kelvinc
Members
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by kelvinc
-
I was wondering that SI was giving minimal damns, or being uncharacteristically forward-looking, that they would have photos where half of Nina's areola is visible. LOL turns out they oopsied and re-uploaded them airbrushed out. Great editorial team: they had these for literally months and nobody asked "are these too much?" Warning: umm even less nudity than what fisker47 uploaded
-
I think the Katherine Webb pics haven't been posted? (There's a blog entry on the Daily site on her but not on the main site. Maybe they couldn't fit in her layout at the last minute) These are the web images consistent with the rest of the pictures on si.com
Did those models do appearances like Letterman though? I mean, if it was just doing some media events with something like E! or whatever interviewing then nobody really cares about the fluency, but it gets a lot more anecdotal on an interview on a talk show. Guests on those are expected to talk more than just their work, and have small talk about things of a more personal nature. Brooklyn talked about how she met Andy Roddick (his people called her people) and how she doesn't know how to play tennis. Too much of an accent or lack of fluency and the whole thing looks forced and scripted. Don't forget this is first and foremost a sports magazine and the overwhelming majority of the audience is the SI subscriber base, so advertisers are going to prefer models that can maintain reader(?) interest as much as possible. Marisa and Brooklyn, obviously, have that type of "all-American" appeal (and, to a lesser extent, Bar can mimic it in a way that, say, Daniella or ABB, cannot).
I can't find it on the PS Store on my PS3. Either my PS3 still hasn't updated its store catalogue or this isn't available in Canada (I can't even find a channel for downloading any TV shows, so it's likely blocked in Canada). In any case, serious weak sauce. UPDATE: tried creating a USA PSN account. Still can't find it in the store. BLAH. SECOND UPDATE: yah I think the store is region locked. Logging in with the USA PSN account, I still can't find the video store button on the panels on the left but waiting for it shows an ad for the video store in the middle, but going deeper inevitable ends with "No content" or "This content cannot be accessed on this account." (or something to that effect). So I think I must've registered the PS3 as under Canada when I first booted it or it recognizes the IP address.
Yah the screenshots look better. I was expecting like a pot belly or something when frenchkiki was comparing the screenshot to the scans but Brooklyn looks way more like a real, attractive woman there. You can clearly see some well-defined musclature but it's not that excessive Marisa I-have-zero-body-fat-but-still-have-jugs-the-size-of-Jupiter level. Let's not forget that even video is put through filters that enhance the appearance but it's a lot less individually tweaked so it's still more representative of reality. I just realized what this looks like: a swimwear catalog. And that REALLY depresses me.
Re. general thoughts on the issue: the thing I was thinking about this morning was "I miss Petra." Also, Dominique and Genevieve are usually really hot in the SASI swimsuit issues and this is really disappointing (though whatever Dominique's doing to her lips was already apparent in the last SASI). Heck, just generally the SASI swimsuit issues look hotter, and this is just from looking at low-res pics because I don't live anywhere near South Africa. Maybe they should just hire those guys to do the next issue, since SASI is now officially the SI publication there. (After seeing above post): I'm sorry, but how hard is it to get all the models to go to one beach (any beach) and take a group shot instead of this half-arsed Photoshopping?! <_< Finally, miscellaneous random junk that should interest no one unless they have some sort of compulsion to collect all the pics....what are you all staring at me for? Front images for the gallery pages. Sometimes these are higher-res or close-ups of the smaller published pics, though I didn't check for this year. B&W model self-shots. May contain non-fashion-model content. I also skipped the M&M pic. Oh almost forgot ('cuz she's not really a fashion model (anymore?) but I noticed some of the pics were posted): Ashley Greene Not gonna bother posting the other non-fashion-model stuff.
Sonia Dara Zoe Duchesne
Julie Henderson Julie Ordon
Jessica Gomes Jessica White
Genevieve Morton Hilary Rhoda
Dominique Piek Esti Ginzburg
Damaris Lewis Daniella Sarahyba
Brooklyn Decker Christine Teigen Cintia Dicker
Missing pics. Most are BTS stuff, so depending on your taste, you might not be missing much. Anne Vyalitsyna Bar Refaeli
Looks like Prettyphile is going through them all. I have them all but I gotta run soon. It's actually not too hard to figure out: just view the HTML source of the gallery pages. They've been much more consistent in their file naming scheme this year. I think Brooklyn, being the cover model, is the only one with the hi-res pics.
There are some higher-res Brooklyn pics hidden behind a Flash gallery. Managed to whack my way through: All the other extra crap aside, the core model pics are not too bad. Bar and Daniella look particularly good, and I think either Brooklyn put back some weight from last year (a good thing) or they've cranked up the airbrushing. Either way it's good 'cuz she looked too unnaturally thin in last year's pics (the disproprotionately large breasts were noticeable in a bad way). I don't remember from where but someone said they wanted a more classical look and my initial impression is yes, they seemed to have reduced the skanky ho factor in a good way.
