61. does not look like the same 2 shots of the body. the original has one arm showing and the one on the cover has 2 arms showing. faith is great, she does not need re-touched!

Posted at 6:36PM on Jul 20th 2007 by QUINCYGIRL

62. Fake Hill, she really can hit only one note, and she really is not very talented.. she is practically washed up without her husbands help. However a given is the new duet by Tim and Fake Hill, Yes, this is a good song. But!!!!! Notice when she sings Breath, it sounds like she is making a yawning sound, this to me is Not, I repeat Not talent.

Pennie

Posted at 6:59PM on Jul 20th 2007 by Pennie

63. Shame on you Redbook and many other magazines for that matter This retouched photo is the very reason women of all ages have such negative body images. How do you live up to what everyone sees on these covers? I am glad to see the untouched photo. Faith Hill is beautiful naturally. Let us see what she REALLY looks like on a cover!!!!!

Posted at 7:22PM on Jul 20th 2007 by Becca

64. PLEASE, ITS TWO DIFFERENT PICTURES, ONE IS CLOSER THAN THE OTHER THAT'S HOW HER AMR MIGHT LOOK THICKER. CHECK OUT HER FACIAL EXPRESSION AND HER HEAD SIZE. DUH, TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE LOOK BAD, SHAME ON YOU!

Posted at 7:51PM on Jul 20th 2007 by TYLER

65. tyler, It is NOT two different photos... photoshopping can make it look like 2 different photos, but it is the same photo... they have *miniaturized* her body, simple as that... Shame on Redbook, which I thought was supposed to be for more mature women, possibly those past thirty?? This magazine certainly can't think the people with the biggest budgets are anorexic teenagers and college students, Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie probably don't even know what a Redbook is!

Posted at 8:05PM on Jul 20th 2007 by Brock

66. Her smile looks friendlier and more inviting in the original untouched photo. Without the smile lines around the mouth and eyes, her smile looks forced in the touched up version.
.
I wish that the media and Hollywood would just let people be people and appreciate a beautiful woman when they see one without having to alter every single thing about her. I mean, what have they decided? Beauty is only that which is not human or natural? Faith Hill is stunning. Imagine looking like her and having some photog say "we're gonna have to edit and change every single one of your features before we publish this thing." I mean, here we are wishing we could look as good as Faith Hill, and even Faith Hill is being told she's not good enough! Then they wonder why women are ravaged by depression and eating disorders. Hmmmm...

Posted at 11:10PM on Jul 20th 2007 by Margarita

67. For the love of...
...they even removed her freakin' CLAVICLE. Nice.
Ah, to live in a world with no bones...

Posted at 11:10PM on Jul 20th 2007 by Margarita

68. Good for you TMZ for giving her credit for her original apperance. She looks beautiful before her touch up.

Posted at 12:16AM on Jul 21st 2007 by Moe

69. This is why so many women have issues with their bodies! The media makes stars out to be so "perfect" and women feel they have to live up to stars...leave Faith naturally beautiful.

Posted at 8:24AM on Jul 21st 2007 by stormyrain

70. THE WOMAN IS ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL AND NEEDS NO HELP FROM ANY PHOTOSHOP. ACTUALLY ITS AN INJUSTICE TO HER.

Posted at 10:18AM on Jul 21st 2007 by JOECAPRIOCITYLIFE PRODUCTIONS

71. when I saw this on line in the supermarket it took me a minute to realize it was Faith. Now I know why.

The photoshopped version is hideous compared to the original - if I were her - i'd be pissed.

Posted at 11:37AM on Jul 21st 2007 by creativegirl

72. the cover does not look like the one that TMZ is showing. i have collected faith hill for years and she has the wrinkles under her eyes on the redbook cover. maybe TMZ needs to find something else to do

Posted at 2:11PM on Jul 21st 2007 by mary

73. 2 things, 1 I can't believe how bad she looks. if you're getting shot for a magazine cover, at least have your makeup professionally done to hide most of those flaws! instead of "oh they'll just airbrush it out"

#2 her body. not too bad for a 40 year old that just had a kid. but c'mon, they shouldn't be slapping some hot 22-year-old body double on there. ridiculous!

I also find it odd that her head does seem smaller and it's not even positioned at the same angle. for some reason they tilted it to the left, which for the life of me I can't understand. absurd

time for women to start figuring out that ALL these women are airbrushed before they get suckered into buying all these rags.

Posted at 4:17PM on Jul 21st 2007 by bpsp

74. #22 that is too true. they shrunk her head so it looks like she won't have a big one ! LOL

Posted at 4:17PM on Jul 21st 2007 by bpsp

75. mary,

That's probably because, they pulled the altered cover knowing that it had been leaked and everyone would know what a fraud they/Faith Hill are!

therefore, they couldn't run it, and replaced it with something that was "much less" airbrushed.

Posted at 4:24PM on Jul 21st 2007 by bpsp