Playing With Makeup

Retouching Backlash in UK Cosmetic Advertising

Posted by:

Retouching Backlash in UK Cosmetic Advertising

Much of the imagery seen in cosmetic advertising online and in magazines rely heavily on retouching (Photoshop). This sets the consumer’s expectations to an unreachable level and triggers all kinds of self esteem and image dysmorphia issues..  Well, it seems that our pals in the UK have put their foot down and are crying foul.
A major ruling was released on Wednesday in London.  Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) cited L’Oreal for their Revitalift Repair 10 magazine advertisement featuring actress Rachel Weisz. The ASA stated that it “misleadingly exaggerated the performance of the product,” and stipulated that the “ad must not appear again in its current form”.

The ASA continued by saying the ad made misleading claims about the product’s ability to make skin look smoother and the complexion more even. The committee believes Weisz’s image had “been altered in a way that substantially changed her complexion to make it appear smoother and more even.”  The ASA also cautioned L’Oréal on continuing to use postproduction techniques (retouching) that could misrepresent a product’s claims.

L’Oréal’s response to the ASA was that they had “sought to represent Weisz as favorably as possible”, shooting her with a lot of light, giving the image a soft focus and low resolution.   The studio that produced the image also provided the ASA with details of what postproduction techniques (retouching) had been used because “they wished to ensure that they were compliant with the [ASA’s] code”.

A spokesperson for L’Oréal said: “We are disappointed to learn that the ASA has adjudicated against our press advertisement for Revitalift Repair 10. We believe that the image in the advertisement is a true representation of Rachel Weisz. The product claims are based on extensive scientific research which proved that the product improves 10 different signs of skin aging. We therefore do not believe that the ad exaggerates the effect that can be achieved using this product.”

So, how do you feel about the excessive use of image altering/retouching in cosmetic advertising?

 

©2012 Playing With Makeup - Makeup Art + Design Enterprises



About the Author:

Kevin James (KJ) Bennett - The Tim Gunn of the cosmetic world ...or the MacGyver. IATSE Journeyman Makeup Artist - Emmy Award Winner - International Beauty Expert.

Discussion

  1. Ruthless  April 3, 2012

    I say good on them for putting their foot down. It’s one thing to have flawlessness in theatre and film, those are fantasy and art and are marketed as such. It’s another thing to present flawlessness when you are trying to sell a product to someone. Cosmetic advertising standards are lax enough as it is-for instance you cannot advertise something as “skin perfecting” when it doesn’t do that but change the name of the product to “Skin perfecting lotion” and all of a sudden it’s fine. Rachel is gorgeous, and doesn’t really need retouching.

    (reply)

Add a Comment