One of the things about the print issue is that there are nearly none of these ridiculously high-contrast front-lit shots like this or this or this. I'm just not a fan of excessively angular features and those shots really highlight them, not to mention that they emphasize the cleavage trough usually associated with augmented breasts. Maybe it's a technological thing: features seem generally smoother and not as sharp in the print issue than on-screen, and I prefer that. I'd say that the print issue is a nice improvement from the online photos, but I'm questioning the website-as-a-bad-photos-dumping-ground strategy as prudent in the long term, if they want to improve sales. <_<
[quote name='
Memento, I feel bad that you felt pressured into answering what's probably my question. The eyes are part of it (they look listless). I'm also not a fan of sharp cheeks, and the lips are unnaturally shaped and plump. The freckles don't thrill me but I don't think that's the big issue. But like I said, it's a big magazine, so I'm not going to dwell on who I don't like. And are they having models share pieces now? You'd think, given how much fashion designers make, that they'd be able to find more ways to cover a girl's naughty parts.
So I downloaded all (and I mean all) the pics using GetRight last night, and boy was I disappointed when scrolling through them in IrfanView when I reached the end of the directory and nothing popped out for me. I agree with a lot of what Memento Mori said. I don't follow fashion or modelling so my impression of these models are almost completely based on how they look in the magazine. I also heavily base my impression on facial features, which is why some models, like Cintia Dicker or Marisa Miller, will never do it for me. Then again, the issue is big enough that I can always skip them, so I base my evaluation on the issue's highlights, not my average assessment of the pics. Last year my highlights were Brooklyn and Jessica Gomes, and both have become quite more forgettable this year. Also, I totally agree that you can't really see a model's personality through her portfolio. But she can certainly sell an expression, and none of the models are doing that except Daniella. I think it's a fashion photography problem though: read this article about the Heeb Refaeli cover and you'll see that awesome cover was the brainchild of a non-fashion mind. BTW, for some bizarre reason SI uploaded a number of pics without posting them. Most of them aren't really interesting but they did slash off 6 decent Brooklyn body-painting shots for some reason. I think these are it, though I'm not sure... ...
That pic of Brooklyn is okay, but generally speaking her shoot was devastatingly disappointing. The thing is very simple: she has become too thin for her figure to work. She clearly upgraded her breasts last year: it looked okay last year, but losing weight has made them look very unnatural now (classic trough-like cleavage). Her face looks less rounded, and I think her lips look strangely full now (not Irina level, but still...). The nose actually seems to look larger, which doesn't even make sense to me, so I'll have to attribute that to the face getting slimmer? The face now gives off a very Marisa vibe to it (which is not a compliment in my book). This pic really puts these features to light... ...and it was one of the front page rotating ones, so I basically just started off the wrong foot. Overall it looks pretty unimaginative. I guess I shouldn't be disappointed by now of SI's lack of creativity but I still am. (I apologize if I come off ridiculously negative. It's late and I just started downloading the pics after a long RPG session. :| )
My previous experience last year was just to guess the URL of the new site from the previous year's site, and then I figured out how they named all their image file names and I pretty much had all the pics using GetRight even before they were finished uploading the thumbnails (seriously there were broken image holders when I was looking through it). The front page says to come back after midnight (EST presumably) so I guess they'll be uploading things at that time. (UK is five hours ahead. If you're still snowed in I guess you might as well take the day off. )
Yeah, I agree She seems like a sweet girl and has an amazing body, but IMO her nose looks like she was hit with a football ( * flashes back to Marsha Brady* ) I think has gotten better-looking over the years Does anyone know what else she does besides SI? I've never seen her doing anything else I'm 80% sure that it's her in the new Herbal Essences Hydralicious commerical. BTW, I just realized Brooklyn's pic has been sitting on the SI front page for probably a month now. Given that I don't think they like to telegraph these things ahead of time, I'd say her odds of being on the cover are not too great. <_< I think Daniella has a good shot, if you consider seniority. Jessica has been around SI for longer, but she still looks 18ish, and they always pick someone that's older-looking than that.
No need to speculate: she'll be up on Sunday, from the Flash video data file. Rebecca's "Not So Virgin Islands" was 1999. I totally agree that the 00's have not been great for SI. I've been really disappointed since 2006 because even though I hated the cover, it had my favorite set of rookies (Brooklyn Decker, Carla Campbell, Alina Nakashima, Pania Rose, and :heart: Yesica Toscanini :heart: ), and they've ditched them all except for Brooklyn within two years.
