Model
Marie Marguerite
Posts: 34
Orlando, Florida, US
I think she's a beautiful girl and a skilled model. She has many great fashion spreads and ad campaigns. However, I happened to see a youtube video of her and before makeup, posing, lighting, retouching, etc., her face looks basically like anyone else's. She could have gone to school with me and I wouldn't have batted an eye. I'm not hating, merely wondering how much this of this business has to do with luck, timing, and oh yeah - being very skinny - versus anything else. After all, lots of people would look great with professional makeup artists, photographers, stylists, etc. surrounding them all the time. Do you think being a great model is mostly innate or mostly about being in the right place at the right time and practicing to get the right expressions/walk? It just seems like a lot of the high fashion models don't look much different than anyone else when you get right down to it...
Model
Isabella55
Posts: 152
West Hollywood, California, US
A ton of fashion models aren't pretty, they just fit the bill of 5'11, 125 pounds. Karlie is in that class. Some fashion models are downright ugly when you look at them. Modeling is something you can be good at but it's not a talent or artform.
Photographer
Kev Lawson
Posts: 11294
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Most great models have something unique, it could be the way they walk, the way they pose etc...
I think most photographers here would agree, that a natural in front of their camera is probably the best part of the job.
Model
Paige Morgan
Posts: 4060
New York, New York, US
Not everyone who photographs well is traditionally pretty.
Not everyone who is traditionally pretty is photogenic.
Karlie photographs amazingly, "ordinary" face or no.
Model
Chloe Selene
Posts: 636
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US
The finished product of modeling, like campaign ads that you see of Karlie: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ogSQjynqHEE/T … /i28py.jpg does go through a lot of editing and photoshop. Professional hair and makeup artists had a lot to do with how "perfect" she looks. Models aren't perfect underneath all the hair and makeup: http://models.com/mdx/?p=8238 although most of them have strong features, bone structure, or something unique about their faces. This "something" might not be conventionally pretty, but it sets them apart. To some extent, a successful model's career probably was influenced by who she knew, what connections she had, being in the right place at the right time, etc. To some extent, all careers in all fields are influenced this way. To give credit where credit is due, though, more goes into modeling (or at least into great modeling, like everything, modeling can be done poorly or extremely well) than winning the genetic lottery and having pro hair and makeup. I think the ability to do this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HvqyOe6vsM is a skill and a talent in itself. Not every skinny, pretty girl knows how (or can be taught how) to pose and emote.
Photographer
Oscar Partida
Posts: 732
Palm Springs, California, US
Pretty is boring IMO....
most great models have a natural statuesque physique that makes them look Alienesque and beautiful
Karlie Kloss has those unique looks and that make her beautiful
Photographer
Yves Duchamp- Homme
Posts: 3212
Virginia Beach, Virginia, US
Marie Marguerite wrote:
I think she's a beautiful girl and a skilled model. She has many great fashion spreads and ad campaigns. However, I happened to see a youtube video of her and before makeup, posing, lighting, retouching, etc., her face looks basically like anyone else's. She could have gone to school with me and I wouldn't have batted an eye. I'm not hating, merely wondering how much this of this business has to do with luck, timing, and oh yeah - being very skinny - versus anything else. After all, lots of people would look great with professional makeup artists, photographers, stylists, etc. surrounding them all the time. Do you think being a great model is mostly innate or mostly about being in the right place at the right time and practicing to get the right expressions/walk? It just seems like a lot of the high fashion models don't look much different than anyone else when you get right down to it... It's all of the above. Innate AND being in the right place at the right time AND perfecting the skill.
High fashion models look EXTREMELY different from the average person, IMO, and not just the fact that they are a foot taller and 50 pounds lighter than them.
Photographer
Innovative Imagery
Posts: 2841
Los Angeles, California, US
She has a face that doesn't need all that much done to it to look great on film. She also has poise and confidence in front of a camera. She is the right size and has a great shape. She worked hard, paid her dues and got some breaks. That is why she is a successful model.
When you have all those things, you can be one too.
Photographer
-Ira
Posts: 2191
New York, New York, US
An attractive face/body does not necessarily make for a good model. I'd attribute more to confidence, poise, and uniqueness.
Model
Anna Adrielle
Posts: 18763
Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
I have to agree with you. She's a great model, don't get me wrong, but her look is a bit... I don't know. meh. It's not that she's ugly or anything, not at all. But it doesn't matter what I think of her  . the industry loves her and she has some great skills, and that's what matters.
