True Self vs Best Self

What is more important in self-portraiture – envisioning who you are (i.e. your “true self”) or envisioning who you wish to be (i.e. your “best self”)? Why?

In a self portrait, I think that it is far more important to capture who you are, as opposed to who you want to be. When people see a portrait of a person, they're more interested in their characteristics and personality instead of who that person desires to be. When you take a picture of yourself as you are, it gives people an idea of your style and what you're all about; what you like. When you take a picture of what you want to be, it can sometimes be misleading to the viewer and confusing. To me, the definition of a self portrait is taking a picture of yourself. Not making youself into the celeb you want to be, or the perfect person you want to be, but of yourself. That's what makes self portraits beautiful, is that no matter how big or small you are, how pale or tan you are, it's a picture of you.

Smile and Say "No Photoshop" reflection

I think that the main point of this article was that society is looking up to or envying people that don't even look like the pictures we see of them. The short video even said that these people don't even look like their pictures in real life. They are made to look absolutely perfect, which nobody can achieve. This article pointed out how sick and disturbing it is that the images we are "supposed" to look like aren't even real. This article also stated that there should be another way to go about writing magazine articles. This article suggested that maybe magazines shouldn't alter people's image so much that it is a completely different picture.
I definitely agree with the ideas in this article. I think it is disgusting how the media presses for everyone to be superficially beautiful and thin and flawless. I think the idea of not having photoshopped images, or at least giving the editors credit for the work they do is a wonderful idea. People need to know that the images they see in these magazines aren't real; that nobody has to be perfect. I think this article is an excellent reminder that we don't need to look like these images, that aren't even real, just to be beautiful; there's so much more to it than what's on the outside. I would love to see a law like the one they are trying to pass in France happen in America. I think America is one of the worst when it comes to superficiality. There is a pressure tabloids, tv shows, even among peers to be perfect. I think it's awesome that this article points out that perfect really isn't achievable by humans, so we need to stop focusing on getting there.
I think Photoshop should be used when you are trying to make a photo more artful or creative. I've seen some really cool stuff done with it making pictures unique and different. I think that Photoshop would definitely be okay to use on landscape pictures or of random pieces of art. However, I do not think that magazines should use Photoshop to make people look perfect. Frankly, I think that whole idea is a little on the ridiculous side. I can understand if you need to reduce red eye, or make someones face a little shiny because everyone wants to enhance their own pictures. However, when it's to the point where people start looking like barbie dolls instead of normal everyday people, I think that's when we have a problem. Like a lot of things in life, I think the use of Photoshop is fine as long as it's in moderation.