Real Models Vs Real People

[AlmostFamous]

Originally posted by softgrey+Apr 9th, 2004 - 11:44 am--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(softgrey @ Apr 9th, 2004 - 11:44 am)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by smashinfashion@Apr 9th, 2004 - 11:38 am
<!--QuoteBegin-softgrey

@Apr 9th, 2004 - 11:24 am
designer samples...the samples used in photos are the same ones used on the runway...they are usually fitted specifically to the girl who wears them in the show...very small...less than a standard size 4...american...these girls are usually under 20 and have no hips or boobs...no healthy adult woman could fit into these items...

well i wish i could get ahold of some samples. i'm a healthy adult woman and i have the body of a 12 year old. some of us just weren't meant to fill out, apparently. i often have things tailored to fit because most consumers pieces are made for "healthy adult women"

i think you're still under 25 ...right?...

what no one bothers to tell us women is that there is another growth spurt at twenty five...

i was shocked to discover at the age of 26-25....that i had suddenly developed hips and boobs...having had the body of a teenage boy all my life...i didn't really know what to do with them... ...it took some years and serious wardrobe revision before i got it right...

your time will come...never fear...

i know how you feel though- no one ever has any sympathy for those of us who are small and thin... [/b][/quote]
My mom is 42 and has the same body type since she were 16. 5'7 and 105/110 lbs, with no boobs or hips.

 

[softgrey]

almost famous...i dare say that you are not the norm...you are a model right...the regular rules do not apply... i've talked to a LOT of girls about this and it's very very common...even if it's not common knowledge...consider yourself lucky... i guess...depends how you look a it...many people consider boobs and hips a good thing...

but you will probably never suffer a weight problem based on what you've said about your good genes...

 

[purplelucrezia]

Originally posted by softgrey@Apr 9th, 2004 - 4:42 pm
almost famous...i dare say that you are not the norm...you are a model right...the regular rules do not apply...

Just look at Twiggy though. She was stick skinny as a young woman, but now that she's gotten older...

 

[AlmostFamous]

Originally posted by softgrey@Apr 9th, 2004 - 4:42 pm
almost famous...i dare say that you are not the norm...you are a model right...the regular rules do not apply... i've talked to a LOT of girls about this and it's very very common...even if it's not common knowledge...consider yourself lucky... i guess...depends how you look a it...many people consider boobs and hips a good thing...

but you will probably never suffer a weight problem based on what you've said about your good genes...

I"m not going to argue that I am very lucky. And boobs and hips are definately a good thing, so is not having boobs and hips. Everything is just beautiful!!!!

 

[softgrey]

Originally posted by AlmostFamous+Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:15 pm--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AlmostFamous @ Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:15 pm)</div><div class='quotemain'> <!--QuoteBegin-softgrey@Apr 9th, 2004 - 4:42 pm
almost famous...i dare say that you are not the norm...you are a model right...the regular rules do not apply... i've talked to a LOT of girls about this and it's very very common...even if it's not common knowledge...consider yourself lucky... i guess...depends how you look a it...many people consider boobs and hips a good thing...

but you will probably never suffer a weight problem based on what you've said about your good genes...

I"m not going to argue that I am very lucky. And boobs and hips are definately a good thing, so is not having boobs and hips. Everything is just beautiful!!!! [/b][/quote]
i agree...pros and cons with everything... we all just need to accept who we are...
and embrace that...

 

[model_mom]

Here are a few things I have learned from this topic:

First and foremost models are real people.

All people who are not models would like to see themselves portrayed in mags,so they can they can communicate that it's Ok to look fashionable in any size, shape and nationality.

95% of the Fashion Industry believes that it takes models and celebrities to sell their product.

5% have started the ball rolling to use everyday people in some mags, and it's working.

Magazine sales are based on purchase by the public. Sooooo.....

 

[As You Like It]

Not everyone has that third growth spurt in their mid-20s. I'm almost 27, and still have a horrible boyish-figure from head-on. Seen from the side, I have a decent rack and a great butt, but I must have been at the end of the queue when hips were being given out.

If my hips shift after I have kids ( whenever....someday...not real soon), it will probably be something of an improvement. Then I will maybe look like I have a waist.

 

[softgrey]

Originally posted by model_mom@Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:38 pm


5% have started the ball rolling to use everyday people in some mags, and it's working.

Magazine sales are based on purchase by the public. Sooooo.....

that figure is way too low...we're talking about the us here...and not advertising...us magazines are all about 'real people' now...and celebs

just another tidbit...models get paid-real people and celebs don't...so that's another incentive for magazines to promote the use of real people and celebs in stories...editors are often pressured to do this even when it poses a major problem in terms of size and finding the right clothes...everyone's budget has been seriously cut back....

 

[model_mom]

Originally posted by softgrey+Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:52 pm--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(softgrey @ Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:52 pm)</div><div class='quotemain'> <!--QuoteBegin-model_mom@Apr 9th, 2004 - 8:38 pm


5% have started the ball rolling to use everyday people in some mags, and it's working.

