> >
> > Gee... I think I'd get really mad if my photographer "retouched" my pictures without letting me know, just as an automatic part of the service. Would it not occur to them that I might want pictures of *me,* not some idealized version with all the "flaws" removed? Bah.
>
> Hmmmm. Could it be that you look better, unretouched, than I do?
>
> I think retouching pictures is a standard practice among portrait photographers. They have done it so long, they might not think to mention it.
>
> But the truth is, I just went down there and posed. My wife took care of the business part of the shoot and she said she paid extra for the retouching service. She also looks better than me, unretouched, so I guess she did it for me.
>
> Come to think of it, almost everybody looks better than . . . . . never mind.
> How"can I look so old before retouching and so young afterw"ard

Photographers not only retouch their photos to make the subject look better, but to also make their photograph look better. Most photographers don't go to the length that the guy in Gahalyn's link go to, but they will whiten your teeth, etc. Before I started my chemo, my dad took pictures of me. I had just had surgery on my neck. I, for one, was glad he was able to remove the ugly tape that covered the incision.

I dunno. I don't think retouching is a bad thing. I certainly wouldn't take offense at finding out a photographer retouched my photo. But maybe I think that because my dad is a photographer and I've seen what photographers do (and how they think) to make *the photo* look better.

Retouching is just a small part of the art of photography.

Mia