Miranda Kerr Looks Different in Flare Magazine
February 11, 2010 in Miranda Kerr, Photoshop Job by Versus
Different, aka facially photoshopped.
1. Her actual face is much rounder – why alter it when it’s so, so cute?
2. The nose (!), the eyebrows, the chin, the cheeks, the eyes… all different.
Once again: WHY?
Do you think that this version looks like Miranda or is it a “too much / unnecessary Photoshop” case… yet again?
UPDATE: 2 more pictures added after the jump!
I like this outfit.
I think she looks amazing in Flare, I have always found her a bit to babyish looking but that look isnt there in the Flare.
Maybe her face is too babyish for flare, but this doesn’t mean they have to make her so different. If I saw this on the magazine shop, I probably wouldn’t be able to realize it’s miranda,unless i read her name(and it would take a moment for me to realize it).
That girl in the pic is pretty,but it looks nth like miranda kerr…
I’m also not a fan of her face, she does look like a little kid to me. But, if Flare doesn’t like her face then why hire her? I don’t get why they pay these people tons of money to be in their magazines and then just change them to the point of being unrecognizable? It’s so stupid. If you don’t like them the way they are, don’t use them!
yea true. I like her face with makeup and a bit of airbrushing…but here it is unrecognisable. its like a made up ‘perfect face’. sure i prefer the airbrushed one but plenty of people like her face so why change it. but i suppose as i mentioned they want to make the ‘perfect’ face with skinny nose, slim face, high cheekbones, bigger bluer eyes and full lips and peachy complexion…which isnt miranda therefore making a doll.
They definitely did make her face less-rounder.
It’s a shame. Really. Such a beautiful girl. I like her natural better. Her REAL face compared to this fake one. They also made her nose less pointy and softer. I think the lips are the same however.
I wish photoshop would be elimated from the world, but that will sadly never happen.
Edit: Anybody wanna take a stab at her weight? I’d say 115, maybe 110 at the lowest. I really don’t think she’s 5’9, maybe 5’8/5’8.5, at the lowest 5’7.5. Anybody know? I could be wrong, but I’m just wondering
I don’t think we can guess her weight because every person carries his weight differently…But what you suggest sounds logical!
She said in an interview that she’s 5’9″! It’s hard to tell because people really are much smaller in person than they are in photos. But my guess would be between 110 and 115, probably closer to 115.
looks like natalia vodianova here
I thought so too! With a hint of Lily Donaldson
when i first saw the cover i was like ‘brunette doutzen krous is that you?’ but after much staring, she does look a bit like natalia too. lol. poor miranda.
thats what i was thinking! i would never have realized that was miranda kerr if i hadnt been told. the photoshopping is so unneccessary.
they make her look exactly like Abbey Lee Kershaw.
Thanks for the post!
Her real face is much more beautiful. They changed the things that make her, her. I think that Miranda Kerr is the most beautiful person that I’ve ever seen and for them to do this to her is just insane. This is definitely photoshop taken way too far.
she looks half miranda half natalia vodianova.
http://www.whosdatedwho.com/topic/7957/abbey-kershaw-vogue-magazine-september-2008.htm
!!
this is just insane! i didn’t even recognize her at first:S
Me either. I saw the mag on the newsstand, saw her name and wondered why they didn’t put her on the cover as well as in the article… Horrible overphotoshoppery.
This is just funny, I would still buy the magazine knowing full well they changed her face! I think people over react too much when it comes to photoshop. Everyone knows it’s fake, I think it’s fun! I actually think the fake Miranda looks really pretty on the cover, they gave her some wicked bone structure. Real Miranda is gorgeous as well! Whatever is shocking, ethereal and unreal will sell magazines. This is WHY I buy magazines!
Magazines don’t sell anymore. Circulation is at pitiful levels and has been for years. It’s why I never went near it because you are promised to be axed within the next decade.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35299892/ns/business-media_biz/
If fantasy sells, I’d say the industry is pushing the wrong fantasy.
you can see the photoshopping on what would be the right side of her jaw. there is clearly alot missing.
so terrible, what an unnecessary ridiculous thing to do.
Looks like a porcelain doll.She is not THAT pretty!
I think the Miranda on the cover looks really good, but i’m so bad with face regognition to begin with that i really wouldn’t know it was her without seeing her name. I don’t know where to draw the line, but somehow just changing her whole facial structure seems too much; i mean it’s the jaw, the cheeks, the nose and i think they maybe put her eyes more close together as well to complete the symmetry. But she’s a model, so her job is to sell basically, if she’s ok with it so am i.
This photo could have been one of those “Recognize the girl” posts, because honestly I didn`t knew who was I looking at before reading the title.
It`s a shame that they plastyfied her look, because she has such great facial features
I do retouching for a living, she has had her face lengthened, narrowed, the eye spacing is different, the nose has been changed, the lips, everything. You’d be surprised just how much retouching on all photos can go unnoticed, but it’s there, and in this case, it’s gone too far.
ooo thats interesting! i would love to hear more about it! am doing a thesis on it =o). I have done some research and i noticed that they can change stuff like making the nose thinner and changing the eye size/ where they are in relation to each other and make a much more symmetrical look. It’s amazing how a little subtle change can make a huge difference to overall look!? why would they make the face thinner tho? i always thought they would try and change people to look more like Miranda is naturally. just ‘younger’ looking
this is just stupid. I can understand photoshopping to eliminate blemishes or shadows, but when you start messing with the structure of the person’s face or body it has gone entirely too far. Apparently even one of the most beautiful super models in the world isn’t good looking enough to be on the cover of a magazine. I always wonder what celebrities think when they look at these pictures of themselves, if they are deluded into thinking they actually look like that or whether they feel hurt that the editors changed their faces so much.
i did not think it was miranda until i read that it was…why would they do that she is beautiful with out it
Why do we have models again? If they are going to change the face so much that the girl they paid for is unrecognisable, why bother? May as well skip hiring anyone and create a virtual model who’s so perfect she doesn’t need to be photoshopped.
