POP Fall 2008 : Agyness, Amber, Jourdan, Natalia, Naomi & Oluchi by Sebastian Faena

[darri]

Originally Posted by Sugarmama

Aggy's cover is my favorite. As much as I like Jourdan, the unibrow ruins her cover for me.

I agree, I even photoshoppd out the uni in the brow, lol, and the cover looks alot nicer, but not as strange, which perhaps goes against what they were aiming for. Im not in love with Naomi's, Natalia's, or Ambers, even though i should cause shes working those smoky eyes. And i totally wish that theyd sexed up Natalia more, but in keeping with the theme.

But Oluchi's( that she got this cover!!!), Agyness, and Jourdans covers are very good. I'll get one of those three.

Originally Posted by Miss Dalloway

^^Berlin i agree with what you wrote, dont think M&M could have done a better job at all, in fact i think some of their POP covers were awful.And yes they are signed with CN now, so i doubt they will be working with the mag anymore.Which imo is fantastic because other photographer's get their turn.

I agree that its good that another photographer gets their chance to shine and be in the spotlight, it not fair for one photographer to monopolize something, but M+M ALWAYS pruduced GREAT Covers for Pop!!! ALWAYZ!!!(Well, maybe apart from that Angel Kate one....but the boxing one was ok,lol)

Originally Posted by TheVeed

Can we please kill the word 'fierce' already? It's so ridiculous..

I know it sounds ridiculous, but in all honesty, sometimes its the only one word that can say to describe something!!!

[surrealseven]

Originally Posted by darri

it not fair for one photographer to monopolize something, but M+M ALWAYS pruduced GREAT Covers for Pop!!! ALWAYZ!!!

I totally agree, they bring such fun and creativity to POP! That's why I'm quite disappointed when they didnt shoot the current POP cover. They are almost synonymous with the POP name.

[taben]

^ wasn't the last POP cover shot by Solve Sundsbo? The one with Stephanie Seymour?

[surrealseven]

Yup, it was the most boring cover POP has ever put out.

[darri]

^Wasnt it!!! well, Sienna's wasnt that hot either.....

[surrealseven]

But at least the makeup on Sienna was cool....

[spiceboy]

i truly hate, how they r not serious enough to make an actual website, and all they have is a MySpace.... :/

[secretforest]

Originally Posted by spiceboy

i truly hate, how they r not serious enough to make an actual website, and all they have is a MySpace.... :/

i know, all they have is just some photos of their past four or three covers and some photos of themselves and thats it.

[surrealseven]

Originally Posted by spiceboy

i truly hate, how they r not serious enough to make an actual website, and all they have is a MySpace.... :/

Agree! Omg, that MySpace page is so cluttered. They should make a wonderful website like i-D, which I think it's great.

[Miss Dalloway]

Hopefully POP will get published 4 times a year like Grand wants it to (it better happen) and they get a proper website.

And Darri I'm sorry but thats my opnion, its ludicrous to me to claim M&M are always interesting when they produced some god awful POP covers and blatantly copied other photographers over and over again, i like them but they can be grossly overrated and i will certainly not miss them specially since they are at W,VP.etc.........

[darri]

Originally Posted by Miss Dalloway

And Darri I'm sorry but thats my opnion, its ludicrous to me to claim M&M are always interesting when they produced some god awful POP covers and blatantly copied other photographers over and over again, i like them but they can be grossly overrated and i will certainly not miss them specially since they are at W,VP.etc.........

What are these awful covers you are talking about?? From what i can recall (Madonna, Kylie, Jlo, Stam, Lindsay, Liz Hurley, Agyness, Letica Birkheuer, Christina Ricca, Kate Moss Boxing) were all very good covers, some of which were really great. They all added something 'special' to the subject. I didnt say they are always interesting, i said they produced great covers (not forgetting those superb editorials) for Pop. Kate Moss's Angel one (even though i got it,lol) and Victoria Beckhams werent that good, but they werent AWFUL...

That being said, I agree with you about them copying (No.1 example: W MAGAZINE THIS SEPTEMBER!!!!!) and perhaps abit overrated, but I still love them, because when they're good, they're spectacular!!!lol

[Miss Dalloway]

^^I guess its all subjective in the end, i really disliked few of the ones named but wont go into it, since i do agree that they contributed so much wonderful work for POP, i just wanted to stress that to me they did not always (as you wrote in caps lock no less ) produce great covers and edit's.

But ya i very much agree with the last sentance, when they get it; its superb! I think they will be fine at W, VP.etc though, just fine and i am happy that other photographer's such as Faena and McLellan are getting their turn at POP as a result.I truly hate when a single photographer/s hold monopoly over certain publication's.

[darri]

Please say which ones you hated, Im just so interested to see which you hated!! I wont go on about it, i just wana know?!!! lolol

My Faves were Kylie (Zombie Perfection!!!ol,,d that cover!!), Madonna, and Liz Hurley, and for some reason i really liked Lindsays??

[mikel]

^I love Kylies cover

[surrealseven]

Oh, I've never seen Liz Hurley's cover before, can somebody post it?