‘Perfect’ Fashion Models Get Computer-Assisted Allure

NEW YORK —  The model posed on a mountaintop in the original photograph. But after a graphics artist spent an hour with her image on the computer screen, she was standing on the beach, her laugh lines erased, her waist slimmer and her hair a shade lighter.

“We can do almost anything with the computers from hiding a pimple to changing the color of a shirt or putting sleeves on it,” said Carol Knobloch, a quality-control manager with Conde Nast Publications, which publishes Vogue, Glamour and Allure.

Today, diet, exercise and makeup are not the only tools used by the fashion industry to create the “perfect” woman. More and more, editors are relying on computer-altered photographs to fill the pages of top fashion publications.

The changes--some subtle, some dramatic--are often undetectable by the human eye. And that is the problem, say critics who worry about what effect the photos, sometimes more fantasy than reality, have on unsuspecting readers.

Touching up pictures to make models look better, especially by air brushing, is not a new practice. But over the last few years, computers have transformed the process, making it easier and cheaper.

“What once took days or even weeks can now take less than an hour,” said Nathan Lang, a computer graphics designer at Duggal, a photograph-developing company that frequently works for the top fashion magazines.

“It is not that you couldn’t make the changes before, but you wouldn’t,” he said. “It was too expensive and took too much time. Now it’s cheap and getting cheaper.” Lang said Duggal charges $150 to $400 an hour for high-tech touch ups.

Lang uses a Macintosh computer and software programs like Quark Express and Adobe Photo Shop, items that can be bought over the counter in retail stores, to do most of his work.

As the technology improves and prices fall, magazines are increasingly turning to computers, especially when photo shoots go wrong.

“When photos aren’t any good, the computers are used to fix them,” said Serge Lazarev, the computer systems director for Elle. Elle’s editors once used computer graphics to hide a model’s exposed breast in a bathing suit shot, he said.

Considering that a top model’s daily fee runs between $12,500 and $25,000, according to Ford Modeling Agency, the computer saved the magazine thousands of dollars in re-shooting costs, Lazarev said.

Some editors have also been taking advantage of the new technology to have some fun.

Since it began publishing two years ago, Allure magazine has run a monthly feature using computer-altered photos. In the April issue, computers dressed the designer Calvin Klein, Vice President Al Gore and the actress Candice Bergen in grunge wear, the torn and tattered look popular with young adults.

In another issue, computers created Madonna’s and Michael Jackson’s baby from photos of the pop superstars, said Jeffrey Slonim, a contributing editor.

But critics say the technology can also be dangerous, especially when the enhanced photos pass as reality instead of art.

It’s an old story gone high-tech, said Meg Hagarth, director of Media Watch, a Toronto-based organization that monitors the media’s portrayal of women.

“For years, the fashion industry has been promoting a view of women that is totally unobtainable for most,” she said. “Now it’s worse. I don’t know if what they are doing is unethical but it is certainly unfair. But the benefit to the magazines is huge. They make a lot of money out of the insecurities of women.”

Most women, especially young women, do not understand that the pictures they are looking at are computer-enhanced fantasy, said Elly Ryder, assistant executive director for the American Anorexia and Bulimia Assn.

“They think they can’t be happy unless they look like these models, which is impossible,” she said. “Some use frightening, drastic means to look like the pictures, and they just don’t understand why it doesn’t work.”

Some editors, like Mirabella’s Grace Mirabella, Vogue’s former top editor who founded her own publication in 1989, say they are trying to buck the industry norm.

Adam Smith, Mirabella’s senior associate art director, said the magazine tries to portray women honestly, but concedes the magazine still retouches some photos.

“Decisions are made on a picture-by-picture basis,” he said. “But we really put an emphasis on real women, and that means showing women with their flaws.”

Despite concerns about any misuse of the technology, most in the fashion business feel computer graphics will be increasingly popular, especially if it sells magazines.

“What are we going to be doing in the next five to 10 years?” Lazarev asked. “Maybe models are going to be copyrighting their body parts. I have to wonder what’s next.”