Magazine sales are based on purchase by the public. Sooooo.....

that figure is way too low...we're talking about the us here...and not advertising...us magazines are all about 'real people' now...and celebs

just another tidbit...models get paid-real people and celebs don't...so that's another incentive for magazines to promote the use of real people and celebs in stories...editors are often pressured to do this even when it poses a major problem in terms of size and finding the right clothes...everyone's budget has been seriously cut back.... [/b][/quote]
Celebs don't get paid? I never knew that. But then I'm learning everyday! That is the main reason I joined tFS, and along the way I gained some friends.

 

[softgrey]

celebs don't get paid for editorial...they get paid super well for advertising...

 

[model_mom]

Can you believe the # of looks this topic has recieved and it scored big in the reply section as well. Some people have even changed their point of view.

 

[softgrey]

Originally posted by model_mom@Apr 9th, 2004 - 9:16 pm
Can you believe the # of looks this topic has recieved and it scored big in the reply section as well. Some people have even changed their point of view.

i hadn't noticed...

well...it's a complicated issue and there are a LOT of different factors involved...i think it really helps to understand it when you look at it from many perspectives...everyone's perspective has been very interesting...i've really been enjoying the discussion and i hope others have as well...

 

[tres_vogue]

I love to read Teen Vogue because they feature models in their editorials and style looks, but I also enjoy reading about all the other "non-models" and their own unique style. I also like to see socialites and celebrities, but I agree that Vogue should feature a real model on their cover. I mean Madonna?? Come on...

 

[Kimkhuu]

Real people and models.... Real people add on to the diversity....... But def MODELS over celebs.... That's FOR SURE.

 

[orlem]

Fashion highlights so many things that don't deserve to be highlighted...

I like models in magazines up until the point where it becomes shallow and the magazine starts sending out the wrong ideas. That kind of thing is really hard to measure, of course.

 

[sasseestefanie]

I like seeing models.... and definintely models over celebrities

 

[ablutophobic]

I can see why magazines need to put celebs on covers to sell more issues, but I think ads and editorials are best left to models. I also dislike celeb "guests" in runway shows. America is so obsessed with celebrity lives that magazines keep putting celebs on the covers.

As for promoting body shapes, I do like when magazines have a few pages dedicated to dressing each body type and it ISN'T because I'm short with big hips, in fact I'm a 6' beanpole so looking at models is pretty much looking at my own body. I just like reading how different cuts and patterns can affect how you look. My only complaint is that the "tall" person is often only 5'9" or so in these with a 34" inseam and that isn't tall or long enough for me haha.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Hmmm ... I've noticed there seems to be a lot of pro-model for everything opinion on this board, and even after reading every bit of this thread, I'm not sure I understand why.

I get that we have to have models in editorials due to sample size. I'm a big fan of real people because I am reading magazines (and I read almost all of them, especially the fashion issues spring and fall) because I want to see the clothes (not looking for fantasy), and seeing them on Hana or whoever doesn't tell me how they'll look on me (but, if she looks fat, the money is good I will too). The reason I like to see so-called "celebrities" on covers--certain ones, not all--is because they are generally accomplished women. Sure, a few are famous for being famous, but most of them are genuinely talented, hard workers, and have done interesting things with their lives.

Models, on the other hand, are genetic lottery winners. Some are beautiful, not nearly all IMO, but they are the perfect human clothes hangers. In most cases these are very young girls who often don't have character in their faces (who does at 14) and who haven't really accomplished anything yet.

So my feeling is, it's largely models in ads, it's largely models in editorials, I'd just as soon see non-models for the rest.

 

[SuperWalker]

^

 

[iluvjeisa]

I get that we have to have models in editorials due to sample size. I'm a big fan of real people because I am reading magazines (and I read almost all of them, especially the fashion issues spring and fall) because I want to see the clothes (not looking for fantasy), and seeing them on Hana or whoever doesn't tell me how they'll look on me (but, if she looks fat, the money is good I will too). The reason I like to see so-called "celebrities" on covers--certain ones, not all--is because they are generally accomplished women. Sure, a few are famous for being famous, but most of them are genuinely talented, hard workers, and have done interesting things with their lives.

Models, on the other hand, are genetic lottery winners. Some are beautiful, not nearly all IMO, but they are the perfect human clothes hangers. In most cases these are very young girls who often don't have character in their faces (who does at 14) and who haven't really accomplished anything yet.

So my feeling is, it's largely models in ads, it's largely models in editorials, I'd just as soon see non-models for the rest.

I don't agree. Actresses are accomplished because they take direction from directors but models are not accomplished because they take direction from photographers? That sounds truly bizarre to me - taking direction is taking direction. Modeling is still-acting. Just like there are people who are gorgeous and act terribly, there are gorgeous people who photograph terribly - so photographing well is a talent - a gift to project emotions. Very successful fashion models, not swimsuit models, are extremely beautiful and still-actresses. After a few years they have accomplished something - a portfolio packed with art.

As for the genetic lottery argument - everything we accomplish is because of our genes - acting as well. So just like models are genetic lottery winners, so are actresses.

At the end of the day, though, the most important thing for people who are interested in photography and/or beauty, is that most celebs just look bad on covers - they are not gifted still-actresses. To me, it's fine with Kate Winslet, Demi Moore or Nicole Kidman because they generally photograph very well. But SJP....COME ON. She looks dreadful and doesn't photograph well - and should not be tainting a cover.