Nudity

[extramax]

ok, she is a clothes model and has nothing to do with sex! and zhen she can be photographed by terry richardson in the way he made with susan . he has nothing in common with sex too. he is only a fashion photographer...

 

[cocomonkey4]

the reality is that you show your boobs though it is a clothes not a nude model. the catwalk is presenting and always have a lot to do with sex as such. and if gemma is presented in this way with her child breasts it is not very tasteful. why she is a high fashion model i cant believe...

out of the many things it is needed to be a high fashion model, having playboy worthy breasts isn't one of them. I can think of tons of other reasons why a person might be confused by Gemma's popularity but because she's flatchested isn't a legit reason. Most of the fashion heavyweights are all flat chested(case and point Kate Moss).
IN fact one of the reasons girls modeling are so tiny is so that their body shape doesn't distract from the actual clothing. So if her boobs were big and just hanging out, then that would definately ruin the purpose/shape of the dress. and the dress she was wearing wasn't to show off her breasts(unlike some others specifically designed for that purpose), nip slips on the runway happens all the time.

 

[martinionrox]

ok, so Anouck did this topless film here.

http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/

(Make sure to click Anouck at the bottom)

I don't condone nudity, and I'm not a big fan of it by any means, but I actually think this film is quite tasteful. I don't think its purpose was to be obviously sexy. I think it was to evoke more feeling than that. I think hidden sexuality can sometimes be more appealing than obviously sexually charged footage (i.e. Gisele) But then again, I'm not a guy. That's my opinion. It seems to be Anouck did this for the sake of good film, not some tacky p*rno clip by any means.

I believe in Eugenia's film at the end you can also see some nipple, but in my opinion it too was tasteful. Nudity isn't necessarily a GOOD thing, but when it is performed for the sake of "art" (which I realize is a grey area) to give something more depth and meaning (which in these cases I think it did), I think it can be a beautiful thing. I think sexually charged nudity is tacky. ..and high-fashion models are not meant to have beautiful bodies to show off, not it's a problem if they do except . . High-fashion modeling should not be in the same proximity of the next pin-up girl for Maxim.

 

[AlexN]

Is that Gemma runway pic old? Because I know her chest isn't that small...

I find most of those Gisele pictures pretty tasteless. And those Ana pictures...

 

[GlitteryBug21]

Beautifully put, martinionrox - couldn't have said it better myself!

 

[extramax]

out of the many things it is needed to be a high fashion model, having playboy worthy breasts isn't one of them. I can think of tons of other reasons why a person might be confused by Gemma's popularity but because she's flatchested isn't a legit reason. Most of the fashion heavyweights are all flat chested(case and point Kate Moss).
IN fact one of the reasons girls modeling are so tiny is so that their body shape doesn't distract from the actual clothing. So if her boobs were big and just hanging out, then that would definately ruin the purpose/shape of the dress. and the dress she was wearing wasn't to show off her breasts(unlike some others specifically designed for that purpose), nip slips on the runway happens all the time.

the difference is that kate moss looks lioke a woman. a young woman. little breasts but a woman. gemma looks like 12 yo and in addition to that her boobs ( by chance or purpose viewable ) emphasis she is 12... tasteless! kate moss tasteful!

 

[extramax]

besides, as a fashion phoographer i can tell you why tiny boobs are better. but this is not the topic. its gemmas face plus her boobs... this is the little but important difference...

 

[hugobossdaria]

ok, she is a clothes model and has nothing to do with sex! and zhen she can be photographed by terry richardson in the way he made with susan . he has nothing in common with sex too. he is only a fashion photographer...

terry richardson disgust me

 

[morgan38]

^Terry Richardson's nudes are often very tastless in my opinion.

 

[scblonndie]

Gemma Ward's nudes are anything but tasteful. When Gisele poses "nude" (I've yet to see a legit nude photo) she looks like a woman. Gemma has a wonderful face, but the body of a little boy. I'm much more offended by Gemma's nudes than Gisele's.

 

[hugobossdaria]

hahaha

 

[cocomonkey4]

the difference is that kate moss looks lioke a woman. a young woman. little breasts but a woman. gemma looks like 12 yo and in addition to that her boobs ( by chance or purpose viewable ) emphasis she is 12... tasteless! kate moss tasteful!

Kate moss is also more than 12 years older than Gemma. If you take the pictures of Kate when she was the same age as Gemma they both look equally young.
Also there is a big different between purposely showing off undeveloped breasts or by chance. By chance(as in the photo you first talked about) means that she did not do it on purpose, it was the designer that put her in the show and put her into that dress, therefore if you find it tasteless, it's not gemma's fault. If she was blatantly flaunting her boyish chest down the runway suggestively by choice then one can argue it is tasteless.

