UK Tatler February 2012 : Kate Middleton by Chris Jackson

[tarsha]

twitter/fashionfoiegras

 

[honeycombchild]

It's shot by Chris Jackson. There's another shot inside the magazine also where she's laughing. It's not a commissioned shoot though I believe so they've done pretty well making it look like she sat for them.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[MON]

They keep on failing to photograph her and deliver. this is a fail again

 

[liberty33r1b]

her face looks pretty odd and weird on that cover...

 

[NadineAndTheCity]

Why does it say "What to expect when you're expecting" under her name?
Did she confirm that she's pregnant?

 

[Deleted member 116957]

I think it's more like, "What to expect when you're expecting Kate Middleton to be pregnant."

 

[8eight]

This is a paparazzi image from getty images, heavily retouched to look like a shoot.

 

[YoninahAliza]

Poor Kate... I feel bad that she get's put on all these magazines without her permission. Especially Tatler, it just makes them look cheep because they obviously couldn't get her to sit for them (same thing with Pippa a few months back). Also the tagline under her name is such a ploy to get people to buy the magazine. After seeing this paparazzi image turned magazine cover I really hope she never sits for the magazine, I'd much rather Vogue or Harpers Bazaar.

 

[honeycombchild]

My Snap

 

[MulletProof]

They should've photoshopped her eyes into the camera, this looks wax-figure creepy.

 

[tigerrouge]

The core readership of Tatler will know she'd currently neither pose for them nor speak with them, while the casual purchaser who's unaware of that will discover the emptiness of the cover feature and probably never pay good money for the magazine again, especially not when they can get countless glossy shots of her every week in Hello for half the price.

I thought that when the new editor took over, there'd be a different spin on the Tatler formula, but for me, it's gone downhill faster than the winter olympics. People might not expect that much from the magazine, but it used to offer a modicum of glamour and wit in its own way. I used to subscribe and enjoyed what I saw most months, but now it feels as if the magazine regularly keeps lurching into cheap desperation where the Middletons are concerned.

And while they have made some interesting cover choices during the months when they're not scraping the bottom of that particular barrel, those images have often been so grotesquely photoshopped that they lost all appeal to me.

 

[YoninahAliza]

^Completely agree Tigerrouge. Tatler used to be a glamourous magazine in a way, with it's writings of high society people and royalty but now it's totally rerouted and gone all cheap. It looks more like a tabloid not a magazine that used to be more or less respected. Plus the fact that they over-photoshopped Kate and many other coverstars just makes the magazine seem much more sad. Shame really...

 

[rox_yr_sox]

I'll have to admit that Tatler does put out the odd beautiful editorial. But the journalism is so bad, any self-respecting, moderately intelligent person would be ashamed to admit reading it. I never pay for Tatler anymore on principle. My local library gets it, so I borrow it and scan anything worth keeping.

 

[WilliamsLe010919]

damn, this look really creepy. are royal people not allowed to be in magazine photoshoot or something? i have never seen a studio shot of Kate.

 

[Master Wood]

I will buy this because I always do, and unfortunately I am one of those people who (Until such time as I fully choose so stop reading it) can't ever miss buying a copy. That said this is abysmal, and Kate Reardon (Editor?) Is doing a real poor job with this magazine and I dare say the conde nast name in general.

 

[tarsha]

newsstand.co.uk

 

[YoninahAliza]

damn, this look really creepy. are royal people not allowed to be in magazine photoshoot or something? i have never seen a studio shot of Kate.

They are allowed to sit for magazines but Kate's never sat for one (well except for the Vanity Fair shoot with Wills when they got engaged). However Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, and Lady Kitty Spencer (Princess Diana's niece) have all sat for Tatler. Princess Diana was on the cover three times but I'm pretty sure they were paparazzi shots not actual sittings. So it's not impossible for them to get the royal ticket.

 

[rox_yr_sox]

^ I don't believe they actually sat for Vanity Fair directly. They commissioned Testino to shoot some engagement photos, and some of these went into VF, but they weren't directly commissioned by VF.

I don't think Kate would ever sit for Tatler. If she sits for any glossy it would have to be Vogue UK surely. The brit fashion monthly that has the most prestige, not some gossipy society magazine. Eugenie, Beatrice and Kitty are lower calibre royals/aristos, who, if they'd had their choice, I'm sure would have chosen to have a cover of Vogue UK over Tatler any day. Diana sat officially for Vogue UK covers on a number of occasions (one of the few magazines to score this).

 

[YoninahAliza]

^That's true about the Vanity Fair cover. I should have explained it better. Thanks for the correction. And yes, I completely agree about if/when she sits for a glossy it should be Vogue UK. It's much more prestigious then Tatler. I can only imagine that the magazine who nabs a sitting with Kate will have a best seller.

Also all the tag-lines on this cover really annoy me, from Margaret Thatcher A Jolly Good Handbagging, to What to Expect When You Are Expecting, and the bit about the country houses. They are all quite off putting.

 

[kokobombon]

Kate Middleton by Chris Jackson




ebook-free-download.net