there have only been a handful of girls in the history of magazines who qualify for that honour...don't fool yourself...girls come and go...most of them are interchangeable and replaceable...with very very few exceptions... and they are ALWAYS directed by the photographer /editor /art director...
Yes, of course the model is directed by the photographer/ed/ad. Of course models come and go because most of them are mediocre. But I still belive that the model is as important for the image as the photographer. Important to me doesn't mean how much work the model puts into the image. It means that however much work most photographers put in they will seldom produce great fashion photos with bad models.
To me, there are a handfull of photographers who always put out great work - Guy Bourdin, Frank Horvat, Sieff, Feurer and Helmut Newton quite obviously. Today there are a few that seem to do their thing irrespective of the model - Nathaniel Goldberg seems like one of those to me but I can't think of anyone else. Your average fashion photographer can't do miracles with a boring girl - your average fashion photographer is a vampire who feeds on model blood to get his pictures. An excellent fashion photographer enhances what is already there and knows to appreciate the model (Like Arthur Elgort, Francesco Scavullo, Patrick Demarchelier and Albert Watson).