Lovelyish

Seriously? She looks absolutely fine not photoshopped. The lighting for that photo is horrendous. Quit being a hater.

@kinseydanielle@xanga - I think there was a hint of sarcasm about her being an ugly troll.

They actually didn’t shop her that much in comparison to other covers I’ve seen. Such some tiny details–mostly with lighting and smoothing. Not bad. Of course, it is difficult to improve on a body like Katy’s.

@kinseydanielle@xanga - I think she was being sarcastic.

Most of the changes really aren’t a big deal to me.  The only one that seems odd is the hand, but I get it, because it does kind of look like her fingers are stubbs in the original, haha.  Really, though, nothing more than a lot of kids do for high-school senior photos now.  Hardly scandalous!

lol this is standard -___- i wish ppl would realize how long they have been retouching pictures for!!! almost a century even if they didnt have fancy computer programs to do it

@Queen_of_You188@xanga - @empty_rebel@xanga - 

I thought it was sarcasm too until I misread the link as being “I hate Katy Perry”, instead it’s “I heart Katy Perry”.
Haha, my bad

Wow, they hardly have to do anything at all with her pics.  Just a little adjustment to the lighting & color and it’s perfect.

she’s so gorgeous naturally.

“Removed mole on upper chest”

I think you must’ve spent a lot of time staring to catch that one. xP

so she’s gorgeous naturally nice

If you look at her boobs back and forth, it looks bigger in the second picture hahaha. But that’s just me being a creep since she has nice boobs

She’s such a sexy beast.

What i can’t get past is how much her hand changes…did they just paste on someone else’s hand?;lol

lol

haha love the sarcasm… I think katy Perry is very pretty naturally… at least her hair pretty much stayed the same. I love that about her… wonder how much her treatments cost?

they also slimmed her front leg..

the picture really is beautiful without all that crap

she looks amazing unphotoshopped! she does look a little pale but it could be the lighting.

She looks great!

she is still sexy.
go katy!

well, she isn’t as photoshopped as other celebrities are/have been.

the original lighting sucked before the photoshop helped out the background. her body is sexy as hell and they didn’t smooth out any cellulite or anything… but why does her head look like it’s not on her body!?!

I think she looks gorgeous before being photoshopped! It was so unnecessary.

this girl looks damn good without the air brushing

Hardly a difference, but she looks better unairbrushed!

i don’t understand the big deal about this.  this isn’t bad at all…

they also made adjustments to the size of her thighs

wow she’s gorgeous even not shopped. 

She is no naturally beautiful–the photo-shopping was so unnecessary. But, this is the media world were talking about and no blemish, crease, roll, or mole goes unnoticed. 

actually, she looks really good either way.

She looks really good even before airbrushing

she still looked good before, I notice skin change, bigger boobs, and removal of baggy eyes.

Jeez, could they make my thighs smaller too?

@KickingSheep@xanga - omg I thought that too!!!!

It also looks like they lifted her boobies and thinned her thighs(which totally didn’t need to happen) a. Shes totally perfect before the photoshopping! They did need to fix the lighting though. 

I think she looks great naturally! I hope that was sarcasm you were using. 

they also got rid of the bags/wrinkle under her eyes

they also slimmed down her thigh… i honestly don’t know why they bother spending all that money on retouching when they start out with such a beautiful woman

I think the changes are pretty standard- they took her natural beauty and then enhanced it, especially her skin. It wasn’t bad before, but they gave her a nice glow. No big deal. I would want some touching up too, if I were going to be on a magazine cover!

OMG the hand scared me

she looks amazing, only difference is that she’s not that tanned in the original and they made it a little more colorful.  

she still looks amazing(:

they also removed creases from her underwear and made her boobs bigger and bustier as well as removing the crease in her bra.

the changed her hairline on HER left.. so the right of the picture. to make it seem like she has more hair i guess? i think it makes it look kinda awkward.

compared to most posts like this, I’d say it looks like they barely had to do much.

she looks better pre photoshopped in my opinion, her boobs look natural and pretty damn juicy,  her skin tone actually complements her dark features by being paler (not pale by any standards…just in comparison to her “tan”) ….and why they edited her left thigh to look even skinnier is completely beyond me..her muscle tone is already perfect….why change it.

She looks pretty much the same…

She looks yummy before and after.

Her upper thighs were also thinned… and on the left shoulder, her bra crease was “softened”… Maybe the photographer really needs to be more professional because it didn’t really turn out as good. Who needs photoshop if their photography is that good already? 

Not much of a difference.

SHE IS SO PRETTY EITHER WAY. 

-dies-

Well that’s upsetting, she really is unbelievably hot.

