Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Color film was built for white people. Here’s what it did to dark skin.

The biased film was fixed in the 1990s, so why do so many photos still distort darker skin?

For decades, the color film available to consumers was built for white people. The chemicals coating the film simply weren't adequate to capture a diversity of darker skin tones. And the photo labs established in the 1940s and 50s even used an image of a white woman, called a Shirley card, to calibrate the colors for printing:

Shirley card

Concordia University professor Lorna Roth has researched the evolution of skin tone imaging. She explained in a 2009 paper how the older technology distorted the appearance of black subjects:

Problems for the African-American community, for example, have included reproduction of facial images without details, lighting challenges, and ashen-looking facial skin colours contrasted strikingly with the whites of eyes and teeth.

How this would affect non-white people seemingly didn't occur to those who designed and operated the photo systems. In an essay for Buzzfeed, writer and photographer Syreeta McFadden described growing up with film that couldn't record her actual appearance:

The inconsistencies were so glaring that for a while, I thought it was impossible to get a decent picture of me that captured my likeness. I began to retreat from situations involving group photos. And sure, many of us are fickle about what makes a good portrait. But it seemed the technology was stacked against me. I only knew, though I didn’t understand why, that the lighter you were, the more likely it was that the camera — the film — got your likeness right.

Many of the technological biases have since been corrected (though, not all of them, as explained in the video above). Still, we often see controversies about the misrepresentation of non-white subjects in magazines and advertisements. What are we to make of the fact that these images routinely lighten the skin of women of color?

magazine skin lighten

Image credit: Magazines and Getty Images

Tools are only as good as the people who use them. The learned preference for lighter skin is ubiquitous in many parts of the world, and it starts early. That's an infinitely tougher problem than improving the color range of photo technology.

Further reading: Why it’s believable that InStyle didn’t intentionally lighten Kerry Washington’s skin

More in Video

Video
What would J.R.R. Tolkien think of Palantir?What would J.R.R. Tolkien think of Palantir?
Play
Video

How The Lord of the Rings lore helps explain the mysterious tech company.

By Benjamin Stephen
America, Actually
The progressive plan to reclaim the working classThe progressive plan to reclaim the working class
Podcast
America, Actually

Progressive caucus chair Rep. Greg Casar on his movement’s new playbook.

By Astead Herndon
Video
The Department of Holy WarThe Department of Holy War
Play
Video

What Pete Hegseth’s fascination with the Crusades can tell us about the war in Iran.

By Nate Krieger
Video
Live Nation lost. Will anything change for ticket prices?Live Nation lost. Will anything change for ticket prices?
Play
Video

A jury ruled Live Nation and Ticketmaster a monopoly, but what that means for ticket prices is not so simple.

By Frank Posillico
Eating the Ocean
Why are states unleashing millions of these fish?Why are states unleashing millions of these fish?
Play
Eating the Ocean

America’s fishing paradox.

By Nate Krieger
Video
Why Americans can’t escape credit card debtWhy Americans can’t escape credit card debt
Play
Video

Credit card APRs are now as high as 20 percent.

By Frank Posillico