Kate Moss

Whimsical

Grand Dame
Joined
Oct 17, 2020
Posts
463
Karma
3,043
Location
Europe
I'm on a Kate Moss kick and have discovered some really lovely photos that I wanted to share :kiss:

tumblr_mv3bkwjK2E1r9tciko1_1280.jpg
e2410b906597656f1b9864d02636561939b007f5.jpg

tumblr_mzkasf3e5d1sftdmho1_250.gifv
tumblr_mzkasf3e5d1sftdmho4_r1_250.gifv

Kate-Moss.jpg
1058327.jpg
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users

ghost

Grand Dame
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Posts
1,687
Karma
3,065
Location
United States
At Fendi Couture S/S 21. She looks different from what I remembered and a bit different from that video in post #342.
Ms3oYf8.jpg


Lila also walked the show.
SHmOdJj.jpg
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user

Skinny2skin

Worker Bee
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
65
Karma
348
Location
Europe
At Fendi Couture S/S 21. She looks different from what I remembered and a bit different from that video in post #342.
Ms3oYf8.jpg


Lila also walked the show.
SHmOdJj.jpg

Kate looks botched, which is sad since she looked absolutely stunning in her British Vogue video from November 2020.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

mentaldiet

Rookie
Joined
Mar 13, 2018
Posts
38
Karma
133
Location
Europe
At Fendi Couture S/S 21. She looks different from what I remembered and a bit different from that video in post #342.
Ms3oYf8.jpg


Lila also walked the show.
SHmOdJj.jpg
Upon seeing this post and the photo of Kate, I wondered why you were posting some random model in Katie's thread.

I agree with skinny2skin; I also thought Kate looked really good in that recent Vogue video. Perhaps this is just some unfortunate makeup and lighting?
 

Izzy

Worker Bee
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Posts
93
Karma
281
Location
Berlin, Germany
January 2020:

2fba896518ec6736c481dd848f0e3a60.jpg
(I think she looks great here. Her hair is falling nicely, her face looks fresh and rested, and the outfit is flawless too.)
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: 2 users

soymatcha

Worker Bee
Joined
Nov 1, 2020
Posts
81
Karma
396
Location
Australia
Kate looks botched, which is sad since she looked absolutely stunning in her British Vogue video from November 2020.

I think the face lifts were an artistic choice by Fendi. Maybe a comment on the beauty standards for woman in a post postmodern world.
1CBF1D9F-3008-4646-B035-E94D3127D85C.jpegA181B126-42D5-48DD-B91B-430481E5D490.jpeg
B1B53DA9-8650-4B3F-BE35-E8AF167A8D1E.jpeg

Not to dissimilar the Gucci cyborg we saw in Fall 2018. They both frame beauty as a social construct.

But good on the models for agreeing to massive reconstructive facial surgery for the sake of art. Why else would they do it?
 

Attachments

  • 796373FE-AB5E-421F-84C6-59B14EECE043.jpeg
    796373FE-AB5E-421F-84C6-59B14EECE043.jpeg
    358.2 KB · Views: 2
  • Like
  • Funny
Reactions: 4 users

Tinyportia

SkinnyGossip Royal
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Posts
2,900
Karma
12,215
Location
Australia
Just read in an article that Kate is auctioning a video of herself sleeping online? I'm really not savvy with cryptocurrency web stuff, I have never even heard of an NFT before, but to me this seems so fucking odd and creepy. Anybody care to enlighten me here? :lol:

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion...s-sleep-with-kate-video-as-non-fungible-token

The article you linked explains NFTs pretty well imo:

(non-fungible tokens) - one-of-a-kind assets that are linked to photos, videos, audio and other types of digital files, and can be bought and sold.

"Images in the public domain are owned by everyone by definition,” said Amit Katwala, the senior editor of Wired UK. “NFTs are attaching the notion of ownership to something that can’t really be owned – you don’t own the image itself but you own the right to call yourself the owner of that image"

Bitcoin etc are types of fungible tokens, they can be exchanged/substituted for other bitcoins (the same way that normal currency can). NFTs are basically tokens that attach to unique, one-of-a kind assets, i.e they are non-fungible. Think of it like a digital receipt /proof that you own a particular asset People think buying and selling NFTs will be like a new form of art collecting: you want to own the original asset (whether it be a meme, photo, tweet etc) and will pay a high price for it.

The one thing that I don't quite get about NFTs is why people would want to pay so much money simply just to call themselves the "owner" of a particular asset. From a copyright/intellectual property perspective, unless the laws change, the owner of an NFT doesn't own the copyright in the item that the NFT attaches to. So they don't acquire all the rights that the copyright owner has, such as the right to control the distribution and reproduction of the asset. I understand why people buy physical works of art even though they don't own the underlying copyright but when we're talking about digital assets, it doesn't make sense to me. Digital assets are easily distributed across the internet. Like the "overly attached girlfriend" meme which was sold as an NFT for over $400k according to the article. What is the point in owning an original digital asset if you don't also own the underlying copyright in the asset?

Anyway back to the article: emrata had me rolling my eyes once again:

The digital terrain should be a place where women can share their likeness as they choose, controlling the usage of their image and receiving whatever potential capital attached,” she tweeted. “Instead, the internet has more frequently served as a space where others exploit and distribute images of women’s bodies without their consent and for another’s profit.”

She said she wanted to use the new medium of NFTs to set a precedent for women and ownership online through a blockchain – a set of digital contracts – that “allows women to have ongoing authority over their image and to receive rightful compensation for its usage and distribution”.