 

[extramax]

Gemma Ward's nudes are anything but tasteful. When Gisele poses "nude" (I've yet to see a legit nude photo) she looks like a woman. Gemma has a wonderful face, but the body of a little boy. I'm much more offended by Gemma's nudes than Gisele's.

exact!

 

[hugobossdaria]

in gemma's paris vogue cover she looks like she has a bird chest

 

[martinionrox]

Kate moss is also more than 12 years older than Gemma. If you take the pictures of Kate when she was the same age as Gemma they both look equally young.
Also there is a big different between purposely showing off undeveloped breasts or by chance. By chance(as in the photo you first talked about) means that she did not do it on purpose, it was the designer that put her in the show and put her into that dress, therefore if you find it tasteless, it's not gemma's fault. If she was blatantly flaunting her boyish chest down the runway suggestively by choice then one can argue it is tasteless.

agreed. Gemma is not deliberately flaunting her chest, runway slip-ups happen all the time! She's yet to do any nude photos to the extent of Kate Moss's nudes, so one can wonder how someone could call her nudes tasteless or tacky.. in my opinion.

 

[lostgirl]

Gisele on Nudity in modeling:

-"While her model contemporaries NAOMI CAMPBELL and KATE MOSS are happy to show off their bare breasts on camera, the shy Brazilian will only wear bikinis and underwear.

Bundchen says, "I would never be naked in a film. I would never be naked in a fashion picture.

"Kate Moss can take her clothes off no problem. Most girls have no problem with it.

"To me, it's different. I think there are some things you should keep to yourself. I have a contract with VICTORIA'S SECRET. They've had already seen me in lingerie for God's sake. If someone should see me naked, it's my boyfriend."

Um... evidence to the contrary?

Her breasts are barely covered. Plus in that Rolling Stone interview I quoted a few pages ago she said she never wears transparent tops.

I'm not seeing any baithing suits or underwear in either of these.
I thinks she means she won't pose full frontal, absolutely nude.

 

[extramax]

it makes no difference if the pop-out is by chance or porpurse. the top gemma wears is obviously dangerous. anyway, because it can happen anytime a girl with this face and bshape shoulnt wear something like this on the catwalk. i dont need to tell you that the catwalk is a sex-presentation-platform! that is why fashion itsself works... no place for childporn...

 

[lostgirl]

Gemma Ward's nudes are anything but tasteful. When Gisele poses "nude" (I've yet to see a legit nude photo) she looks like a woman. Gemma has a wonderful face, but the body of a little boy. I'm much more offended by Gemma's nudes than Gisele's.

First of all, just because she looks twelve doesn't mean she is. Really you're just faulting her for being flat-chested, and saying that small breasts are offensive. Am I misunderstanding you?

 

[lostgirl]

Gisele on Nudity in modeling:

-"While her model contemporaries NAOMI CAMPBELL and KATE MOSS are happy to show off their bare breasts on camera, the shy Brazilian will only wear bikinis and underwear.

Bundchen says, "I would never be naked in a film. I would never be naked in a fashion picture.

"Kate Moss can take her clothes off no problem. Most girls have no problem with it.

"To me, it's different. I think there are some things you should keep to yourself. I have a contract with VICTORIA'S SECRET. They've had already seen me in lingerie for God's sake. If someone should see me naked, it's my boyfriend."

Um... evidence to the contrary?

Her breasts are barely covered. Plus in that Rolling Stone interview I quoted a few pages ago she said she never wears transparent tops.

I'm not seeing any baithing suits or underwear in either of these.
I thinks she means she won't pose full frontal, absolutely nude.

Do her boobs in the first picture look a lot smaller than they do in all of the other pics?

 

[martinionrox]

Thank you GlitteryBug21 I'm glad you see my point

it makes no difference if the pop-out is by chance or porpurse. the top gemma wears is obviously dangerous. anyway, because it can happen anytime a girl with this face and bshape shoulnt wear something like this on the catwalk. i dont need to tell you that the catwalk is a sex-presentation-platform! that is why fashion itsself works... no place for childporn...

I understand where you are coming from, but keep in mind that it is not Gemma's choice what she wears and does not wear on the catwalk. Runway slip-ups are inevitable with ANY designer. It happens all the time, it cannot be something to dwell over, and it's not something anyone can really avoid.. even the designer. The designer isn't going to change their designs to make sure that a young-looking model's nipple doesn't partially show. Their job is to present unique clothing. Yes, it is Gemma's choice to be up there, but part of being a model is being comfortable with yourself. Like I said before, she is not deliberately flaunting her chest. She is not "presenting sex," the viewers are there strictly to view the fashion. If they want to look at beautiful vuluptuous naked breasts, they can look else where. The point of them being up there is not to present their bodies. It is not called a model show for a reason; it is to present the fashion in a fashion show.