Some graphics arts designer was like, well I guess I have to do something. 

im always amazed/terrified when reading comments on the blogs of the xanga/lovelyish/etc community. the lack of recognizing and understanding sarcasm makes my heart sad.

with that being said, OBVIOUSLY katy perry looks like steve buscemi w/o being photoshopped.certainly if the lighting was better and maybe she sat up a bit straighter, they still need to photo shop her bc she is flat chested, ugly and older-looking than bob barker’s ball sack.
tell me how mean i am if you dont understand the concept of sarcasm!lol. people are AWESOME.

I honestly think she doesn’t even need the photoshop.

Agreed with most the comments; she looks great unairbrushed. And the lighting was terrible on the photographers behalf.

@kinseydanielle@xanga - If she looks ‘fine’ before then why did they photoshop her? Clearly she was flawed in the eyes of whoever is responsible of the photos. Furthermore, do you know what sarcasm is?… Go google it. Then you’ll see she’s not being a HATER she just mentions how it’s stupid to remove those MINOR flaws.

I don’t like katy perry whatsoever, but she’s not really photoshopped greatly in this magazine, just minor tiny flaws. The one thing I do find funny is how they made her boobs bigger! That’s the only thing she’s got going for her anyways cus god knows she’s go no talent xD

They thinned her thighs up big time.

@novalidation@xanga - I apologized in a comment later on, and explained why I thought she wasn’t being sarcastic. Simmer down.

Wow, is that how she really looks? She’s hot. They ruin her with photoshop making her look like a cartoon. Seeing her look like a real woman makes me want to bang her. Her little tummy and armpit creases are sexy, and the freckles too. I do like the hand better now though. Watching the boob lift in the animated image is funny shit. I can’t believe they thought they needed to give this babe a boob lift. Wtf???

I think it’s great that she looks beautiful either way. 

How did you miss that they thinned out her leg? Or outer thigh, rather. Because they were soooo offensively fat beforehand. (PLEASE NOTE SARCASM)

These are all pretty standard retouching I would guess. 

i think she is beautiful without it & better without it.

@iJessie@xanga - & they photoshopped her hand? wtf. i swear what happened to being REAL. oh society

i think she looks better unairbrushed

Even without retouching, Katy’s body looks amazing.  :/
So much for the “don’t worry, all celebrities look amazing because of Photoshop” argument.

why is this post worthy…..

@kinseydanielle@xanga - yea, like a LOT of sarcasm

Its pretty much all the standard stuff they would do on anyone else. The mole part makes no sense to me though, why airbrush it out? I think that would be the only thing to upset me, aside from touching the boobs, if i were her. Pointless airbrushing is pointless.

@CuriousLoveLetter@xanga - Very True.

i think she looks awesome before the photoshop

She looks pretty either way.

*Xanga’s Batman Out*

At least she looks like herself…I consider this photoshopping done right.

It’s not like they drastically altered the image. we weren’t really deceived or anything unlike a lot of other photoshop jobs. She looks good before and after. 

they also photoshopped her right hand’s fingers. wtf.

I think only a pathetically insecure and jealous women would find any sort of comfort from those kind of miniscule differences.

As much as I dislike Katy Perry (except when she is chasing Elmo), why did she need to be turned into a plastic doll when she is pretty to start with?

Am I the only one that finds it astonishing that they added fingers to the photograph?! How on earth do they do that! Wow!

bigger boobs, thinner legs, no wrinkles, and slightly change on her stomach. yes she’s pretty, but then again we can all be goddesses if we had photoshop. shes just like any standard pretty girl on the street. thanks to this photoshop everyone in the world thinks shes perfect. 

She’s beautiful. They didn’t need to Photoshop that.

unless you take the time to look closely, you can barely even tell. this isn’t bad at all

They also thinned down one of her thighs. All the changes made aren’t really necessary, she looks good without them.

ughhh. i clicked on this hoping to see that the amizing pic in rolling stone were totally fake…..but she looks fabulous naturally. lol good for her. im just jeralous

I don’t care about the air brush or mope-head. She is still hot like hell. 

dis bee’s rasis because they “darkened” her up, just like they did with OJ simpson on dat magazine cover

Wow. Why did they even bother to photoshop her? She’s absolutely beautiful unphotoshoped. 

@kinseydanielle@xanga -  I agree! she looks beautiful! the only change that need to be made was the clarity of the shot, but shes gorgeous!

Her hand looks like its just grabbing the bed, and under covers hahah. they probably took it from a different picture. But damn, she looks reaaalllly good even with out photoshop. <3

i can’t believe how similar the two photos actually are! a lot of the adjustments made were standard, harmless editing. the lighting before the retouching was SO bad…haha

overall, i think this proves nothing other than the face that katy perry is gorgeous.

not saying they should have air brushed her… but i’ve seen WAY worse photoshop jobs in magazines.
i still think she looks good naturally and they probably didn’t have to do that much photoshopping on her.

lol@the animation :’D

Wow totally no need to airbrush her!!!

@KickingSheep@xanga - they probably took the hand from another shot of her in the same series. Not uncommon!

