Louis Vuitton F/W 10.11 : Christy, Karen, & Natalia by Steven Meisel

I think... so many people more interested in handbags and clothing, and not in reflections.
 
It's the ad campaign of the season, but... Now, the image quality doesn't convince me.
Maybe in the magazine look better.
 
Very simple ad. I love it though, the girls look divine...if a bit lotioned down to the bone :lol:. The clothes very so beautiful so I don't think this ad could've been bad though.
 
EDIT (MAJOR EDIT:( ok... so Street_a_Licious did a much better dissection of the mistakes in the picture -_- oh well... 24h+1unreadpage late i am :P anyway... isn't it amazing that such a big company makes a mistake like that? i mean... these must have gone through dozens of hands before they are made public... did they seriously NOT notice? not the photographers, the designers, the marketers, the executives, the secretaries...
they spend time, money and energy making sure that the paper tissue in the set is exactly the way it should be for the picture, and that the bag is held at a certain angle... and they dont see these things?!


Sorry for double post.

Btw major photoshop fail in this shot:

OH! But there's one even BIGGER!!!
which I thought nobody had noticed :innocent:, but of course the awesome Creative did see it a few pages back!!

Christy's reflection in the mirror is not too coherent with the pose of her arms and hands... It looks weird.

Don't you see something really strange comparing Christy's pose (shoulders and hands) with her reflection on the mirror? B)

MISHAP!! :o :o

http://imgur.com/PG5Co.jpg

tell us Christy...
are you leaning forward? or agains the mirror? is your hand in your knee? horizontal? looking down? what about your other hand? is it holding the bag?
and the breasts... are your breasts tanned and sweaty (mirror mirror)? or are they powdered, pale and turgid!?


Tiny mishap encore Karen's hand in the reflection has 4 fingers down, and yet the "real hand" has one finger on the handle....

Monsieur Arnault will not be pleased when he finds out!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think... so many people more interested in handbags and clothing, and not in reflections.

^Couldn't agree more. It's not the reflection nor the errors that matter in this campaign, it's the collection and how the models present it. :smile:
 
OMG!!! Great cast stupid photos this are baad , old cheap, this idea are used many times for me the worst campaig for the moment i hate seriusly i hate so much M+M pleaseee back Meisel no have the LV Felling

FYI the photos are by Steven Meisel
 
yes i knoe me seay pleaseee back Mert alas + marcus:smile:
 
There is another mistake, I didn't realize until I saw in photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com: in the one wich Natalia is touching her breast, her reflection is not
I this one:
http://www.imagebam.com/image/e9dab985742536

I'm also more interesting on the collection, but as Mies van der Rohe said "God is in the details"
 
so classic; this is a very valid visual translation of the collection. love, love, love the set & hollywood-esque glamour they did. pat mcgrath is a beast.
 
Snapped by me from ELLE UK August 2010:

rawxg9.jpg
 
beautiful campaign a little bit like american vogue editorials!
 
I've never been Christy's fan, but she looks amazing here!
The whole campaign is fabulous.
 
The styling in the hair and outfits is lovely, the 50s inspiration is quite clear.

However, I can't help to feel a sense of uncomfortableness when looking at the ad. I understand the concept of "backstage", but over-stuffing the space with lots of light bulbs and shoe boxes is distracting. It takes away from the focal point I find. When looking at the ad, I feel a struggle to want to leave the room, no matter how gorgeous the bags are.
 
A little unsure where to post this, but it's new.

Louis Vuitton Jewellery




(my own scan from Harpers Bazaar UK Dec 2010)

 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,461
Messages
15,185,465
Members
86,314
Latest member
BeneathTHEsurFACE
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->