Why Can't They Photograph Celebs Correctly?

**Sirch** · December 31st, 2011, 03:12 PM

Ever notice how bad Pl@yboy celebrity photo shoots are? More times than not I come away with the thought they made the actress look as unattractive as possible. It doesn't help, most actresses wait until their 40's before they agree to a nude shoot. (No offense to MILF!)

Usually the shoots are to contrasty or they make them up like strippers, with feathery things and all. I wonder if this is on the demand of the actresses? Whom think they know what an "artsy" photoshoot is?

Two that come to mind are Claudia Christian and Tia Carrere. What disappointments.

In closing all the photoshoots are horrible nowadays, but this thread specifically is about celeb shoots over the years.

**cuzzyman927** · December 31st, 2011, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirch

Ever notice how bad Pl@yboy celebrity photo shoots are? More times than not I come away with the thought they made the actress look as unattractive as possible. It doesn't help, most actresses wait until their 40's before they agree to a nude shoot. (No offense to MILF!)

Usually the shoots are to contrasty or they make them up like strippers, with feathery things and all. I wonder if this is on the demand of the actresses? Whom think they know what an "artsy" photoshoot is?

Two that come to mind are Claudia Christian and Tia Carrere. What disappointments.

In closing all the photoshoots are horrible nowadays, but this thread specifically is about celeb shoots over the years.

Whether it be men's magazines or the tabloids, one would get the impression that they feel there is a market for catching celebrities at their worst, and that it will generate more sales.

What I dislike about many of the photos in P-boy and P-house is that the women/models are too well-posed, often making them look like store-window mannequins and very unnatural. Also, due to the texture and sheen of the paper used it often tends to make the look somewhat waxy in appearance.

osbaldeston · December 31st, 2011, 07:44 PM

The one of Kelly Brook is an obvious example. They somehow took a naturally gorgeous woman who is getting sexier as she gets older and made her look wholly artificial and almost unattractive.

**imtrying** · December 31st, 2011, 08:30 PM

I've mentioned this in other threads but, IMO, the worst was Belinda Carlisle of the Go-Go's. P-Boy airbrushed her so much, her photos look like paintings. As far as the Lindsey Lohan pics, what's with the Marilyn Monroe stuff? They could have hired any model to pose like that. We wanted to see Lindsey as is. I think the only good celebrity pictorial in the rabbit mag (at least in the last few years) was the Stacey Dash set. She looked fantastic.

**DTravel** · December 31st, 2011, 08:33 PM

Some of the restrictions are imposed by the subjects (no crotch shots, forex). But I suspect the style of the shoots are from the photographers. Bunny mag's photographers have gone from thinking "let's take pictures of this beautiful woman" to "Hey, look how artistic I can make these pictures by mucking about with lighting and the digital camera's settings!". Basically they've gone from taking photos of the subject to creating abstract art, with a severe overuse of post-production "touch ups" when they accidentally stray too close to keeping the subject recognizable.

**Sirch** · December 31st, 2011, 08:54 PM

Glad I am not the only one who has noticed this. Some beautiful women are simply not photogenic. I get that. But this can't be the case with every celeb photo shoot!

Edit: Oh, yeah regarding the no crotch rule. Why would that be considered anymore private than the rest of their (nude) bodies? Its like a partial hang-up. I'm ok with the nipples and ass, but ashamed of my crotch. That's another reason celeb photo shoots are so boring.

**cuzzyman927** · January 1st, 2012, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTravel

Some of the restrictions are imposed by the subjects (no crotch shots, forex). But I suspect the style of the shoots are from the photographers. Bunny mag's photographers have gone from thinking "let's take pictures of this beautiful woman" to "Hey, look how artistic I can make these pictures by mucking about with lighting and the digital camera's settings!". Basically they've gone from taking photos of the subject to creating abstract art, with a severe overuse of post-production "touch ups" when they accidentally stray too close to keeping the subject recognizable.

I agree wholeheartedly, but there is a difference between no crotch/tit shots (which are typically achieved with leg/arm crossing or strategically placed props), than some magazines and photographers making the models look like wax figurines.

Personally I dislike and never understood the logic of some model/celebrity wishing to pose "nude" but covering up all of their assets.

I would much rather see them in a classy or unposed shot elegantly dressed or in a bathing suit/bikini as opposed to some posed shot crossing their limbs and covering up their goods -- I believe the correct term for that would be a cock-teaser.
If they possess such an overwhelming sense of modesty then don't do the photo shoot. But yet, ironically, their sense of modesty seems to fly out the window and does not seem to become an issue when they are often revealing more of themselves in their skimpy string bikinis on the beach!

**alex31** · January 1st, 2012, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirch

It doesn't help, most actresses wait until their 40's before they agree to a nude shoot. (No offense to MILF!)

They seek publicity because they are in decline and even the paparazzi do not photograph them anymore

Lester Square · January 1st, 2012, 01:34 PM

On a similar and related point - the thing I hate (esp with Hefs Rag) is the incorrect and misleading use of the word 'nude'.

