Catherine Zeta-Jones & Sarah Jessica Parker are in Photoshop hell

allure

Ugh. I just saw the two May covers for Vogue Magazine and Allure (apologies for the Ebay logos, they’re the best images I could find), and now I’m totally pissed off. What in the Photoshop hell is happening? First, let’s take Catherine Zeta-Jones for Allure. I think highly of Catherine’s beauty – if she’s had work done, it’s good work that you can’t detect. She looks fabulous – although she doesn’t look 40 years old, which she allegedly is. So, if you’re a beauty magazine and you get Catherine for your cover, wouldn’t you want to do a solid, and not Photoshop two decades off of her face? Yes, she has gorgeous skin. But her skin does not look like this! It’s like they used a photo of her from The Mask of Zorro.

vogue

Next up, Sarah Jessica Parker’s cover shot (by Mario Testino) for the May issue of Vogue. Let me say this – I’m so f-cking sick of SJP’s Vogue appearances. I guess they keep putting her on because Carrie Bradshaw works for Vogue? But surely Vogue doesn’t need the cross-promotion. SJP really doesn’t bring anything to the Vogue brand. Especially considering she’s barely recognizable on the cover. What kind of soft-focus sh-t is this? Is the same sh-t that Barbara Walters gets for live television? What was Testino thinking? He usually does glossy, not soft-focus matte. I guess Anna Wintour didn’t want to see SJP’s face do “glossy”.

Oh, and if this wasn’t bad enough, sources told Page Six that SJP is in a bikini at some point in the photo shoot. Ugh. By the way, compare and contrast SJP’s actual face with her Vogue face:

Sarah Jessica Parker Attends Bravo's Work of Art: The Next Great Artist

voguecloseup

Covers courtesy of The Fashion Spot’s Forums.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

62 Responses to “Catherine Zeta-Jones & Sarah Jessica Parker are in Photoshop hell”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bite me says:

    damn i love it, when you are super bitchy Kaiser, love.it.

  2. Obvious says:

    oh god my retinas! SJP is like Madge and Pam. Special lighting to make them bearable

  3. Squirrel says:

    Compared to these pictures the Jessica Simpson one in the other post is at least more honest. She’s made up too (no matter what the magazine claims) but not completely photoshopped off this planet!

    Vogue managed to neutralise SJP’s nose, thicken the eyebrows, erase all lines, smoothe the face to baby-bottom state and then even felt the need resort to the fail-safe trick of choosing a pose with a tilted head (also always works for Shannon Doherty, whose tilted head makes the uneven eyes seem less crazy).

    As for Catherine Z-J, that works me up even more. The woman is absolutely gorgeous in real life and does not need any of this ridiculous photoshopping to reduce her to a robotic make-up ad from around 1985…

    Am really getting close to boycotting all the magazines which are only about advertising one way or another. Too few of them actually have interesting content left in them.

  4. canadianchick says:

    SJP is missing part of her jaw in the photo, wtf? If I were her I’d pose with hand behing her back, her veiny hands and forearms are pretty awful.

  5. Ursaline says:

    They definitely took some liberties with SJP’s nose. I wonder what she thinks of that.

  6. Green Is Good says:

    Who do these magazines think they’re fooling? Ridiculous.

  7. moi says:

    I love that Vogue Magazine and my small, dinky art department end up with the same quality of portrait shots.

  8. bellaluna says:

    CZJ is not 40 – it’s common knowledge she’s lied about her age and is closer to 50, if she’s not already there.

    No wonder we have teenage girls getting plastic surgery and starving themselves…to look like women who don’t even look like that to begin with. Look for the pix of Kimora Lee Simmons and compare how she looks in the ad for her new perfume and how she looks for real – they’re in a web article where she “cops to photoshop.” Well, no shit! She doesn’t even look like the same person in that perfume ad! Who did she think she was fooling? (I’m trying to find the side-by-side, but the photoshop pic is on D-Listed.)

