photoshop

There's a long and storied tradition of mocking politicians, one that can be traced back to doubtlessly as long as they've been in office. However, one Georgia lawmaker wants to put the kibosh on a very specific type of satire: Putting someone else into an obscene image.

I'm not quite sure why they didn't make the announcement last week at Photokina, but today Adobe has pulled back the curtain on the latest versions of their entry-level photo and video editing software solutions: Photoshop Elements 11 and Premiere Elements 11.Both titles have gotten significant redesigns in the user-interface department, but there has also been a fair bit of tweaking done on the code side as well.

It's not hard to argue that modern advertisements overly post-process images, especially reshaping women in ways that are just about physically impossible. This has lead to a recent and significant backlash — but what do you do when an image is accused of being a Photoshop Disaster, but actually isn't?

In May we reported on 14-year-old Julia Bluhm’s petition asking Seventeen magazine to produce one spread per month without the aid of Photoshop. She gathered a lot of attention and over 84,000 signatures. But Editor in Chief Ann Shoket gave only a boilerplate response with lukewarm promise to be “more transparent” about their use of Photoshop.