The amount of female 'celebs' that have been billed in the mag as 'nude' in the past few years, and then when you see the photo set, the knickers stay on (or if they are off, her legs are angled in such a way they may have well stayed on) and the although the bra is off, she is doing a great impression of a octopus and covering up the two good points about her.

From memory the only celeb who has shown all the goods in Pb recently is Lizzy Jagger.

I can't be the only one who thinks that 'Nude', should mean nude.
No bra and kickers off in tamden, no photoshoot.

Topless, Ok if it's then billed as a top off shoot, but using the nude word for a photo that's being taken from distance with a soft foucs filter with the girl in a side on view with tits covered and a vase of flowers or lace curtain covering her flange, is not in my book, nude.

**tygrkhat40** · January 1st, 2012, 03:12 PM

When Valerie Perrine posed for Pl@yb*y in the 80's, she wouldn't allow crotch shots. To her, they were private, not for public display.

December 31st, 2011, 03:12 PM	#1
Sirch Vintage Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1,216 Thanks: 18,391 Thanked 12,680 Times in 1,147 Posts	Why Can't They Photograph Celebs Correctly? Ever notice how bad Pl@yboy celebrity photo shoots are? More times than not I come away with the thought they made the actress look as unattractive as possible. It doesn't help, most actresses wait until their 40's before they agree to a nude shoot. (No offense to MILF!) Usually the shoots are to contrasty or they make them up like strippers, with feathery things and all. I wonder if this is on the demand of the actresses? Whom think they know what an "artsy" photoshoot is? Two that come to mind are Claudia Christian and Tia Carrere. What disappointments. In closing all the photoshoots are horrible nowadays, but this thread specifically is about celeb shoots over the years.

December 31st, 2011, 08:33 PM	#5
DTravel Lean Mean Screencap Machine Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Better you don't know. Posts: 23,804 Thanks: 10,480 Thanked 207,287 Times in 23,711 Posts	Some of the restrictions are imposed by the subjects (no crotch shots, forex). But I suspect the style of the shoots are from the photographers. Bunny mag's photographers have gone from thinking "let's take pictures of this beautiful woman" to "Hey, look how artistic I can make these pictures by mucking about with lighting and the digital camera's settings!". Basically they've gone from taking photos of the subject to creating abstract art, with a severe overuse of post-production "touch ups" when they accidentally stray too close to keeping the subject recognizable. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I rage and weep for my country. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I can reup screencaps, other material might have been lost.

December 31st, 2011, 08:54 PM	#6
Sirch Vintage Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1,216 Thanks: 18,391 Thanked 12,680 Times in 1,147 Posts	Glad I am not the only one who has noticed this. Some beautiful women are simply not photogenic. I get that. But this can't be the case with every celeb photo shoot! Edit: Oh, yeah regarding the no crotch rule. Why would that be considered anymore private than the rest of their (nude) bodies? Its like a partial hang-up. I'm ok with the nipples and ass, but ashamed of my crotch. That's another reason celeb photo shoots are so boring. Last edited by Sirch; December 31st, 2011 at 09:00 PM..

January 1st, 2012, 03:12 PM	#10
tygrkhat40 Long Suffering Bills Fan Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: The City of Good Neighbors Posts: 9,669 Thanks: 304,243 Thanked 152,323 Times in 9,629 Posts	When Valerie Perrine posed for Pl@yby in the 80's, she wouldn't allow crotch shots. To her, they were private, not for public display. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.* To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

December 31st, 2011, 07:44 PM	#3
osbaldeston Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 51 Thanks: 914 Thanked 513 Times in 49 Posts	The one of Kelly Brook is an obvious example. They somehow took a naturally gorgeous woman who is getting sexier as she gets older and made her look wholly artificial and almost unattractive.

December 31st, 2011, 08:30 PM	#4
imtrying Vintage Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,068 Thanks: 14,832 Thanked 17,239 Times in 1,043 Posts	I've mentioned this in other threads but, IMO, the worst was Belinda Carlisle of the Go-Go's. P-Boy airbrushed her so much, her photos look like paintings. As far as the Lindsey Lohan pics, what's with the Marilyn Monroe stuff? They could have hired any model to pose like that. We wanted to see Lindsey as is. I think the only good celebrity pictorial in the rabbit mag (at least in the last few years) was the Stacey Dash set. She looked fantastic.

January 1st, 2012, 01:34 PM	#9
Lester Square Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 2,638 Thanked 523 Times in 57 Posts	On a similar and related point - the thing I hate (esp with Hefs Rag) is the incorrect and misleading use of the word 'nude'. The amount of female 'celebs' that have been billed in the mag as 'nude' in the past few years, and then when you see the photo set, the knickers stay on (or if they are off, her legs are angled in such a way they may have well stayed on) and the although the bra is off, she is doing a great impression of a octopus and covering up the two good points about her. From memory the only celeb who has shown all the goods in Pb recently is Lizzy Jagger. I can't be the only one who thinks that 'Nude', should mean nude. No bra and kickers off in tamden, no photoshoot. Topless, Ok if it's then billed as a top off shoot, but using the nude word for a photo that's being taken from distance with a soft foucs filter with the girl in a side on view with tits covered and a vase of flowers or lace curtain covering her flange, is not in my book, nude.