Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!
Even if a photo is not retouched with an airbrush, I have said for years that if you took an ordinary woman and had a professional hairstylist, professional make up artist, professional wardrobe consultant and so on do her up and then had a professional photographer take 2 dozen rolls of pics of her, you could find one or two that made her look fabulous -- you know?
(And that is not even going into how they tape up the boobs so she can go braless and the 2 dozen safety pins shaping the jacket that doesn't actually fit her.)
On a serious note: totally predictable... technology can make quite some changes... for an example... who would have thought that the scene in Matrix reloaded when Neo fights the thousand agent smiths is completely computer generated... yeah... it looks kind of fake sometimes, because it is!
This shows an extreme example of how far an image can be taken
I've known women who have absolutely perfect skin; almost perfectly smooth, an even tone throughout, no blemishes, no acne or blackheads, and no large pores. This is without makeup, too.
The subject of the airbrushing looks older - I'd guess her early 30s. (Here's another example, with a woman that is pretty but definitely in her mid-to-late 30s.) She looks good, witthout the airbrushing and photoshopping, but she has the wrinkles and bumps that come with age. Younger women have fewer "imperfections." This partially explains the appeal of teenage high fashion supermodels.
The airbrushing cleaned up a woman that would otherwise be a 7.5 or 8 on the metric scale of superficial attractiveness. What about a 9 or 10; someone in the upper 0.5 percentile of hotness?