America is way more conservative than Europe when it comes to fashion, that's why American Vogue is always a year behind the French or Italian version; American women - in general - need time to let the avant-garde become more mainstream before they will chance it.
So if it's Charlize in September, that must mean Drew Barrymore in October.
I got this issue over the weekend and well, it's OK. I don't know if I can handle another Charlie interview, but the Jenny Sanford article was at least somewhat interesting.
I still had trouble finding the table of contents. I wish there would be a little flap you could pull out and open up to the table of contents, but then that would deprive you of the wonderful majesty of flipping through a gajillion ads.
I might catch some flak for saying this, because even though I am a fan of Meisel, Leibovitz, et al, I think sometimes we get this deja vu because these photographers have worked for the mags so much that they're inevitably going to recycle some ideas, either consciously or not. More fresh, young/new talent would be welcome.
@galaxina: I think that's basically inarguable. The well of ideas runs dry for everyone after a while, and the constant productivity that top fashion photographers are pressed into only hastens the process. Vogue needs new blood.
Liya looks both highly skeptical and distinctly unimpressed with her hair in that first photo of her (photo 9).
I like the Leibovitz photo of Karlie Kloss, when it's juxtaposed against the editorial photos. I look at them and realise that what's stunning about her is not so much prettiness (which isn't to say that she isn't pretty), but an incredible level of photogenicity (if that's a word). It's like, if you take each of her features in the portrait separately, they are almost ordinary (note I said almost), but in the editorial shots, she becomes like a work of art. I am in awe.
@t-yo3: I once heard someone say that being photogenic really just means being able to hold your face really, really still. A lot of people with her features would have twitched before they could have caught that picture.
I actually like that picture of Miley. I think it makes a statement on the entertainment and tabloid industry's exploitation of young starlets. She looks like her innocence is being stripped away from her. It's a very powerful photo.
08/24/09
08/24/09
I got this issue over the weekend and well, it's OK. I don't know if I can handle another Charlie interview, but the Jenny Sanford article was at least somewhat interesting.
I still had trouble finding the table of contents. I wish there would be a little flap you could pull out and open up to the table of contents, but then that would deprive you of the wonderful majesty of flipping through a gajillion ads.
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
I like the Leibovitz photo of Karlie Kloss, when it's juxtaposed against the editorial photos. I look at them and realise that what's stunning about her is not so much prettiness (which isn't to say that she isn't pretty), but an incredible level of photogenicity (if that's a word). It's like, if you take each of her features in the portrait separately, they are almost ordinary (note I said almost), but in the editorial shots, she becomes like a work of art. I am in awe.
08/24/09
08/24/09
In my ideal world, the articles on Roger will make the issue much bigger.
(Testino has the sitting photo credit, for anyone wondering what this could possibly have to do with fashion. :-))
[www.style.com]
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/25/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09
08/24/09