By Sierra Filucci, Common Sense Media editor

Walk past a supermarket checkout stand near summertime and you can't help but see models and celebs in bikinis plastered across magazine covers. Tween favorites like Selena Gomez and Katy Perry appear all over the Internet in glamorous outfits with incredible hair and makeup. Ads on billboards, buses and subways display long-legged models selling everything from liquor to lipstick.

Kids are bombarded with images of men and women -- famous or not -- who look incredibly perfect. Too perfect, in fact. And that's thanks to photo editing, which, as many of us parents know, can eliminate a model's pimples, make a celeb's cellulite disappear and make legs longer, waists slimmer and erase wrinkles.

Pull Back the Curtain

But kids aren't always so savvy. Kids who see unrealistic bodies or faces or clothing -- especially on folks they admire -- can feel inadequate as a result. In fact, several studies have shown that reading women's fashion magazines or looking at images of models has a negative effect on women's and girls' self-esteem.

That's why it's important to teach kids about the reality behind the images that surround them. Empowering kids to see behind the photo spreads and the advertisements can help combat the negative effects of these images.

Add Your Voice

The good news is, some kids -- and even celebrities -- are talking back to the beauty and advertising industries and taking action to encourage more realistic images. Maine eighth grader Julia Bluhm recently started a petition (with support from Spark Summit) that garnered more than 25,000 signatures, asking Seventeen magazine for regular photo spreads that don't use Photoshop.

Celebrities (including Taylor Swift, Jessica Simpson and Britney Spears) have stepped up to show a more realistic image of themselves in photo shoots and online, and in doing so help pull back the curtain on the amount of retouching that goes on in Hollywood and beyond.

Not sure how to approach this subject with your kid? Here are some ideas:

Do a reality check. Make sure kids know that almost every photo in magazines and advertisements has been altered. Show examples of models and celebrities where the before and after examples are starkly different. (Pop Studio is a great site to help kids understand what goes on behind the scenes at a magazine, etc.)

Play "spot the Photoshop." See who can spot the retouching on any ads or photos you come across. (Search online for "Photoshop fail" and you'll come across some amazing examples of how poorly the tool can be used.)

Connect the dots. Discuss the difference between fantasy images and products being marketed. Talk about how photos are used to sell magazines, specific products, celebrities' brands and more.

Ask questions. Get kids to think about how images affect viewers (both boys and girls) and how images can distort our ideas about what's healthy or beautiful. What would your kids say to a friend who felt bad after looking at an unrealistic image? How could you encourage them to celebrate their inner qualities? What kinds of things besides looking at magazines or celebrity blogs can you do to make you feel good?

Look for backup. Help kids locate resources to take action. Find out how to sign or start petitions. Encourage kids to speak up about these images in their classrooms, through their social networks, and among friends. (Check out our list of sites that encourage social action.)

Sometimes Photoshop fails are truly reckless displays of airbrushing gone awry, like when someone whittles away a waist or does a hilariously bad job of adding a bikini to a woman's chest.

But other times, especially with celebrities, bad Photoshopping can distort just leave you with a vague sense of uneasiness, as in, is that really supposed to be Drew Barrymore?

Jessica Alba is the latest victim of over-enthused retouching, on the June 2012 cover of Marie Claire. The whole cover seems washed in a bright pink haze, and something seems a little robot-y about it to us. Maybe it's the way they did her hair?

And, er, in the inside photo, where Jess adopts the "gaze-peripherally-into-a-mirror" pose we've already seen in a June mag, it inadvertently looks like Jessica has a second mini-head sprouting out of her wrist.

Anyway, on to the interview, where Alba reveals her new philosophy on styling now that she's 31 and a mom of two:

"There are some women who dress for men. I dress for myself. It took me some time to get here. Being a mom and feeling grown-up have helped. Now if I’m going to wear something short, it has to have a high neck or a little sci-fi toughness to it, an edge.”

Click over to Marie Claire to read more of Jessica's interview.

PHOTOS:

Check out some more egregious Photoshop fails below!

Want more? Be sure to check out HuffPost Style on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr and Pinterest.

We've seen some great magazine covers and fashion ads in the month of April, but we've also seen some great covers and ads ruined by bad Photoshop fails.

From thinning celebrity waists to adding extra limbs in retail circulars, it seems like obviously bad Photoshop fails popped up all over the place this month.

As this month comes to an end, we pay honor to some of the worst Photoshopping fails we've seen this April 2012.

Click through our slideshow and see just how out of hand it got!

Don't you hate when random limbs start sprouting up on your upper body? Us, too!

That's how this model must have felt in this recently dug-up Target ad, which features a happy-looking family wearing some lovely fleece tops and track pants (you know you want some).

Everything seems to be going fine in the fictitious lives of this cozy family, but there's a little something extra in the picture... and it's touching the mom's hair.

That's right, the "dad" is getting extra handsy, seeing as no one at Target proofed the number of limbs on its models before approving the ad. Whoops.

Then again, at least they didn't simply Photoshop their limbs out... better too many hands than too few, right?

UPDATE 6:15 p.m.:
The featured ad is from Target Australia, which has no affiliation with the company's U.S. stores, according to a Target representative.

