Vogue has stopped being a fashion magazine for a long time now. I think the 2000’s is when they really became vanity fair lite. When I look back Vogue’s from that era all I see is celebrities on the cover promoting their new album or movie. Oh they are also in all the ads as well! As for Annie Leibovitz, I feel like she’s been phoning it in for a few years now. It’s sad to see.
2001 is the year the celebrity covers outnumbered the models and they have not gone back since then. I’m going to do a video about the history of the Vogue covers, I think it’s pretty interesting to see how different they were across the decades
She's a former news person on one of the lowest rated news programs in LA. He's buying her a place in a manufactured celebrity group. It's social elevation through his money.
I love that you called this out. I'd rather see a cover with someone I might not know that catches my eye because of it's beauty rather than a cover with someone that makes me roll my eyes when I see it. I know industries change, but moving in this direction is just bad form. Another brilliant video that speaks the truth.
Absolutely, she isn't doing her own retouching, but if you want to take credit for photographing an image, you have to take the blame when the retouching is bad. The best part is that the second picture was from a "behind the scenes" image, showing how fake all the bts content is as well.
I don't understand how you can miss something like this because that picture has to work around some people. Is everyone dumbstruck at the magazine or at her studio. I mean look at Annie's rates, you expect some quality control over the final files. Maybe they sell ''fast food'' for the masses. wink wink
@@AlinPurcaroiu the final image isn’t that important to most clients. A famous photographer + famous person = success. That’s why all these Instagram kardashian Nepomodels are doing Prada and Dior campaigns now. No one cares if they retouch their faces entirely or what the final image is, it creates “engagement. “
I actually think US Vogue can be incredibly useful, specifically when you are taking your dog for a walk and you’ve run out of 💩 bags to clean their mess.
It's a little sad to see Leibovitz's brilliant, raw and revealing images of celebrities evolve into grandiose productions with a blatancy of stroking the celebrities egos and garnering clicks.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
What billionaire should we see next in Vogue? Rupert Murdoch in Balenciaga?
Vogue has stopped being a fashion magazine for a long time now. I think the 2000’s is when they really became vanity fair lite. When I look back Vogue’s from that era all I see is celebrities on the cover promoting their new album or movie. Oh they are also in all the ads as well! As for Annie Leibovitz, I feel like she’s been phoning it in for a few years now. It’s sad to see.
2001 is the year the celebrity covers outnumbered the models and they have not gone back since then. I’m going to do a video about the history of the Vogue covers, I think it’s pretty interesting to see how different they were across the decades
She's a former news person on one of the lowest rated news programs in LA. He's buying her a place in a manufactured celebrity group. It's social elevation through his money.
And buying her son a spot walking for Dolce and Gabbana. It’s so bizarre to watch.
I love that you called this out. I'd rather see a cover with someone I might not know that catches my eye because of it's beauty rather than a cover with someone that makes me roll my eyes when I see it. I know industries change, but moving in this direction is just bad form.
Another brilliant video that speaks the truth.
Thank you 🙏🏻
Annie usually points with a wooden stick at the monitor, so I think the extra limbs are a case of ''somebody fire the retoucher''
Absolutely, she isn't doing her own retouching, but if you want to take credit for photographing an image, you have to take the blame when the retouching is bad. The best part is that the second picture was from a "behind the scenes" image, showing how fake all the bts content is as well.
I don't understand how you can miss something like this because that picture has to work around some people. Is everyone dumbstruck at the magazine or at her studio. I mean look at Annie's rates, you expect some quality control over the final files. Maybe they sell ''fast food'' for the masses. wink wink
@@AlinPurcaroiu the final image isn’t that important to most clients. A famous photographer + famous person = success. That’s why all these Instagram kardashian Nepomodels are doing Prada and Dior campaigns now. No one cares if they retouch their faces entirely or what the final image is, it creates “engagement. “
As a 30+ year Fashion photographer, Im never looking at Vogue USA these days!
I actually think US Vogue can be incredibly useful, specifically when you are taking your dog for a walk and you’ve run out of 💩 bags to clean their mess.
So sad to see that Annie is agreeing to that…
You should watch my video on Annie's worst photos and you'll see rock bottom is much lower than this
It's a little sad to see Leibovitz's brilliant, raw and revealing images of celebrities evolve into grandiose productions with a blatancy of stroking the celebrities egos and garnering clicks.
I agree entirely. There are so many photographs from her time at Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair that are exceptional.
Super clever commentary. Brilliant!
I think Lauren and Ivana had the same plastic surgeon.. same jawline...very strange.
I HATE Jeff Bezos since he closed Book Depository, before that I just despite him.
He and his girlfriend are the most boring ppl ever.
They surely have an interesting way of spending that money...