May 11, 2010 | Fashion, From You
I was asked the below questions on formspring.me and I thought I should consolidate them to answer:
do you think the style of zipper embelished accesories and clothing is still in?
is denim still in?
First of all, I think it’s hard to say “what’s in” in general since fashion is so diversified even within a single season, and even designers known for a certain “look” will send different pieces down the runway to appeal to a larger market. Plus, regionally, trends vary – and no matter where you are, there’s always going to be a girl who goes against the generalities and has her own signature unique style.
That being said, I believe both are “in”! (Any style, any way is my motto.) There was a lot less zipper-embellished clothing/accessories on the Spring/Sumer 2010 runways (with the notable exception of Ann Demuelemeester, whose zipper headpieces and scarves sent even the most zippered-out fashion editor into paroxysms). Zipper-edging? Sculptural zipper elements? Not so much anymore per se. But just because it wasn’t on the runways and has begun to desaturate the retail shelves doesn’t mean you should put all your zippered pieces away for good. The 80’s are still back with a vengeance, and a little zippery lends a hard edge to tiny-flowered dresses and short shorts. Maybe try a small accessory if you’re unsure? (I just spotted some rolled zipper rings at Target which might work well if you just want to dip your toes – er, fingers, into the trend.)
my own Zara display photo; D&G runway img from Style.com;
As for denim, according to the runways, retail, and catalogs – denim is HUGE for this summer. (Especially blue denim on blue denim – eeek!) Just look at Gap’s last ad campaign – the shelves of Zara – and the last D&G collection if you’re unsure. Now, whether it’s actually happening on the streets and on fashionable girls in the know….well, that’s another thing. I think if you wear denim-on-denim you’ll look exceptionally trendy and straight out of an editorial, though depending on the crowd you hang with you may get a few raised eyebrows. Want to look on-trend but not like an 80’s victim? Maybe stick with one piece of light blue denim (and not necessarily your jeans!) as a counterpoint to busy prints, bustiers, a loose tee, a chain cross-body bag, sorbet-colored pumps, or strappy flat sandals.
Hope that answers your questions!
xoxox
Carly
Leave Comment
May 10, 2010 | From You
I received this question awhile ago on Formspring.me when I had an Ask Me Anything account there:
I have a question about modeling in Japan. Are the height requirements similar to the ones here? I’m relatively short (5’2-ish) and curvy, but not fat in the least!
Hi! Models in Japan need to be a minimum of 5’6″ (166 cm). Since the average Japanese person is shorter, there tends to be no market for models under that height. You also need to be able to fit into Japanese clothes, with the standard size being: B (80-86 cm; 31-34″) W (54-60 cm; 21-24″) H (80-86 cm 31-34″). (There is a little bit of variance here and there, and if you want to work on late-night TV shows or raunchy catalogs etc you can be more curvy.) There is almost no market for foreign Asian models there – the more blond and Caucasian you are, the more work you are likely to get. (Though as of the last ten years or so half-Japanese models are getting more work for more mainstream outlets, but they are usually from Japan and speak Japanese to begin with.)
Hope that answers your question!
xo
Carly
My modeling in Japan story:
Though I’ve returned to Japan since my son was born in 2005 for a month every single year to visit my in-laws, I never modeled there again. All I can speak towards is general trends I’ve been seeing over the past decade or so, but I’m no expert!!
Leave Comment
May 9, 2010 | Beauty, From You
To tell the trutch, my first reaction was ewwwwww…but they’re very editorial-looking. Sure,for a party or photo-op, why not? Def. not for the office! (I feel the paper would be somewhat distracting on the eyelids for the wearer, but who knows?) They may take off unlike Lancome’s tattoo decal eyebrows from way back when…
Inspired by the art of Chinese paper-cutting, Eyelashes blend an element of traditional culture with contemporary design.
Intricately cut and delicately pretty, Eyelashes are available in three styles, each infused with symbolic meaning rooted in Chinese culture:
Horses: symbolic of success
Peony: for happiness and good fortune
Peach blossom: a symbol of love and romance
Unique and expressive, Eyelashes come in two sizes: accentuate the corners of your eyes with the smaller lashes for a subtle daytime look, or make a statement with the full lashes for a special occasion.
Leave Comment
Apr 25, 2010 | From You, Media
I received this question in my formspring.me box:
Have you seen the release of the unretouched photos of Brittany Spears for the new Candies ads? (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1265676/Britney-Spears-releases-airbrushed-images-digitally-altered-versions.html). What do you think of them?
This is the 4/14/2010 Daily Mail Reporter article she is referring to:
“Britney Spears bravely agrees to release un-airbrushed images of herself next to the digitally-altered versions
“Celebrities, and the industry around them, are often accused of producing images that affect young people’s body image.
“Which is why it’s so refreshing to see one of the world’s most famous pop stars allowing all of their imperfections to be highlighted.