Photographer
Photographe
Posts: 2351
Bristol, England, United Kingdom
Some models tend sometimes to look worse than non-models prior to the mua session.
This seems to come from exhaustion, lack of food, drama and having tons and tons of make-up constantly applied up to 7 days a week, I've seen some very androgynous, grey and zombified looking women, suddenly turn into a gorgeous feminine star.
They aren't being paid to be beautiful in real life. Pretty women aren't often what is best for the light or lens, it's about two things mainly...
1. Bone structure.
2. Ability of that face to take different make-up/looks. Versatility.
If it was a beauty contest, you'd see a completely different set of winners.
Photographer
FullMetalPhotographer
Posts: 2797
Fresno, California, US
I have worked with models that absolutely connect with the still camera that and create stunningly powerful images, but in person you just would never guess that they had that ability. I have also seen were model takes great stills but just has no presence on video. I have also seen beautiful women who just have no chemistry with the camera.
It is rare that you can get a model that connects in person, stills, and video. Cameras record in 2 dimensions so a face that might make dramatic and works well with the camera may not look the same in person.
Photographer
Digital Photo PLUS
Posts: 5503
Lorton, Virginia, US
I think she is gorgeous. Very interesting look. I don't like pretty.
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 12221
Los Angeles, California, US
Pretty isn't what is necessarily desirable in a great editorial fashion model. A striking beauty which is unique and interesting is. Pretty is for glamour models and playboy.
There are a lot of pretty girls out there. You can see a lot of images of them on sites like MM. Boring.
Photographer
Mortonovich
Posts: 6209
San Diego, California, US
Paige Morgan wrote:
Not everyone who photographs well is traditionally pretty.
Not everyone who is traditionally pretty is photogenic.
Karlie photographs amazingly, "ordinary" face or no. Truth.
Model
Marie Marguerite
Posts: 34
Orlando, Florida, US
Thanks everyone for your input - interesting discussion. I just happened to see a video of Karlie and her face looked extremely normal (which is what sparked my post), but I agree that she photographs very well.
Model
Marie Marguerite
Posts: 34
Orlando, Florida, US
Also, I don't think I said the word "pretty" in my original post. It seems like some people thought I was saying she's not pretty - I don't think she's particularly pretty or not pretty - just average-looking before the glam and photos.
Model
K I C K H A M
Posts: 14689
Los Angeles, California, US
Marie Marguerite wrote:
I think she's a beautiful girl and a skilled llama. She has many great fashion spreads and ad campaigns. However, I happened to see a youtube video of her and before makeup, posing, lighting, retouching, etc., her face looks basically like anyone else's. She could have gone to school with me and I wouldn't have batted an eye. I'm not hating, merely wondering how much this of this business has to do with luck, timing, and oh yeah - being very skinny - versus anything else. After all, lots of people would look great with professional makeup artists, photographers, stylists, etc. surrounding them all the time. Do you think being a great llama is mostly innate or mostly about being in the right place at the right time and practicing to get the right expressions/walk? It just seems like a lot of the high fashion llamas don't look much different than anyone else when you get right down to it... Everyone can look fine with all those things, but they still might not have that factor.
They can put ANYONE through that-- they pick who they pick for a reason, and it definitely doesn't look the same.
You know who I've always thought looked a little ordinary (but very pretty) is Coco Rocha. But I know everyone disagrees with me on that. I still think she's one of my top 5 favorite llamas because I love her expressions and the way she moves-- but putting her photos with no makeup, retouching, etc, next to other llamas, she probably wouldn't be my choice based on looks alone.
It's interesting how so many people can look at the same thing/ person and see something different.
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25319
Bath, England, United Kingdom
Some of the prettiest girls are also the worst models.... And some girls who you wouldn't look twice at in the street are just amazing once they get in front of the camera. Just my $0.02 Ciao Stefano www.stefanobrunesci.com
Photographer
Quay Lude
Posts: 6386
Madison, Wisconsin, US
K I C K H A M wrote:
You know who I've always thought looked a little ordinary (but very pretty) is Coco Rocha. But I know everyone disagrees with me on that. I still think she's one of my top 5 favorite models because I love her expressions and the way she moves-- but putting her photos with no makeup, retouching, etc, next to other models, she probably wouldn't be my choice based on looks alone. I've never seen the word ordinary any where near Coco until here. On Modely Mayhem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfl5ZCUgQYM
Model
K I C K H A M
Posts: 14689
Los Angeles, California, US
Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
I've never seen the word ordinary any where near Coco until here. On Modely Mayhem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfl5ZCUgQYM *shrug*
Just my opinion. I think she's fantastic, but I feel like I could see a similar girl walking down the street. Though that's probably because she shows more of her personality in her modeling than many of the top models, which makes her seem more "real."