  9. R2D2 says:

    I dont know why they would do that to CZJ, she is gorgeous. I never found SJP attractive in the least, i actually find her face annoying for some reason.
    I would think it would be insulting to them to such a P-shop job. Its like saying your natural face/body isnt good enough so we’ll make you into something better with this program.
    Luckily I dont buy these mags but they’re not fooling anyone, I think its more insulting than anything.

  10. Sigh. says:

    That Vogue cover has a Seventeen magazine feel. And that is not a compliment by any means.

    And her roots look crazy. What? Did the run outta Photochop money?

    Testino is either being edited/restircted in some way, or he is in a slump. I think he’s going for “simple” but it’s been reading “amateur.”

  11. meme says:

    my little pony is fugly. CZJ is NOT 50 and she is beautiful.

  12. bellaluna says:

    @ meme – She may not be 50, but she’s closer to 50 than she is to 40. And I never said she wasn’t beautiful. I think she’s one of the most beautiful women out there. But her lying about her age is pretty common knowledge.

  13. Toe says:

    Thanks God SJP has some beautiful hair to cover her face. If she had pixie hair, she would definitely be confused for a man.

  14. RobN says:

    Geebus, I’m getting sick of the CZJ’s is closer to 50 crap. She was an actress all the way back to her early teens. Two seconds worth of research and you can trace her career for almost 30 years. Unless she was a 20 year old playing a 10 year old in local theatre productions, she’s 40. Birth records are public. With all the discussion about her age, you don’t think that some reporter would have popped down to the local registrar where she was born and checked? She looks great, soft focus or not.

  15. N says:

    I do not buy these magazines because of the way they portray women – and I mean I have ZERO subscriptions to any of these fashion magazines. The only way we are going to change the way they portray women is to stop giving them our money – it is the only way to produce a change because they pay attention to their bottom line. If you are as offended by their refusal to portray women in a realistic manner, show them!

    ps: If CZJ is closer to 50, that just makes her even more beautiful. I’m 30 and I wish I looked like her whether she is 40 or 50!

  16. lola lola says:

    God forbid some women actually look their age. Vogue & Allure won’t let it happen as long as photoshop is around!

  17. N says:

    @ bite me: I must admit, I love it when Kaiser is all riled up too!

  18. Kaiser says:

    bite me & N – thanks! The Vogue one really pissed me off. SJP has nothing to say, so what’s the point of having her on the cover if you’re going to Photoshop her into oblivion?

    I really do think Allure used an older photo of CZJ too.

  19. N says:

    It’s the injustice aspect that creates such an “oh no you did NOT just do/say/show that” because we are, as women, measured by the standards that these women set. Since I’m not willing to spend the time nor the money to look like these women, it makes me irate and it makes me feel like they are traitors to the female gender for not saying “um, no, you will not photoshop me or I will not appear on your cover.” Unfortunately, the men who see these covers and photographs of these women measure the rest of us by these standards too (so I really love when the pictures of the celebs without make up come out and I can say “wow, look at this one” to my husband). Does that make me evil?

  20. meme says:

    @bellaluna – nooooooooooooooo i didn’t think you said CZJ wasn’t beeyoutiful. i think she’s around 45 right smack in the middle. and she’ll always look youthful standing next to grandpa.

  21. Maritza says:

    I wonder why SJP hasn’t gotten her bumpy nose fixed, she would definitely look much better. At least she got rid of her mole, that really made her look like a witch.

  22. K says:

    What’s up with the Joker mouth on CZJ?

  23. Nicky says:

    They have even photoshop SJP arms!!! Wow. Plumped it actually no veins…

  24. Huma says:

    Gross. I’d never buy any magazine with a cover girl like THAT on it.

    Although I don’t really buy magazines anymore…I just get all my gossip here and at Dlisted. 😛

  25. Catherine says:

    Catherine is gorgeous.

  26. Wisteria says:

    I’m surprised men even find any women attractive anymore with all the photoshopped images pushed. Real humans must seem like mutants to them in comparison.

