Recommended Posts

4 Comments

  1. Typical American magazine – heavily pasteurized.

    But Lindberg is sooooooo good.

  2. I’m normally a Lindeberg fan however this was just an insult. I noticed that the cover image was soft and not just a bit. I picked up three different magazines and noticed that it wasn’t just a rogue plate stamping error and shook my head in disbelief. I can’t tell you how pathetic this is. Vanity Fair is one of the last bastions of great photography and you mean to tell me they couldn’t find an in-focus shot for their cover? Come on! I don’t know who to blame. Does Lindberg not own an auto focus camera? Does he not have the aptitude to simply edit that one out? (I personally wouldn’t have let the client even see that image.) Or do the editors at VF really not give a crap about how the cover of their magazine looks?

    All in all it’s just the same mediocre drivel that’s putting the editorial business further in the red. If you don’t care, why should we?

  3. @Victor
    I agree. I believe peter use D3X with a 24-70 zoom. The focusing should be this bad. These images look quite disappointing on paper…

  4. I totally agree. This shoot is awful. There’s loads of red in the images and they’re not sharp but much worse than all of this is the fact that Lindbergh has managed to make a strikingly beautiful girl look mediocre. Taylor Swift has changed dramatically in 6 months. For the better. In a recent Elle shoot she looked amazing. Lastly wind machine on a fringe?! You are having a laugh……


Comments are closed for this article!