She's one of the only models I've seen pull of the really real look. You know what I mean, how a lot of people do things to say, "Oh, I'm just a regular girl, too!" but it seems very fabricated (I'm just a regular girl but I need to make sure that everything of me looks perfect). Whereas Coca actually looks like an individual. I'm not sure why I see a regular girl when I look at her (albeit, a very photogenic and beautiful one), but that's what I see.
Photographer
LA StarShooter
Posts: 2731
Los Angeles, California, US
K I C K H A M wrote:
*shrug*
Just my opinion. I think she's fantastic, but I feel like I could see a similar girl walking down the street. Though that's probably because she shows more of her personality in her modeling than many of the top models, which makes her seem more "real."
She's one of the only models I've seen pull of the really real look. You know what I mean, how a lot of people do things to say, "Oh, I'm just a regular girl, too!" but it seems very fabricated (I'm just a regular girl but I need to make sure that everything of me looks perfect). Whereas Coca actually looks like an individual. I'm not sure why I see a regular girl when I look at her (albeit, a very photogenic and beautiful one), but that's what I see. I've never thought of the top fashion models as in any way regular, as others have written that the bone structure, etc., sets them apart.
I think you possess some interesting qualities yourself and one can see why you would book work, angularity and the face, the bone structure. You don't look regular to me. Kloss is in another galaxy. Not many women really have the total package that is a top fashion model.
While hair and makeup can transform a model--they can only be transformed for so long as it's usually a short career for a fashion model.
I have never had much difficulty in real life picking out a model. To start with: height. Then there's the build, oh and you just at the face and even in a raw, unmade up state, it usually smacks your eyeballs out of your head.
Since I have started shooting my eye for models has become more keen and I'm always on the lookout for one. It's rather amazing you can even in L.A. walk down a busy street, or somewhere like Farmer's Market and not see a woman with a model's build, etc.
And L.A. is crowed with models. People like Karla Kloss are really rare.
http://glamazonsblog.com/wp-content/upl … blog-3.jpg
Model
K I C K H A M
Posts: 14689
Los Angeles, California, US
LA StarShooter wrote:
I've never thought of the top fashion models as in any way regular, as others have written that the bone structure, etc., sets them apart.
I think you possess some interesting qualities yourself and one can see why you would book work, angularity and the face, the bone structure. You don't look regular to me. Kloss is in another galaxy. Not many women really have the total package that is a top fashion model.
While hair and makeup can transform a model--they can only be transformed for so long as it's usually a short career for a fashion model.
I have never had much difficulty in real life picking out a model. To start with: height. Then there's the build, oh and you just at the face and even in a raw, unmade up state, it usually smacks your eyeballs out of your head.
Since I have started shooting my eye for models has become more keen and I'm always on the lookout for one. It's rather amazing you can even in L.A. walk down a busy street, or somewhere like Farmer's Market and not see a woman with a model's build, etc.
And L.A. is crowed with models. People like Karla Kloss are really rare.
http://glamazonsblog.com/wp-content/upl … blog-3.jpg I think she's (Karlie Kloss) fantastic and completely irregular looking (in the nicest possible way). I'm just saying that I might know how OP feels when you look and someone and say, "Yes, they're amazing, but I just don't have the same attraction as everyone else."
And yeah, what you said still strikes me as odd... There are so many super full-of-themselves people here, and I don't know how it's possible since being pretty is so normal... Even if you DO look like Karlie Kloss, if you don't have the name (or while you're building it), you're still one of 50% of the population that's super attractive, and people will disagree one whether you unique qualities (as fashion models have) are attractive or not attractive. Therefore, to someone your unique qualities make you gorgeous and to some they make you ugly.
It even works that way with agencies-- like how some highly successful models get turned down before they get their break.
Sorry I'm rambling... late night coffee. :X
Model
_eMMe_
Posts: 866
Florence, Toscana, Italy
The greater model I know aren't pretty. They can model.
|
. the industry loves her and she has some great skills, and that's what matters.