“Britney Spears has allowed the pre-airbrushed images from a shoot she took part in for fashion firm Candie’s to be used ALONGSIDE the digitally-altered ones, so people can see the difference.
The 29-year-old singer made the extraordinary move in order to highlight the pressure exerted on women to look perfect.
“In the first shot, she is seen facing the camera with her arms behind her back. Imperfections that can be clearly seen in the un-airbrushed shot include blemishes on her calf, her larger thighs and, if you look really closely, you can see her feet have dry skin on them.
“The airbrushed pictures, however, tell a different story with a slimmed-down waist and flawless, skinny legs.
“Meanwhile, in the second picture, she is seen from the back – in the un-airbrushed shot she has areas of cellulite on the back of her thighs, a tattoo on her lower back (sometimes called a ‘tramp stamp’) is clearly visible and her backside is a little out of shape.
“However, in the altered photo all of these imperfections have been wiped out – and she appears to have a pert rear, unrealistically smooth skin, slimmer legs and the tattoo has vanished.
Shaping up: The pop star’s whole body has been trimmed down with the use of a computer, even down to removing a tattoo on her back.
“A source told the Daily Mirror newspaper: ‘Britney is proud of her body – imperfections and all.’
“Of the experience, the singer told press: ‘I had so much fun shooting the Candies for Kohl’s campaign. My favorite set-up was against the gigantic wall of pink cotton candy.’
“And she added: ‘I got to wear the cutest clothes and they are perfect for summer!'”
Source
So…here’s my 2cents since you asked…
I think it’s pretty obvious from Britney’s history that she is not particularly savvy when it comes to press and PR…and thus, it is most certainly stretching the truth to write that she “made the extraordinary move in order to highlight the pressure exerted on women to look perfect.” I’m willing to bet that it wasn’t her idea in the first place, and she likely did not care one way or the other, as Britney Spears has never seemed overly concerned with women’s issues in the first place. (Unlike Jessica Simpson, for example.)
Excessive Photoshopping and “realism” in magazines and advertising is currently a hot debate topic…perhaps in part kicked off by that unretouched photo of Lizzie Miller in Glamour Magazine last September (photo above)…and it’s patently obvious that Candie’s wanted to be a part of it. (Don’t get me started on why they decided to use Britney Spears as poster girl for the Candie’s brand in the first place…I find it a strange and almost PR-blind decision, but whathaveyou.) It’s sort of winceworthy that they chose to highlight Britney’s imperfections in releasing these photos…we’ve all seen the numerous tabloid photos of her over the years and so the public (I believe) is generally aware that Ms. Spears looks quite different in reality than when she is plastered with makeup, posed, and Photoshopped in a Candie’s ad or on her own album covers. (Had this been pulled with someone like, say, Victoria Beckham, I think there would be much more of an “ohmygosh!” reaction. Come on – we all know Britney has cellulite and acne and less-than-doll-like thighs. The jig is up, Candie’s, in case you didn’t realize.) Plus the company is only drawing attention to how much they have Photoshopped and digitally manipulated her in this ad (and therefore, we can assume, in all her ads for them up to now) so I’m not sure this is casting them in a good light by them saying “Look at our spokeswoman, Britney!! Isn’t she such a dog in real life?? But she’s proud of it, so yay!” Eye-roll-worthy…to me, it’s just someone else manipulating Britney’s image to get something out of it.
I think she looks great in the BEFORE photos (especially as a woman who’s had kids and is entering her 30’s)…though to be perfectly and utterly honest, what I expect when I open a magazine is something more like the AFTER photos, which (though not reality for all intents and purposes) display a visually appealing perfection, and offer no extraneous flaws that could detract from the brand message. (Except for Ms. Spears and her history, but we’ll leave that for another day.:-)
And on another note, as
the Photoshopping vs. what is real? debate rages on (with Jessica Simpson appearing without makeup on the cover of the latest issue of Marie Claire, for instance)…Health Magazine decided on this for their cover for the April 2010 issue:
Do you know who this is?
I didn’t…I was like, “I think I’ve seen her somewhere before..gosh she kinda looks like…no, wait, this lady looks much older…who is this??”
And I’ve seen two of her movies, too. Does this look like the Zooey Deschanel you know? (You know, the cute one, lately from the covers of Lucky Magazine and those sweet and sort of innocent-looking Cotton ads.)
I think you can tell that they definitely laid off the Photoshopping for this cover…and as a result I couldn’t recognize her. Or maybe I just haven’t seen her smiling enough. Or maybe her hair/makeup looks very unlike her. Or maybe I’m just an idiot.
Zooey fans, weigh in! Oh, and Britney fans too – and anyone who wants to talk about Photoshopping people for magazine ads/covers…would love to hear your input too!
Thanks for your thought-provoking question!
xoxox
Carly
Leave Comment
