Babies Being Airbrushed for Magazines

How many of you love seeing those cover models? I know several love getting the magazines just to see who is on the front cover, some like to style after the models and the others wish to look like themNow how many of you are sickened at the fact that most of them are airbrushed in one form or another?

IMG: Elizabeth Ferree

I don’t know about you but I’d like to see the pictures as is, without all the touch-ups.

It has recently come out that magazines actually airbrush babies. Yes, that’s right, not even babies can have a bit of extra weight on them. You thought teens had it bad.  To be honest I’ve never found anything wrong with a baby with rolls, in fact I find them cute to a degree. How can you deny one crawling around on the floor and think they look ugly? Why cut out the fat? There is a time where many babies get a little chubby before they turn 2 and then they go right back to thinning out. But to actually airbrush it away like it never happened, that’s a bit strange to me.

According to Telegraph this is something they are really looking into and it sounds like it may be coming to an end soon. It seems that this has been a practice they’ve been doing for a while, however not many of us knew about it. Telegraph goes on to state the following:

Practical Parenting and Pregnancy, a monthly magazine, has said it has retouched photographs of babies to “put them across in the best light”.

The practice came to light in a BBC documentary, My Supermodel Baby. In footage of a photo shoot for the magazine, the casting director explained how the photograph of baby model Hadley Corbett, five months, was airbrushed: “We lightened his eyes and his general skin tone, smoothed out any blotches and the creases on his arms,” he said. “But we want it to look natural.”

Daniella Delaney, the editor of the magazine which sells nearly 40,000 copies, told The Sunday Telegraph that photographs were airbrushed but that it was kept to a minimum.

“We’ll remove things and even-up skin tone, that sort of thing. But very little is done, in fact, because obviously babies are beautiful the way they are and that is what we went to get across.”

You know I can totally get taking the red out of an eye, boogers out of the nose and same with the drool hanging from a baby’s chin. But I don’t agree with taking away the rolls. What baby is that perfect? For those that are, why continue the trend that so many hear about for Hollywood, you know the whole we have to be a size 0 or 1.

Ms. Delaney never did comment on whether or not her magazine has ever airbrushed a baby for the folds or rolls. But she did admit to airbrushing away the other things like spit, etc. What do you think of airbrushing babies? Should this continue or should it be stopped? Read the rest of the article on airbrushing babies here.