PHOTO:

See more Photoshop Fails!

Many an airbrusher (that's a real profession, right?) has carved out a model's hips, slimmed down a love handle and flattened a tummy here and there. But removing a woman's legs? That would be a bit heavy-handed.

The eagle-eyed folks at Photoshop Disasters spotted this ad from Luciano Conti Professional, an Italian haircare line that's teamed with Brazilian brand Matra Milano Cosmetics. Ads for the 2011 campaign, shot by Angelo Lanza, feature a highly attractive man holding an equally attractive blonde woman, her legs dangling over his arms.

You can see how the original shots came out in the behind-the-scenes video, below. But somehow, in the printed ad, the female model's legs seem to have gone missing... or perhaps the male model's biceps are so big they conceal them?

Check it out below and tell us: do you think this is a Photoshop Fail?

PHOTO:

See more Photoshop Fails!

UPDATE: As it turns out, it was option #1. American Apparel confirms that the model was, indeed, wearing a bodysuit. An earlier version of this story incorrectly asserted that it was probably a Photoshop Fail. Case closed!

Previously:
Now that's what we call ethnically ambiguous.

In one of the stranger Photoshop Fails we've ever seen, American Apparel has digitally attached a white hand to a black model -- or a black stomach to a white model.

A zoomed-in product shot for the retailer's Poly-Viscose School Boy Pant (which has since been removed but was caught by Photoshop Disasters and Buzzfeed), the hand stuffed in the pants pocket is a blatantly different skin color than the midriff behind it. We can only think of three possible explanations:

1. The model is wearing a really dark brown mesh bodysuit.

2. This is one of American Apparel's attempt at sexy, with one model sticking her hand in another model's pants.

3. Photoshop Fail.

(Via Styleite)

It could just be the angle.

But we're more inclined to believe that the neck of "Project Runway All Stars" host and model Angela Lindvall has been the unwitting victim of some cringeworthy Photoshop on this mag cover.

Lindvall poses in Chanel for the March issue of Vogue Mexico, looking pretty in a signature blue blazer and a statement necklace.

But we suspect Angela's neck and jawline have been overly smoothed and elongated, to the point that her head looks like it's perched atop an ivory pillar, or that she's become a modern-day Stretch Armstrong.

Or is her neck just really that long?

See for yourself below!

We've never actually seen alien fingers before, but we've decided this is what they'd look like.

Thanks goes out to Photoshop Disasters and Jezebel for drawing our attention to the amazingly heinous Photoshop Fail that has turned a model's fingers into a craggy, decomposing claw.

Alien fingers, demon hands, talons, nail-biting victim -- whatever metaphor you like, the hands on this SimplyBe model are seriously freaky. Luckily, SimplyBe, an apparel brand specializing in UK plus-size style, realized its error and restored the model's fingers to their original width.

Unfortunately, the image of her demon hands is forever seared in our minds... and now yours too! Enjoy the freaky pictures below. Happy Valentine's Day!

BEFORE:

AFTER:

We've spent basically all day drooling over the new Gwyneth Paltrow shoot in Harper's Bazaar's March 2012 issue.

But we paused briefly when looking at one of the stunning Terry Richardson pics, which shows Gwynnie having fun in her stretchy Anthony Vaccarello gown. The actress' gams are amazingly toned... yet also bent at amazingly odd angles. Check out the second shot from the right -- is that some sort of Photoshop Fail?

Either Gwynnie is pulling the back hem of her dress around the front of her leg or the entire lower half of her body has been digitally modified. It's a toss-up.

See for yourself. Is something wrong with this photo?

The recent firestorm regarding Beyonce's promotional imagery leaves me baffled. The entire hubbub about Mrs. Knowles-Carter and her whitetification seems misplaced, especially in the Post Michael Jackson Era. It's apparent that Queen B has rigorously studied MJ's rules of pop super status to create an internationally recognized brand.

Incubated in the hit-making quartet (then trio) of Destiny's Child, then proclaimed a break out sensation with her solo efforts, Beyonce has become the booty-popping-stilettoed-guru of live performance. The woman can sing. And move some serious product. And of course, there's the wind machine and sparkly spandex, but I digress. Featured on the 2007 cover of Sports Illustrated's Swimsuit Edition and securing a multimillion-dollar contract with L'Oreal, homegirl is riding it until the wheels fall off. The secret of her success? Ambiguity. Or, as I lovingly refer, the race towards whiteness.

This kinda-a-little-bit-but-not-quite mentality has been with the pop superstar since birth. I mean "Beyonce"? It's kinda Creole, a little bit black and not quite French. But it works and it's certainly unique. Although, the same can be said for Laqueefa, but everybody knows a black woman is the worst thing you can be in America. Apparently we don't get married, we're angry all the time and we're fat. And sassy. Sassy. Sometimes very sassy (See: The Help). If your goal is to become an internationally marketable personality you've got to move yourself as far away from these characteristics as possible. Hair dye, lace front wigs and the digital age provide a wealth of opportunities to accomplish this visually, since the majority of your fans will never see you in the 'real' world. Besides, most of us only respond to the cues we're familiar with anyway, (i.e. blonde = sexy and light skin = beautiful).

