posted
wtf!!! seriously?? Zooey gives us basically NO foot sightings and her most recent one may be the most maddening yet. she poses barefoot in the famous 'Pose'.. but yet 80% of her feet are covered up by the damn magazine logo!!! then to add insult to injury, her soles are out of focus of course because they want to create some depth.
i say screw artistic integrity and your f'ing logo and give us our barefoot celebs!!!
posted
To Rider: Great save. This has happened in the past. If I recall correctly Carrie Underwood was on the Self Magazine Cover and had her feet covered by the logo then it turned up online. Hmmm more celebs I'd like to see on that cover minus the logo?
Posts: 2004 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Nina, this is my house, you work for me, and I want to suck your toes." -Big Trouble (2002) Posts: 1855 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
she is an actress and singer but usually does less mainstream movies and music. her sister is emily deschannel of bones. she actually has a sitcom coming out this fall and it is getting some good buzz. fingers crossed.
quote:Originally posted by Keyfeet: they arent out of focus
To me, it looks like the photo was given an out of focus depth touch in Photoshop for the magazine. I've done such things before too for advertising with food. The background was clashing a little bit too much with the logo I placed partially over the image, so I softened the background. To me, the link to the magazine cover looks out of focus when compared to the photo without the overlay of text.
posted
I just watched '500 Days of Summer' today and there is a primo Zooey sole shot with pajama pants on. First person who could find that clip or still gets a free ice cream.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aka.footjoyboy: I asked because I saw a group called (I think) HE AND SHE on a couple of late night shows and thought that she looked like the lead singer.
Yep....she sings in She and Him
Posts: 1 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's strange it doesn't look like the kind of fuzzy back round you get from having a low f-stop, it looks more like they either used a crappy lens or decided "Hey, why don't we make the background look shitty in photoshop?" I like the shallow depth of field look for most portraits and macro shots, but if I was going to do some 'the pose' action I'd go for a well lit area so I could have a tight aperture and get everything in focus. Silly photographers, I should send them a letter lol
Posts: 177 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |