Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by vogue28, Dec 22, 2020.
Brutal, her hair needs some milk.
Im guessing this was due to be a newsstand cover but due to the film moving around they've had to use as a digital cover?
What have they done to her? She looks awful.
Hopefully the early release of this means we escape getting it as the cover story for the February issue, which is due out on... 6th January.
If print ceased and all that was left was digital, I probably wouldn't bother with magazines at all.
Awful, but I couldn't care less about digital ''covers''.... What exactly are they covering, because there's no magazine behind it? It's not like you will get this cover when you buy their, for example, January issue in PDF version.
I don't get this digital covers thing. It doesn't add anything interesting to their portfolio. Also this reference to an iconic photograph went completely wrong. She looks slightly ill and bored. It's a big no from me!
I worked for a fashion brand and just had meetings with a well known international magazine franchise in my country. Basically, now they are doing digital cover as an effort to get a brand to buy the exposure/advertise to the magazine. They do less photoshoots/pages for printed magazines nowadays because of pandemics and less-consumers who buys the printed magazine.
So they created this digital cover that has exclusive content/advertorial that can only be found on their website. Usually it cant be downloaded and the content usually not available for printed version. The concept is pretty much like The Edit from net a porter website. So thats why I guess we’ll see more digital covers in the future. I also heard that a lot of big brands will invest into this kind of cover.
Only realise now that this is actually the UK edition. It doesn't even look like that, and this is why visual aesthetic is so important because at least with Justine's Harper's you'd have been able to tell her cover apart from the rest? What's the decision behind it? Is Vogue even doing their special digital cover? I dunno, it could work but not with such a generic cover like this. A digital cover must be x4 arresting because people are blinded by images all day.
Also, the styling, hair and makeup looks dreadful!
This cover really emphasizes what a good model can bring to a photograph. The pose is really awkward, the facial expression is forced. There is nothing interesting, aspirational, or arresting about it. I like KW but she's not a model and doesn't have the skill set. Just a standard pretty shot would have been more flattering.