  27. whateva says:

    1) It w/b nice if someone’s stylist would clue them in that inner-lid-liner on small beady eyes just makes one look like a scheming-marsupial (at least in photos it does). It’s not flattering. All these “pros” and no one can see this & say it out loud?
    2) Why spend untold sums of money on these worshipped photographers if they still go in and ‘shop’ the whole shoot?? Its wa$teful! Its also not a very ‘green’ approach to operations.
    3) As for the imagery, barfing & cutting over this is nothing short of ret*rded.

  28. H says:

    RobN- well said, I never believed she was older than she said and then I googled it and saw a picture of her at like 13 and she looked like a 13 year old. Also there was one of her class pics so she got a whole class and the small town where she comes from to lie. I don’t think so. Give it a rest people.

  29. the other mel says:

    Am I the only one who’s first thought when looking at the CZJ cover what ‘what the HELL did they do to her back? It’s completely fucking missing!

  30. Guest says:

    Good God! That photo of SJP is rough as hell

  31. GatsbyGal says:

    Hahaha they photoshopped SLP’s nose smaller.

  32. lem says:

    i’m one of the few people that prefers SJP to CZJ. i’ve never found anything stunning about CZJ and i actually have respect for SJP for the fact that she hasn’t changed everything about her face to fit into hollywood (i was disappointed when she lost her mole). her unconventional look is what i find beautiful about her. that being said, it pisses me off that they photoshop her to oblivion because i think they take away from the fact that she is doing what most of hollywood won’t do– age naturally and gracefully.

    oh and her veiny hands/arms– she’s getting older and she’s naturally very thin. it happens. she’s not madge-like at all in my opinion (madge is freakish and obsessed with being young… not to mention delusional).

  33. TG says:

    Horse face or not, I have always thought SJP was attractive and will watch anything she is in, even the insufferable, Morgans movie. And I used to think CZJ was beautiful, but when I got an LCD TV a year ago, I realized her skin is terrible and she isn’t that beautiful. But, then I again I have never seen either one in person.

  34. jover says:

    I for one want to see actual high fashion models on the fashion mags. Do the egos of actresses need that much stroking that they must be on the cover of Vogue,etc – that’s what People and US are for. And why SJP yet again – SATC is not Shakespeare, give it a rest. Please Anne Wintour return Vogue to it origins. Does anybody remember when a Vogue cover was damn near a work of art?

  35. Tazina says:

    CZJ is actually still very beautiful, photoshopped or not. SJP – not so much nor has she ever been. The photo of SJP is ridiculous, only bears a fleeting resemblance to her. They’ve shaved her jaw, changed her eyes. reshaped her nose and given her the skin and arms of a 20 year old. It’s ridiculously unrealistic.

  36. KEN says:

    Not to mention all those things on her chest & arms.

  37. NJMDPS says:

    Ask yourself………why do we (you.me) care about this bullcrap. Obviously, these two have been altered. SAD. No news here.

  38. Fluffy Kitten Tail says:

    Everyone gets photoshopped to death these days, and it takes so much out of the idea of being beautiful, because with photoshop EVERYBODY can be beautiful.

    I hate photoshop, and wish that magazines would get the idea that readers might actually want to see people look a bit more natural.

  39. K says:

    I think that’s me! Oh wait….. no… but not SJP and not C Z-J. Love your commentary Kaiser!!!!

  40. Shawna says:

    @N – no, you are not evil! I am quite curious what I would look like if I had access to stylists, makeup and hair artists, Photoshop, etc. I bet I’d look f*ing out of this world, too!

  41. bizzy says:

    the sjp one actually annoys me more — whatever warm fuzzies i have for her are due to the fact that she’s *not* a particularly attractive woman, but she’s always groomed and styled to within an inch of her life, and has managed to become a fashion icon regardless of how much she doesn’t look like the standard, hollywood-smooth actress/model. photoshopping her like this just takes all the *point* out of her.

  42. TG says:

    @Jover – I bet you saw “The September Issue” too. It was very good and the creative aristic director or whatever she is with the red hair also thinks models should be on the front and not celebs. I agree with you too.