Yuk she is prettier natural. I hate Photoshop.
Totally unnessary use of photoshop. the true purpose of the tool is to eliminate or hide flaws. Does the magazine editors consider Miranda’s facial features flaws? Her whole face? thats a large part of her appeal.why give her bad digital plastic sugery, for her to look like hiedi montag?Apparently even one of the most beautiful super models in the world isn’t good looking enough to be on the cover of a magazine.
To make her so unrecgonizable defeats the purpose of putting her on the cover of the magazine. When you a celebrity on a magazine your hoping their fans will buy a copy, but that is not possible if the don’t regonize who is on the cover!
well at least she isn’t made any thinner than she already is.
I agree, Its annoying to here people say “photoshop is accetable, people enjoy seeing perfect images” bla bla bla. Lets face it this is getting sickening. It is as if there are no human beings actually good looking enough, we have stepped up the ideals of beauty so high that its not physically attainable. Sad world. She’s a beauty but yet as you say, still not good enough.
I didn’t even recognize her at first! What? Changing her face like that is pointless.
They changed waaaaay too much! I would not of recognized her, the nose, the eyebrows, everything is soo different, I really don’t see the point to it.
Honestly I feel like a lot of the reason why her face looks so different in the magazine is because of the angle…her face really changes depending on the angle. She rarely looks like herself.
The only thing that they seem to have actually changed is her nose and dimples. But that was probably because they were trying to smoothen out her skin, and weren’t careful with it.
i usually hate photoshop…..
…but dare i say i think she looks a lot better?
i guess i don’t really like her face (or body for that matter), so i am biased. if they are trying to sell based on her celebrity status, it will fail, because she looks nothing like herself. however, if they just want the prettiest image possible from the raw material…i guess they win! my guess is they want people to buy it for her…and they are only hurting themselves.
if they want the prettiest image possible and are not trying to exploit her celebrity (obviously they aren’t, it hardly looks like her) then why wouldn’t they cast someone else? this image looks more like abbey lee kershaw than it looks like miranda…
Holy shit. I would be pretty pissed if I came out looking like a completely different person after a shoot. I mean I know lighting and makeup will do this somewhat, but still- she looks like a completely different robot! (ahem, I meant person)…
Wow… just wow! If a face like hers make top magazine sellers think is not enough… just wow!
And then they stuff our faces with things like “72634827634 to feel confident in your own skin” -__________________-
she looks so BORING. she has so much more individuality in real life…
I like her better without photoshop. I like her baby look cause its soooo cute. I bet tons of guys love that!
That’s not even her. No really, the spread of Miranda is inside the magazine. That’s someone else. I can’t believe you didn’t work it out?!
I added 2 pictures from the magazine – she is still photoshopped, has the same eyebrows and a narrowed face, but at least these pics look more like her. It is supposed to be her on the cover…
not really sure what you mean because that IS miranda on the cover. cant think of the last time a magazine had a huge headline for someone famous with a spread on the inside and they WEREN’T on the cover.
She looks more like Natalia Vodianova, the eyebrow part. I think its ridiculously that they photoshoped her that way, she looks like a completely different person. And she is gorgeous the way she is, i kind of like the round face.
what the?!?! that’s not even her!!! it looks like a totally different person. like maybe the girl on the cover could be miranda’s sister but not miranda herself!! why would they do this miranda is such a gorgeous girl! only second to doutzen for the v.s models (in my opinion).
i think she looks great, but i didn´t thought that´s really her!
she is so beautiful and so natural, she doesn´t even need photoshop.
o the natural is better!
Not necessary!
I like the after one
she looks like an elf irl
Why?? The eyebrows I’m fine with, that can be done with makeup, but the rest? She is so cute naturally (though I don’t know how her face doesn’t look super skinny when she is so tiny), and her she just looks…plain. Pretty, but plain.
The girl in the magazine looks aabsolutely breathtakingly beautiful. The only problem is she is not Miranda, she doesn´t exist.
This is horrible. Miranda is soooo beautiful, and while this photoshop creation in the magazine is also gorgeous, she is not necessary. I can deal with them making skin look better etc. but changing someone’s face? Someone who is already incredibly beautiful, toooo far!
poor girl.
bravo! she doesnt look human anymore!
give yourselves a round of applause, Flare magazine, you have created your very own automaton.
Why hire models at all? they should ditch photoshop and use Poser instead. Creating a figure and face from scratch would be much, much cheaper;)
i don’t get why they have over airbrushed her.ive only ever seen pictures of her on here for magazines and without the airbrushing she looks like a completely different person.if they don’tlike the look of her face hire someone else.i really think they and all other magazines should stop using airbrushing and photoshop.
Actually, i like the Flare version more.
Omg. She looks so old!! They took away her famous cheeks, which give her a frash amazing look… So sad!
She’s so beautiful, why would they do that? She’s unrecognizable.
As others have already mentioned, this looks more like a Miranda Kerr/Natalia Vodianova hybrid.
holy crap super photoshop.even her curves are photoshopped in. i’ve seen kerr in person and she has no curves.
[...] For another photoshopped cover featuring Miranda, click here! [...]
i prefer her natural look all the way. i think her look is unique, she has this girl next door look but also really beautiful at the same time. She’s so cute with her round cheeks and dimples. this photoshop action just makes her looks like any other models