgrace and as a man walking into the shop i have to say this made me feel quite uncomfortable.
And as for the 9 people who have disliked Hannah’s comment so far…. Pedophiles!!!!!!!!
Hannah – I don’t know about the way they’ve covered the story in that link (badly!!) but just in terms of allowing kids to be kids – it’s a joke.
I mean, who is this aimed at?! What kind of parent?!
They really did not need to photoshop her
Due to this uncontrolled airbrushing there are girls and boys starving outhere to reach impossible standards. I agree on adjusting colours, smoothing skin, removing little flaws, but sometimes I saw photos so retouched as the result was another person like. At that point, choose another model…
This is great news. Fair play to Debanhams. We need propre role models for women
One on the left is way hotter, 10 times out of 10.
Yep, she’s the only one worth a squeeze.
Girl on the right is perfect the airbrushed left one looks odd, arms too thin and the head too big – she’s lovely as she is
but the left photo is unbrushed….
*facepalm*
#FAIL
Way better on the right :-) go red thumb brigade……… Now
This level of altering a photo is common – just look at all the perfect photos on the glosy mags – and people buy the mags – and buy the idea behind the image .
Many photos do need some adjustment – and even with film – there was always a a level of adjustment in the darkrooom , contrast , darkening areas etc – but with digital – it can go haywire – . I dont agree with it – but for small money one can buy programmes that can adjust just about anything !! eg eyes made bigger , lips fuller – or any thing you want – so in the end the model only serves as a rough draft to the end product – but she has almost certainly signed a model release form – so photogepaher can do what he or she likes – and the public swallow it .
Ansel Adams [ US landscape photographer - now gone ] summed it up well – the negative / digital file is the score and the Print / final image is the performance – but one should never deviate too far from the original feeling that made one take a photo .
Oh aren’t they so good that they changed there minds on something they’ve been doing for years… They shouldn’t have done it in the first place, now it just seems like a bandwagon fad big brands are doing to seem all morally good.
Lads, I appreciate that ye think the untouched photo looks better, and the woman more attractive, but that’s not the point.
Would you all get a grip! This is nothing but a cheap publicity stunt for….. Debenhams.
Wait ’til she gets home, I told her not to pose for photos EVER AGAIN.
WHAT’S A GUY TO DO WITH A GIRLFRIEND WHO WON’T DO AS SHE’S ASKED?
I think they should be allowed airbrush if they want to it’s not like people don’t know that pictures are airbrushed.
It doesn’t abdicate parental responsibility to teach children about good body image, healthy eating and exercise.
People invariably try to live up to what they see around them- television and movie stars, models Etc, and no one can live up to a heavily airbrushed model like that, not even the model!
So you have to legislate for every piece of advertising that can be shown just in case it influences people?
That is kind of the point of advertising.
To feel inferior and to look up to something unachievable ? To make it as if their product can only be worm by semi humanoids with long thin necks arms unable to lift a fork to the mouth and legs that wouldn’t carry you to the fridge? Best of luck to them if that’s there aim?
*their
Adam, there are laws around advertising – large swathes of which are about presenting something real. Usually, that takes the form of a disclaimer or something that should be read (in tiny writing) when you see an asterix.
Kids and teenagers generally don’t read what’s behind the asterix, and as they say; a picture speaks a thousand words.
The untouched version is the hottest.
Good news. The model looks way better untouched up anyway.
Hot twins
Love to do twins(girl twins of course)
Which twin has the Toni? [ thats a question for oldies only, airbrushed or not :-)
Having taking the ‘Pepsi challenge’ with both these photos and a box of kleenex I can say that picture one is better
*taken the ….. sorry, my hand is still a bit shakey
Well done to debenhams. Lets hope the ball keeps rolling
Well done Debenhams!!!
have your say