  43. Ana says:

    What is up with SJP’s hairline? Her face looks one dimensional!

    Has anyone noticed how the corners of some celebrities look like slits attached to fishooks? Like a joker! Catherine’s reminded me of this…is this a symptom of a face life or something?

  44. Ana says:

    The other mel- no you’re not the only one. I stared at it forever before I realized it was supposed to be her back and shoulder.

  45. the other mel says:

    I, too, have noticed that ‘joker smile’ on many celebrities, with the pulled up corners. Think Joan Rivers. Reba McIntyre has it too. Definitely CZJ. Maybe it IS a symptom of a lift, I hadn’t thought of that!

  46. Camille says:

    CZJ looks awful in that pic!

    And aww I think they made Jenny Anistons sister look pretty! Amazing!

  47. Crash2GO2 says:

    NO! I have a joker-smile, and it’s totally just me! Always has been – I wished for years I didn’t have it. Even now I don’t like it. That extra quarter of an inch….

    I don’t know about any of you, but I look at magazine photos and don’t even expect to see anything resembling reality anymore. It’s more like looking at cartoons than reading serious essays. I mean come on… we aren’t expecting our cartoon characters to talk about meaningful issues here, are we?

  48. EMV says:

    I loved the September Issue….great documentary….i loved the hilarious things said about sienna miller…

  49. Mairead says:

    On CZJ’s age, RobN is spot on. On Ancestry.co.uk (available to ancestry.com members with world accounts) they have published the England & Wales Birth Index 1916-2005. For 1969, the birth of a girl Catherine Zeta Jones is recorded in Swansea, with the mother’s maiden name listed as “Fair”.

    And from my research, although there’s a load of Catherine Jones for the 1960s, next-to-none record the mother’s maiden name as “Fair”. In fact she’s about the only Catherine Zeta listed.

    So I’m afraid the naysayers are proven wrong – she will indeed be 41 this year.

  50. Katie from Boston says:

    Hey, I must be out of it but didn’t SJP used to have a mole on her chin? Did they photoshop it out or did she have it removed?

  51. Sumodo1 says:

    SJP IS missing part of her forearm. But, CZJ face is ridiculous AND yellow! Stop all the madness, you retouching editors!

  52. the other mel says:

    @ Katie from Boston, SJP had her mole removed last year. That was the one thing they actually didn’t Photoshop into oblivion.

  53. Caro says:

    xD yes; its true. With Photoshop everybody can look great. But what the hell happened to SJP? For me she is photoshopped too much. Why have they done that? If they´re thinking that she is too “ugly” than they shouldn´t take her for the shoot.

  54. Nicky says:

    @lem I did say her arms were photoshoped as well! I totaly agree. She has been slim in a sustained way and it is normal to show more of a veiny image at this point. Every one seems to be going for the face but face it you get older and it is an overall thing happening. Agree wit you 100%

  55. cie says:

    #49 FYI you must not know that CZJ’s birth records could and would NOT name her as ZETA. CZJ added that ‘ZETA’ to her name later on in life,after her grandmother.

    And White House security discovered her actual DOB during a routine check in 1999. Her DOB is 1958.

    BTW CZJ is a heavy smoker and drinker and has ruddy damaged skin.

  56. Mairead says:

    @cie =, aka, No.55, my research can be verified by going to ancestry.co.uk. As a tool it isn’t perfect, but in the past few months they have ironed out a lot of the glitches.

    I do actually know my own job well enough to check multiple parameters. So I searched for Catherine Jones as well as Catherine Zeta as well as just female Joneses. I also searched for 1960, 1965 and 1970 which brackets the years before and after.

    My main search filters was the England and Wales Index of Births 1916-2005. AND the mother’s maiden name, which is the very unusual Fair. I also generally included the place of birth as Swansea. But in the interests of fairness I ran the search again with just Wales. In every variable I searched with Swansea as the place of birth, whilst retaining the mother’s maiden name in the search reference, the name Catherine Zeta Jones remained as the top most relevant search entry in most cases. Where it didn’t, the top 50 did not record the mother’s surname as “Fair”, so it was a different Catherine Jones.

