Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In a study to show how different countries from around the world view the ideal shape of a woman, female graphic designers from different countries were asked to take an original photo of a full figured model with a height of 165 centimeters or 5 foot 4 inches and change it to show her culture's ideal female form .The results were drastic. The 18 different countries from around the world have very different standards of beauty . Some of which are unhealthy. The US fell somewhere in between but towards the thinner side.
Here is a quote from the article:
"As you can see, our designers’ changes made some of these images almost unrecognisable compared with the original photo. While some remained largely similar with the exception of slight slimming, others resemble a new woman altogether. Drastic changes in hair colour, attire, and waist-to-hip ratio were common. Some designers in North, South, and Central American countries produced an exaggerated hourglass figure; others in European and Asian nations chose to render her so thin that her estimated BMI, according to a survey we conducted (described below), would fall under or dangerously close to 17.5. According to the NHS, “Adults with anorexia generally have a BMI below 17.5.” -
This has been floating around the internet for a while now. The problem I have with this is that for starters, it gives you a rather unattractive woman to start with. Frumpy, dumpy, overweight, etc. Also, it doesnt say much about who the "designers" are in each country or their photoshop skills. The "designer" in Romania may be an overweight woman herself with poor photoshop skills, so of course she is biased about what she thinks looks good.
Its just a poor article IMO. Not only because the starting subject is so unattractive, but also because there really is no way to know for sure (or even ballpark) of what each country really finds attractive. NONE of those photos in the link I find attractive at all. Mexico, USA and Egypt are almost close to being in the ballpark though.
This has been floating around the internet for a while now. The problem I have with this is that for starters, it gives you a rather unattractive woman to start with. Frumpy, dumpy, overweight, etc. Also, it doesnt say much about who the "designers" are in each country or their photoshop skills. The "designer" in Romania may be an overweight woman herself with poor photoshop skills, so of course she is biased about what she thinks looks good.
Its just a poor article IMO. Not only because the starting subject is so unattractive, but also because there really is no way to know for sure (or even ballpark) of what each country really finds attractive. NONE of those photos in the link I find attractive at all. Mexico, USA and Egypt are almost close to being in the ballpark though.
Well what I found interesting is that they took a large woman and not one of the countries kept her the same size they all made her smaller, and it was not just the size, but the hair color and body shape was often changed too. Maybe this was not that thorough of a study but it makes me want to look into it further. I am curious to find out if China for instance really does prefer woman that thin and Italy as well.
It appears from your choices you admire an hourglass shape. And since you did like the USA version and you are an American there may be some truth to this study.
Last edited by vanguardisle; 09-23-2016 at 01:45 PM..
Poor test. They should have provided three body typology - one of each frame type - and then have at least 99 women (33 of each body type and size / frame: endo; ecto; meso) photo shop the three typologies to see where each respective country makes changes to the women of varying type. And particularly, what each real woman typology does to each representative typology.
Since this is two dimensional only, it says nothing about composition, only distribution. Trying to derive BMI from different frames without knowing 'composition' of the distribution has way to much variance. BMI is only a general tool and says nothing about composition of the 'weight'.
Photoshop cannot convey well things like frame, posture, and comportment as well as how it all moves when in motion. Ideally it would be a three dimensional image rendering (i.e. depth) showing movement. Personally the subject picked looks knock kneed.
I'd probably select the South African rendering (and downsize the breasts a little) since it appears the most 'healthy' for the frame displayed.
On a tangential thought....where is the "Weird Science" photo shop program so I can get the 24 year old version of Kelly LeBrock of "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" Pantene commercial fame?
It appears from your choices you admire an hourglass shape. And since you did like the USA version and you are an American there may be some truth to this study.
I never said that I liked the USA version. What I said was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kings Gambit
NONE of those photos in the link I find attractive at all. .
