Is this a photoshop fail, an optical illusion, or SOMETHING MORE SINISTER? (Insert dramatic music here).
According to this, Victoria Beckham recently appeared in VogueChina for a quirky photoshoot, which included this picture (only without the red circle):
Now, as you can clearly see in the photo above, Victoria’s vagina is completely missing. Daisy and I marveled over this in studio yesterday, and were amazed that this photo got past the editing department as is, given the fact that as I just mentioned, Victoria’s VAGINA IS MISSING.
Vicky B has had children, so there’s evidence right there that in fact, she does possess a vaginal area.
Tons of people assumed that Vogue simply photoshopped the ever living crap out of the photo, and inadvertently cropped out that entire section of Victoria’s body. But according to the sourcelink, the editor of VogueChina claims that the “raw” photo has the same missing body part.
Editor-in-chief Angelica Cheung says that this is all just an “optical illusion caused by Victoria’s white underwear.”
Whizzah whuzzah?
She explained further:
“It is an optical illusion due to the mix of the lighting used together with the shadows and the white underwear which, in a black-and-white image, might seem as if there is a gap.”
Now, I don’t know about y’all, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me. And Ms. Cheung has also admitted there were two versions of the image – a raw picture and a slightly different version that appeared in print. And now she plans to talk to the NY photogs to try to get a better understanding of how an “optical illusion” like this actually happens.
I’ll tell you how it happens. It happens when an overly-enthusiastic editor goes photoshop-happy and accidentally erases a person’s vagina, and then the proofers don’t catch it. That’s how.
http://www.chicksontheright.com/the-case-of-victoria-beckhams-missing-vagina/