9 Comments
  1. I don’t understand how the second picture is fashion or art for that matter. The model is not showcasing any kind of clothing for the fall season, only her bare body. If it wasn’t for the dramatic makeup, hair and the only thing shes wearing, YSL earrings, this would be considered pornography.
    I am appalled.

  2. To Kelsey:

    This is in fashion, the “artful nude”. You actually said it yourself, because of the “dramatic makeup and hair and the YSL earrings”, it’s why it’s not pornography. No porno has the taste to use YSL earrings. I’m actually being a little tongue in cheek here, to lighten the mood! Helmut Newton in the 70’s actually shot nudity that was WAY more “sexual”, suggesting situations and intentions that were definitely leaning a lot more towards the “pornographic”. This picture is so mild and innocent compared to Mr Newton’s nudes.

    Just as a warning though, you better not open Purple magazine or any of the other major European magazines.

    Betty
    MDC

  3. Why we use the word “pornographic”?

    During the 80s (I was there), this was progressive.

    Define pornographic this picture mean live in obscurantism way.

  4. Franck,
    She is 20, not a teenager.. When Patti Hanson worked with Helmut Newton for Vogue Paris in 1977, she was 21, only 1 year older than Giedre.

    Betty
    MDC

  5. This is ridiculous, is not even a good picture at all.
    This photographer says he is interested in art, he is interested only in shooting naked girls.
    This is grotesque and please do not mention Helmut Newton next to this non competent photographer. The comparison is again RIDICULOUS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Related posts: