Of course the expected “Oh, she’s not really perfect” comments surfaced with some even calling it a con job to touch up photos of celebs to make them look good in the pages of magazines.
Like, duh. Last time I looked at the calendar, this wasn’t 1992, people! Of course celebrity photos are touched up!
And really, magazine photo spreads, and especially covers, are not about real life lah. It’s about “selling” that celeb, and ultimately the magazine itself.
In the first place, photoshoots take a lot of work in order to produce that perfect 4-5 shots. Makeup alone takes hours, and then hundreds of snaps are taken in each baju with the celeb lentik-ing her body in all sorts of different positions.
If it were about giving the readers something real, photoshoots would be done at storerooms with a disposable camera, which will then last about 20mins.
And please, people EXPECT the celebs to be perfect on magazine covers, especially on the more prestigious titles.
I remember many occasions when I was still editing FHM, and the designer FAILED to sufficiently touch up cover shots, the backlash that I got was not funny at all. “Eh, how come I can see a pimple on her armpit ah?” “Eh, at least cover lah the scars.” “You think hairy arms on women are sexy is it?”
And even the celebs expect the editors and designers to make them 10 times more gorgeous than they really are. “I went to Cherating and got this ugly tan, can you just smoothen out my skin tone later? Thanks darling,” the celebs would say.
So really, no one wants to see cellulite on celebs. Unless, of course, that sort of thing turns you on…