    Here is the basic search with the name Catherine Jones, birth place as Swansea, mother as Catherine Fair but no birth date. And look who comes top:
    http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=ONSBirth84&rank=1&new=1&so=3&MSAV=0&msT=1&gss=ms_db&gsfn=catherine+&gsln=jones&msbpn=89700&msbpn_PInfo=8-|1652381|3257|5250|5365|89700|&_80008000=Catherine+Fair&dbOnly=_F00034D1|_F00034D1_x –
    If you aren’t a member, it might not show up the full details, but it confirms the birth registration in the latter part of 1969.
    The mother’s names for the next batch of Catherine Jones from 1950 onwards are: Jonesx2, Lewis, Brown, Sheehan, Morgan, Lewis, Morgan, Evan, Jonesx2, O’Connell, Thomas, Philips, Samuel, Cox, Thomas, Williams, Jones, Martinson,Hodges, Maguire, Finnis, Cornelius, Powell, Sparks, Ashton, Jenkins, John, Jones, Davies, Stevens, Walker, Sullivan, Davis, Warlow, Evans, Jones, Haycock, Godwin, Griffiths, Radnor, Rogers, Davey, Pritchard, Jones, Higgins, Seburn, Wittingham, Mundy and so on and so forth, (note that these are for CZJ’s purported birthplace of Swansea only)

    Please note that although the searchable database is obviously a digital record (and there are errors of course), you can click through and see a scanned image of the actual page births index page for that year. So it is nearly impossible to doctor it.

    On an even more basic search; just searching for children with the surname Jones born in Swansea to a mother with the surname Fair, no date entered – your top two entries are a Catherine Zeta Jones (1969) and Lyndon Paul Jones (1972).
    http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=ONSBirth84&rank=1&new=1&so=3&MSAV=0&msT=1&gss=ms_r_db&gsln=Jones&msbpn=89700&msbpn_PInfo=8-|1652381|3257|5250|5365|89700|&msbpn__ftp=Swansea,+Glamorgan,+Wales,+United+Kingdom&_80008000=Catherine+Fair&dbOnly=_F00034D1|_F00034D1_x

    My point – I can prove the findings of my research as well as my methodology – please post yours.

  57. cie says:

    OK thankyou but I just checked back here as I was deleting it from my faves, and saw your multi-paragraphed reply.

    I guess the only one who would care this much would be CZJ herself or her agent. All I know is that WH secret service discovered and know the truth. (google it for your link)

    I just don’t care THAT much.
    And I’m sorry you do.
    Will not be checking back but do have a good day.

  58. Yeah, right… says:

    #55. And I’ve got a bridge to sell you!
    No doubt that what you’re saying is the TRUTH, because BS gossip about a celebrity’s age on BS gossip websites is a very reliable source I guess… NOT! LOL

    Is there any real evidence about her “real” age? And I’m talking about REAL evidence, not a revealed blind item about a celebrity’s age in some BS gossip website!

    Why don’t you (and all the naysayers) try to stop believing every BS gossip you read online and think a little for yourself?

    FYI, ‘Zeta’ is really her birth name, so CZJ’s birth records COULD and WOULD name her as ‘Zeta’.

  59. british bitch says:

    A pair of Hollywood hags/fags (?) who can´t accept that they too have to age like everyone else. SJP looks like Red Rum in the 3:30 at Aintree, and CZJ has got a slapped arse for a face which wouldn´t look out of place on the cover of Good Housekeeping. As plain as plain can be. Be gone ye olde witches, and make room for the young, the beautiful and the talented – you´re washed up!

  60. british bitch says:

    And she´s actually 41, though definitely enhanced her skin is very tight and wrinkles across her cheeks when she smiles which doesn´t happen naturally.

  61. CB Rawks says:

    Well, I’m 41, and CZJ has been an actress since I was young, and I’m fairly certain she looked womanly when I was still a kid. I think I would guess 45.

  62. I will be away on business can they deliver to a P.O. Box?