11 ms·
Because it's The New Yorker, there are no photos in the article. So if you're hoping to learn what "instagram face" actually looks like, you'll have to dig some
by ebg13 7y ago
Because it's The New Yorker, there are no photos in the article. So if you're hoping to learn what "instagram face" actually looks like, you'll have to dig somewhere else.
- ossworkerrights 7y agoI think they describe it pretty accurately. The idea here is that the face is fake and propped up and pretty identical between “top” users of instagram. That’s a bit worrying.
- klodolph 7y agoIt may be worrying but it’s not new. What we got from magazines in the 1980s and 1990s is found on Instagram and YouTube in 2020. Now, what’s fun is digging up an old magazine and making fun of it with some friends. You can occasionally find one on Imgur or the Internet Archive.
- illinx 7y agoIt doesn't seem like you read the article, which is about two specific technologies which did not exist in the 80's and 90's.
- campee 7y agoSo instead they just hired people who looked a specific way instead of using technology to make them all look a specific way.
- klodolph 7y agoI read the article. We obviously have very different interpretations, but I’m unsure why you think my comment doesn’t make sense. Could you clarify?
- dang 7y ago"Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."" https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ossworkerrights 7y agoI didn't comment on wether someone read the article. I stated that the description is accurate enough for it not to mandate a picture.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dang 7y agoI was not replying to you, but rather to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21776078 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21776078. Probably you were confused by that comment being [dead], and assumed that I was replying to your adjacent one instead. This happens from time to time, and I'm not sure how best to eliminate the confusion.
- ossworkerrights 7y agoI agree, the reason i find it worrying tho is because of the lack of diversity. the massive reach means even more people will have a uniform set of standards.
- cafard 7y agoYears ago, Esquire put Michelle Pfeiffer on the cover, with the headline "For the Woman Who Needs Absolutely Nothing". A little later, Harpers published the retoucher's bill for that photograph, to the great amusement of many. You could look it up at https://harpers.org/archive/1991/01/what-michelle-pfeiffer-needs/ https://harpers.org/archive/1991/01/what-michelle-pfeiffer-n..., but you'll have to pay.
- searine 7y agoreddit.com/r/instagramreality
- ossworkerrights 7y agoSomehow i don't like this kind of reddits - gives me the impression they are hate-groups.
- pjscott 7y agoAfter looking through some of the threads there, I have to applaud the moderators. They're very explicit about not wanting to be hateful, and (if the number of deleted comments is any indication) they're very willing to enforce this. The surviving comments mostly focus on the photo manipulation.
- ossworkerrights 7y agoYes, but what is the point of that reddit?
- jccooper 7y agoI just stopped reading when I realized that. If your thesis is visual, you have to have visual evidence.
- homonculus1 7y agoJust image search Kylie Jenner for reference. The verbal description is accurate.
- dopamean 7y agoYou can go to any of the accounts of the people they mention in the piece. Even better examples can be found if you go to the accounts of anyone commenting on the aforementioned accounts.
- doublement 7y agoInterestingly the New Yorker manages to take the edge off of head-shot photo competition by using caricatures of its regular authors instead of photos.
- dangwu 7y agoThere’s an animation showing the face before and after. It’s better than a photo, in my opinion.
- Crazyontap 7y agoI think this BBC article about the same is good for people who need the actual visuals: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5c237a34-7a47-4deb-a5b4-a23e77cc88f7 https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5c237a34-7a47-4deb-a5...
- hkmurakami 7y agoThank you for this. The before after was striking. I’m used to seeing these contrasts in corners of Asian culture where high levels of makeup are common, but had been unaware of what it looks like in western faces and how prevalent it is.
- 52-6F-62 7y agoThat was pretty interesting and the writing was quite entertaining. Worth a read.
- dang 7y agoOk, we'll change to that from https://www.newyorker.com/culture/decade-in-review/the-age-of-instagram-face https://www.newyorker.com/culture/decade-in-review/the-age-o.... Thanks!
- conradfr 7y agoShe looks amazing in the before photo so in a way the question remains about the effect on average people ;) I don't have an IG account where I would follow my friends so my only exposure to it is through these fake influencer/fitness/lifestyle accounts and it's appealing. Thankfully they force you to have an account to see most of the content these says so I'm not tempted to browse it more. It seems the battle against airbrushing in magazines and how it shapes society's expectations is already two wars late. Or maybe it's just the new version of the Myspace fat angle and we should stop pop sociology.
- RenRav 7y agoCame to post the exact thing. Not gonna bother with finding it out on my own though.
- fyfy18 7y agoThe Netflix series Better Than Us has a great example of this with the character Svetlana Toropova. Spoiler: The character is a TV host who suffers a mental breakdown. You first see her Instagram face, then you see her looking more natural with her lover (for whom she doesn't wear a wig), and finally she ends up in a psychiatric hospital where you see her without any makeup. At first I was questioning whether it was the same actor.