Also, agencies and magazines prefer the skin to look normal rather than smoothed.
That is true, because the creative directors like to have the final say as to the outcome of the image's, which is unique to either the editorial, or the magazine's "look." They outsource the re-touching to graphic designers / re-touchers, or have in-house personel for the editing.
If you were a sous-chef, would you want your guy whom delivers your garlic to bring a ready made garlic sauce or fresh garlic cloves? Crazy comparison, but it gets the point across. Just because the photographer doesnt edit the images doesnt mean they are not edited before the print run.
You could never do rotogravure or photogravure printing processes without at least some degree of editing. (usually quite a bit. no person wants an exceptionally large set of pimples in a high definition magazine) Editing has been around since almost the very first photograph.http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/We all have different styles and techniques. Doesn't mean you have to like mine, nor do I have to like yours.
But we all strive for quality.
Once again, quite true.
Everyone has their own point of view, and its better left at that.