OMG. She's a "model"! The whole point of which is to enable others to profit from her image. Models pose for photos, and then the photographer/company that commissioned the photo gets to decide how it is used. She was compensated when the original photo was taken (for her time), does she expect to receive ongoing compensation every time a photo of her is used? No, that money (quite rightfully) goes to the photographer or whoever the photographer sold the image rights to. Argh she's so annoying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

skintight

Rookie
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Posts
19
Karma
58
Location
Los Angeles
I mean it’s perfectly reasonable for a model to expect additional compensation if her image is used past the agreed upon terms. It really depends. If the contract didn’t include an unlimited buyout in perpetuity then the agency/model should absolutely receive further compensation if the client wants to add on additional usage. A lot of clients will sneakily try to get around this so I don’t think it’s at all unreasonable to want more control and autonomy over the use of your likeness.
 

Tinyportia

SkinnyGossip Royal
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Posts
2,900
Karma
12,215
Location
Australia
I mean it’s perfectly reasonable for a model to expect additional compensation if her image is used past the agreed upon terms. It really depends. If the contract didn’t include an unlimited buyout in perpetuity then the agency/model should absolutely receive further compensation if the client wants to add on additional usage. A lot of clients will sneakily try to get around this so I don’t think it’s at all unreasonable to want more control and autonomy over the use of your likeness.

If the image is used beyond the agreed upon terms, then yes, agree. I suspect though that emrata is talking about having control over her image regardless of whether or not she assigned all her rights away. Though admittedly this assumption is based on how vocal she has been in the past about wanting to control the use of her image, despite having signed a release to the contrary.

Regardless, from what I understand about NFTs, I fail to see how they will necessarily allow models to control the use of their image as emrata suggests. Theoretically, only the copyright owner should be able to tokenise the photograph. So unless emrata owns the copyright in the photo of herself, she shouldn't be able to tokenise it. At least, that's how it should work under current copyright laws I believe. In any event, the photograph can still be shared online, and as we saw with the whole Khloe Kardashian un-retouched photo saga, once a photo is published online, it's near impossible to control its distribution. I understand that every time the NFT attached to emrata's photograph is sold she will receive a cut of the price, but she doesn't get to control who can use and reproduce the photo.

Here is an interesting article on copyright issues in NFTs in case anyone is interested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

lizzielacksiron

Super Star
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Posts
320
Karma
1,265
Location
Britain
The article you linked explains NFTs pretty well imo:





Bitcoin etc are types of fungible tokens, they can be exchanged/substituted for other bitcoins (the same way that normal currency can). NFTs are basically tokens that attach to unique, one-of-a kind assets, i.e they are non-fungible. Think of it like a digital receipt /proof that you own a particular asset People think buying and selling NFTs will be like a new form of art collecting: you want to own the original asset (whether it be a meme, photo, tweet etc) and will pay a high price for it.

The one thing that I don't quite get about NFTs is why people would want to pay so much money simply just to call themselves the "owner" of a particular asset. From a copyright/intellectual property perspective, unless the laws change, the owner of an NFT doesn't own the copyright in the item that the NFT attaches to. So they don't acquire all the rights that the copyright owner has, such as the right to control the distribution and reproduction of the asset. I understand why people buy physical works of art even though they don't own the underlying copyright but when we're talking about digital assets, it doesn't make sense to me. Digital assets are easily distributed across the internet. Like the "overly attached girlfriend" meme which was sold as an NFT for over $400k according to the article. What is the point in owning an original digital asset if you don't also own the underlying copyright in the asset?

Anyway back to the article: emrata had me rolling my eyes once again:



OMG. She's a "model"! The whole point of which is to enable others to profit from her image. Models pose for photos, and then the photographer/company that commissioned the photo gets to decide how it is used. She was compensated when the original photo was taken (for her time), does she expect to receive ongoing compensation every time a photo of her is used? No, that money (quite rightfully) goes to the photographer or whoever the photographer sold the image rights to. Argh she's so annoying.
Thankyou!

The whole concept still dumbfounds me. I think it's the whole possessive nature of it, of course Mossy is consenting but somebody willing to pay £10k+ for a video of a person, purely exclusive to them, is disturbing surely?
What surprises me is that Kate of all people is doing this, it's something you'd expect a model of the social media generation to partake in, not a 90s supermodel (who clearly doesn't need the cash either?).
I've got a headache trying to understand it all but whatever in the black mirror episode this shit is, she can do what she wants. I hope she doesn't snore.

Kate-Moss-Juergen-Teller-20-Pink-Hair-Lola-Who-Fashion-Music-Photography-blog.jpg
 

Tinyportia

SkinnyGossip Royal
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Posts
2,900
Karma
12,215
Location
Australia
The whole concept still dumbfounds me. I think it's the whole possessive nature of it, of course Mossy is consenting but somebody willing to pay £10k+ for a video of a person, purely exclusive to them, is disturbing surely?

It’s no different to buying a physical piece of art though. Think of it like buying a physical photo. You wouldn’t batt an eye if someone paid a lot of money to own say, the original physical photo of Kate shot by Mario Sorrenti. NFTs work in the same way.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user

angel baby

Rookie
Joined
May 30, 2021
Posts
28
Karma
124
Location
Europe
These are recent ones...
I can't believe how old she looks. My mom is a couple of years older than her and looks a hundred times better.
Kate was such an inspiration when she was younger...

AD5CBB06-798D-4400-AE7B-8AB412DCC9AB.jpeg
7AE38C86-53DB-46F0-A77D-031C60B46B71.jpegFD3F3BC1-7935-4779-8C4F-F5EB1F60AB17.jpeg
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user