|
Forums >
General Industry >
Implied fashion..
Do fashion photographers shoot nudes? What would that look like? Dec 29 06 05:39 pm Link In their spare time they do, but you'd be hard pressed to find anything but the most benign nudes graceing the pages of Vanity Fair or Vogue. Especially now that Helmut's dead. Hmmm... I take that back. It's purely an American mag thing. British, French, and Italian Vogue have nudes all the time, though they aren't particullarly provocative. Define nude, Mr Clinton. Dec 29 06 06:04 pm Link I'm just curious.. Fashion has a very different aesthetic.. Does that play in to how a fashion photographer would conceptualize a nude? Dec 29 06 06:13 pm Link W.G. Rowland wrote: do you really want me to show you Dec 29 06 06:14 pm Link W.G. Rowland wrote: Paris Vogue? Italian Vogue? 125? S? Numero? Dec 29 06 06:14 pm Link As the genius Richard Goldstein once said to me, "There's nothing more fashionable than being comfortable in your own skin." Dec 29 06 09:41 pm Link Fashion isn't about the clothes. That's rule #1. Unfortunately, no one has been able to write the other rules. Dec 29 06 09:41 pm Link Rule #2 - "simply poo" is not a fashion statement Rule #3 - clip your toenails Rule #4 - KMart is not Couture Rule #5 - snot isn't sexy Dec 29 06 09:46 pm Link Searcher wrote: And my point is proven. Dec 29 06 09:57 pm Link Searcher wrote:
Dec 29 06 10:02 pm Link Brian Diaz wrote: Ah, but to whom? Dec 29 06 10:04 pm Link Searcher wrote: LMAO!!!!!! Dec 30 06 01:50 am Link LMAO! Dec 30 06 01:53 am Link W.G. Rowland wrote: Hmmm, "implied fashion"... wouldn't that be more like a nude image where she was wearing gucci shoes, but you couldn't quite make out the label? :-) Dec 30 06 02:01 am Link Searcher wrote: Couture but not Haute? Dec 30 06 02:04 am Link Brian Diaz wrote: being comfortible in someone else's skin is much gooder Dec 30 06 02:08 am Link W.G. Rowland wrote: The answer is in how fashion/glamour photographers critique nudes on mm Dec 30 06 02:08 am Link |