Anything is better than obese/fat, but yes I do like hourglass as it is second only to athletic fit type (think Kaisafit or Crossfit girls - https://www.google.com/search?bih=95....0.CSKk0fKTw3c ). There is nothing attractive about the body shapes of the horribly photoshopped frumpy fat gal pics in the link.
Poor test. They should have provided three body typology - one of each frame type - and then have at least 99 women (33 of each body type and size / frame: endo; ecto; meso) photo shop the three typologies to see where each respective country makes changes to the women of varying type. And particularly, what each real woman typology does to each representative typology.
Since this is two dimensional only, it says nothing about composition, only distribution. Trying to derive BMI from different frames without knowing 'composition' of the distribution has way to much variance. BMI is only a general tool and says nothing about composition of the 'weight'.
Photoshop cannot convey well things like frame, posture, and comportment as well as how it all moves when in motion. Ideally it would be a three dimensional image rendering (i.e. depth) showing movement. Personally the subject picked looks knock kneed.
I'd probably select the South African rendering (and downsize the breasts a little) since it appears the most 'healthy' for the frame displayed.
On a tangential thought....where is the "Weird Science" photo shop program so I can get the 24 year old version of Kelly LeBrock of "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" Pantene commercial fame?
Good advice. Still this study made me think and I guess that is a start. Is Kelly Le Brock your perfect woman? People just love the 80s don't they?
I never said that I liked the USA version. What I said was:
Anything is better than obese/fat, but yes I do like hourglass as it is second only to athletic fit type (think Kaisafit or Crossfit girls - https://www.google.com/search?bih=95....0.CSKk0fKTw3c ). There is nothing attractive about the body shapes of the horribly photoshopped frumpy fat gal pics in the link.
True you did write that I guess what I should have written was that the USA body shape was one you liked better then most of the other choices given in the study.
Interesting that you admire the body builder type athletic female shape. A lot of people think that kind of look is too muscular for a woman. What do you say to those who think it is not soft and feminine enough?
Last edited by vanguardisle; 09-24-2016 at 07:26 AM..
There's really no such thing as perfection. Everything in nature is a variation. As far as fashion and beauty, it is all a subjective thing based on the particular biases of the ones doing the judging and promoting what they promote, not to mention the sales involved. This idea about the ideal female form has changed over time. Look at some of the old art paintings and art works and you will see that the models were "fuller" back then. That was a reflection on the thinking of the people of that time. It was before there were such things as fashion shows, etc. Now, the fashion industry tells us what is "the ideal." Like most subjective things, the idea of the ideal figure varies around the world. What looks good in one place doesn't look so good in another place.
There's really no such thing as perfection. Everything in nature is a variation. As far as fashion and beauty, it is all a subjective thing based on the particular biases of the ones doing the judging and promoting what they promote, not to mention the sales involved. This idea about the ideal female form has changed over time. Look at some of the old art paintings and art works and you will see that the models were "fuller" back then. That was a reflection on the thinking of the people of that time. It was before there were such things as fashion shows, etc. Now, the fashion industry tells us what is "the ideal." Like most subjective things, the idea of the ideal figure varies around the world. What looks good in one place doesn't look so good in another place.
Yes I read somewhere that a fuller female figure was admired in the past because it showed that she was financially well off,able to eat well and afford expensive food, while being too thin was a sign of poverty, hard work, and starvation.
But why do you think different countries have different standards of weight and beauty?
Yes I read somewhere that a fuller female figure was admired in the past because it showed that she was financially well off,able to eat well and afford expensive food, while being too thin was a sign of poverty, hard work, and starvation.
But why do you think different countries have different standards of weight and beauty?
Different cultures might have different standards because partly because of the natural body type associated with each country. China, for example- many Asians are petite and slim, so it's not surprising they designed the body to be so thin. Italy's design is the only country that suprises me. Italian/Mediterranean women tend to have curvy builds, wide set hips, roundish derrières. Maybe the body is so thin because high fashion is very big in certain parts of Italy, and those models are very thin?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