The unphotoshopped pic looks way cooler. Same with Madonna’s pre-photoshop Louis V ads.

Unairbrushed Katy Perry is quite a hottie I must say

I don’t see the big deal. These are all minor touch-ups, I mean even professional portrait/wedding photograpers can and will do this sort of thing without extra cost.
I don’t view this as “wrong” or “misleading”. If anything it’s a compliment to just how beautiful Katy is that all she needs is some slight smoothing and lighting to be “magazine cover perfect”.

@kinseydanielle@xanga - It’s called being sarcastic

@Roonilwaslib - Again, I apologized after I realized her sarcasm in a later comment.

Two thoughts.

One – she looked gorgeous before the airbrushing, and said airbrushing was completely unnecessary but also entirely expected. This is, after all, Hollywood.

Two – this is why we shouldn’t compare ourselves to photos in magazines.

@proudsmartypants@xanga - LOL, i actually caught that right away.

controversial,ei? all I see is that she has natural beauty great for her. There’s something about moles,that arent just acceptable for stars, I remember Chloe, from the Kardashians, complaining about the mole in her face being removed in a airbrushed photoshoot.

’cause, baby, she’s a firework, she knows what shes worth, shes gorgeous without the airbrushing just that its all about tanning nowadays and not having a pale complexity

so they changed the color, her tits and her fingers. the rest is minimal. hell, the only thing i noticed at first was the color. so it was a pretty pointless photoshop. but hey, that’s one thing you can expect from magazines, pointless photoshops. at least she doesn’t look completely plastic.

honestly i don’t think that there is too much done to her picture . it still looks like her and she looks amazing . loveee her .

Ahahahahaha they changed her fingers.  Her FINGERS.  That makes zero sense.

I always wondered why her boobs looked so fake and balloon-y. Her real boobs look great! 

the only thing that bugs me is the fact that someone could still be a horrible photographer as long as theyre good at photoshop. the model (katy perry) doesnt look all too bad in the first pic at all, the technique and lighting just plain suck.

She’s gorgeous even without the photoshopping (if anything, it’s the lighting that sucked)! The only thing I noticed was that they made her cleavage bigger. IMO, completely unnecessary as everyone knows her ta-tas are already big. She looks beautiful.

Uhm, ok? All I see are little things that other people would be making sure didn’t show up as well. It’s not like there’s a huge difference.

This is always interesting to see.  Especially with someone as naturally pretty as Katy, she doesn’t “need” photoshop, but it is something that is required to attract the attention of potential readers.  If this was next to another photoshopped image, it would dull in comparison.  Nowadays, it seems a lot like reality is no longer beautiful enough for us.  You think about how much photoshop is used to distort people’s appearance into the standard of beauty (mostly in the boob area, it seems), it’s kinda crazy.  We’re gonna surpass natural abilities sooner or later.  It’s true though, this one is not nearly as photoshopped as a lot of the leaks.  Things like fingers and color and smoothing out skin is mostly just to enhance the artistic quality of the photo anyway, and I can look past that.  But I know if I ever have a roll or boobs that don’t bust out, I do feel like there must be something wrong, but it’s good to remember what images go through nowadays anyway.  :)

I liked the Photoshopped one better, although she looks fine (minus her boobs look so much better Photoshopped) without it.

The finger change is really creepy.

in other words, they barely changed anything.
well, go figure.

still looks pretty sexy to me.

@petrified_pengy@xanga - Part of mastering photography is the development and post-work. It’s entirely possible that the photographer took the photo intending to make these changes in post. The world is digital now and darkrooms are outdated in the fashion and magazine world. Photoshop is the new darkroom.

I don’t think it’s that she was undesirable before the photoshopping. I think the lighting was bad and cast some bad shadows, and I think they just wanted to remove the sock because it was kind of non-sequitor if you couldn’t see any other part of either of them.

I really don’t know why they thinned her thigh though. It’s not like it was nasty or anything before that. I kind of like it rounder.

Anyway, at least this was a marginally good job. The stomach looks a little weird, but w/e. I’ve seen much worse.

Haha, I just noticed they also fucked with the shells and gravel in the bottom right corner? Wtf.

Wow! I don’t think she even needs to be airbrushed. She looks so perfect in her before picture also. But if it was me, then there would be a lot things to be fixed!

wow… they gave her a new hand?? I’d be mad! Keep her little stubby fingered hand!

she actually looks really good unairbrushed  

First thing I noticed were the boobs. Of course. 

They didn’t even do that much. Either way she is gorgeous.

WHO GIVES A DAMN. SHE’S STILL HOT

I’d still kill for her body

The lighting in the original isn’t brilliant, but other than that she looks fine. And you missed out her leg being made to look slimmer.

Wow! She looks amazing un-airbrushed! Unlike some other celebrities. 

O.O Ohh interesting!

wow, barely needed to change much! Jealous