Ultimately though, all performers use some level of this sympathetic magic to influence their public. By using ambiguity as artifice they create a space for slippage that the audience uses to imagine the artist's deep intentions, or, simply as fodder to talk about them badly. While I am majorly stoked about being a black person, I can't say I haven't wished for a "Becky moment" when trying to hail a cab, shop at Barney's or date a black athlete. I'm kidding. Kinda. A little bit. But not quite.

As an artist who engages in the performance medium, I have found that using the same tools Beyonce does (i.e. whiteness, blondeness, air-from-who-knows-where) that I can create mass appeal in the Art World™. My most recent proxy? Ten white women- blonde hair beating furiously against four high-powered wind machines. The most satisfying part of this exchange is that creation of ambiguity. By personally serving as a fringe member of the performance, the audience isn't sure if I'm 'The Artist', or, 'The Help'.

Have you officially made it as a model when you're a frequent victim of Photoshop disasters?

If that's the case, then we'd like formally to welcome Chanel Iman to the elite models' ranks. Just like this dubious 'shop job from 2010, something very egregious is going on with this new February cover of France's L'Officiel Paris.

The cover shoot stars Chanel looking gorgeous as always in a tropical-printed Dolce & Gabbana romper, but wait... what's the deal with her manipulated proportions?

Is it just us, or are her hands the size of her face? We're pretty sure Chanel doesn't have arms that slowly expand lengthwise as they reach her wrists. A quick scan of her previous campaigns (DKNY Be Delicious, PINK, H&M) reveals that, yep, Chanel's arms are downright normal IRL.

The whole gaffe kind of reminds us of the wonky elbow from that Bloomingdale's ad. Maybe it's just a bad month for magazine cover airbrushing. (Drew Barrymore on InStyle, anyone?)

Check out the Photoshop-abused cover below, and see even more retouching disasters in our slideshow. Mon dieu!

Scroll down for more photos.

Is that you Beyonce?

The Grammy award-winning singer who just gave birth to Baby Blue is being slammed for looking too snow white in her new promo ad.

In the photo, which is being used to re-promote her album "4," Beyonce is pictured lying across a leopard print couch, flaunting her enviable figure (shot pre-pregnancy. Thank goodness!) in a crochet bodysuit and appearing much lighter than her normal skin tone.

In recent months photoshopped ads and magazine covers have come under fire for their blatant misrepresentation of reality. But Beyonce's photoshop fail isn't just skin deep. Hiding blemishes (and hips) is one thing, but changing the color of a model's skin is another.

White-washing scandals aren't new for the 30-year-old superstar. In 2008 L'Oreal was accused of digitally lightening Beyonce's skin in a Feria hair color ad.

The New York Post called it "shocking" and there were countless blog posts swagging their finger at Beyonce for not representing her African-American ethnicity.

But Beyonce's fairer skin and honey blonde hair are ideal for companies looking to appeal to a wider audience. Though she is a black woman--white women can also identify with her.

"Colorism is unfortunately still an issue today. Dark skin is considered less than light skin in the in the minds of many in our community and in the media," Bill Duke and D. Channsin Berry, co-directors and co-producers of the documentary "Dark Girls," recently told The Grio.

But is this a case of digital skin lightening or simply a lighting issue? We hope it's the latter. Check out this collection of Beyonce ads and album covers from over the years. Is she a cameleon or keeping it real?

One of our biggest pet peeves is when an airbrusher unnecessarily retouches an already-gorgeous woman.

We were thrilled to see stunning model Denisa Dvorakova suits up in a sparkly Dolce & Gabbana bodysuit for the January issue of Elle Czech.

But while we're loving the bodysuit (and floral hat!), the Photoshop job done on Dvorakova is making our head hurt. Her glazed-over eyes and shellacked-looking face give her the visage of a plastic doll.

And what's even worse: those arms! The fake sheen on her right arm and the perfectly cut right angle scream "Barbie," and her left arm looks like it's bending the wrong way, tapering into a too-small hand. And wait... where's her left thumb?

Pass the Advil.

Check out the cover below. Do you think it's been overenthusiastically Photoshopped, too?

We are big Hilary Rhoda fans here at HuffPost Style. For a model, Hilary's got an utterly natural look -- rosy cheeks, a real smile (that's not bent into a brooding frown all the time) and tons of freckles.

So we really can't stand when a magazine takes her lovely look and morphs her into a flattened, airbrushed model-bot. Numero Tokyo seems to have done just, putting Rhoda on its January/February 2012 cover.

Shot by Alexi Lubomirski but seemingly Photoshopped by an entire army, Hilary's got alabaster skin, a bony jawbone and cheekbones that could cut glass. All taut, tightened and sharpened, she looks worlds away from her real self.

We can understand the logic of making a model look "prettier" (although we don't condone it) -- but why would even the most deceptive art team want to make an already gorgeous model look worse? That we'll never understand.

Look at the photos below -- do you think the Photoshop is a bit heavy-handed or does Rhoda look like herself?