The Dark Force of Facetune

Facetune was the most popular paid app in 2017—so it must be pretty great, right? 

Facetune is mobile photo-editing app that includes a plethora of filters just as many other popular editing apps do, such as VSCO and Instagram’s built-in filters, but it takes editing a step further — it has the tools to modify photos in a way that was previously only possible through more expensive software programs, such as Photoshop. In Facetune, there’s a blur tool, a detailing tool to make details pop, and a tool that can enlarge or shrink areas of the body or face; Facetune has been called “Photoshop for your iPhone without the headache of Photoshop.”  While some may say that this is a game-changer for social media and photo editing, I argue that we take a step back and think about the negative implications of the increased usage of Facetune. 

We’ve all seen it in action on Instagram; we’ve seen the curved bricks and railings in the backgrounds of photos, and we’ve seen the skin that’s been smoothed to the point of looking like it belongs to a figure in a wax museum.  

And Factune is growing, appearing outside of just Instagram.  James Charles, a beauty guru/YouTuber with upwards of 16 million subscribers is honest about his heavy use of the app, both on his photos and the photos of fellow celebrities, who, according to him, send him their photos to edit.  Recently, he’s gone as far as to upload a YouTube video where he uses Facetune to edit his followers’ photos.  Being a makeup influencer, I assumed that this video would primarily include James editing the makeup in his followers’ photos to make it pop more, but I was wrong — instead he focused on defining his followers’ features to give them a more “snatched” look and slimmer nose.

Hillel Fuld suggests that this app is “magical” and names the cost of $2.99 as being the only catch.  But is it really?  Is the cost the only thing that could possibly be wrong about this?  

Multiple studies have shown that social media plays a role in the increased rates of depression and anxiety.  When looking at the influence of social media on adolescents, another study found that when exposed to original images and images that were both retouched and reshaped, the edited images “directly led to lower body image.”  

Similar to Factuned photos, Snapchat lenses are also changing the way that we’d want ourselves to look, especially in selfies.  In 2017, 55% of patients undergoing plastic surgery indicated that they’d like to look better in their selfies, while only 13% had this request in 2013.  The term “Snapchat Dysmorphia” has been coined since people have begun to ask their plastic surgeons to make them look like the Snapchat lenses. Lenses and the editing of images creates— and normalizes— an unrealistic and unattainable standard of beauty.  Considering that about 1 in 50 people are affected by Body Dysmorphia Disorder, we should be very concerned about the over-processing of photos. 

To be sure, we’re still going to be surrounded by edited images every time we go on Instagram or look in a magazine, so some may argue that it’s pointless to make a fuss over Facetune and other editing apps.  Additionally, some say that is normal to want to paint the best possible image of yourself on social media, but we have to decide how far is too far, and I think that we’ve reached that point.    

While it is true that this world of edited images is the reality we live in, and we have to recognize that we aren’t seeing “real” images and keep in mind that the people we see on social media may not even look like these edited photos of themselves. The reason that the #AerieREAL movement and Dove’s Real Beauty campaign got so much hype is because it’s not common for us to see real people in the media —  I challenge us to remember this and to remind others of this fact so that we can move away from allowing Facetuned images to be our standard of beauty.