[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Nice...always love extreme outfits as an art

__________________________

Are these Mardi Gras outfits?

Alexandra, ahem, she's kinda boring.
Theodora, she is the one.'

....the paint job along that skirting board ain't real good ...



ROCKMAN

She's a lucky girl.

Quote
Rockman
....the paint job along that skirting board ain't real good ...

Dead right.

Should have used masking tape.

Quote
Koen
She's a lucky girl.

Why do you mock her Koen...do you see she's made her clothing out of upholstery and furniture? Its a shame...

OK let's be honest.



These clothes are complete and utter crap.

another daughter and son

Quote
GravityBoy
OK let's be honest.



These clothes are complete and utter crap.

Chef hat?

Quote
GravityBoy
OK let's be honest.



These clothes are complete and utter crap.

The clothes are not crap...the combination is crap

__________________________

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
GravityBoy
OK let's be honest.



These clothes are complete and utter crap.

Chef hat?

Towel...she's obviously recently showered in paint

This is kind of an OT question, but I'm curious. I'm not all that into fashion, maybe somebody can clear something up for me.

A lot of fashion, be it at a fashion show or in shoots like this, feature things nobody would ever wear, and likely never go on sale. I say likely as I can't imagine anybody wearing these things since they aren't practical at all. It seems like they exist solely for the sake of one show or photo shoot. These outfits Alexandra is wearing aren't as bad as some, but who wears that stuff? So my question is, what's the point? If they're not advertising these outfits for the sake of selling them, what are they doing? Is it just advertising the designer? Keep their name out there? I guess that would kind of make sense, but it still seems like it would make more sense to show off things people could actually wear and buy. You might be able to sell 1 or 2 to Lady GaGa or something, but where do these things fit into their business model?

Like these things...





What are they trying to sell us? Is it just about showing off how creative they can be, and catch people's attention to bring notice to their practical outfits? I'm not trying to put down fashion, I just don't understand it. Seems like these fashion shows are very expensive to put on, with what they have to pay the models, all the backstage people, the cost of the outfits, etc. How are they making money off this? Where does it pay off? Does the buzz off these shows translate into sales of unrelated clothing from the same designer?

She is ok,but no big deal.....

she looks like Patsy Stone.

Quote
GravityBoy

Wasn't looking too good, but I was feeling real well.

Alexandra sat next to me at the Stones last Stade de France concert.
A sweet, skinny kid in beat-up pants and top minus any make-up.

Like Patti, the girls are amazingly photogenic at the hands of a "fashion" make-up artist.

Hate to see her going the "GaGa" route. I like Lady Gaga but one is enough!"

some of the photos are crap as well - a few of the poses actually make her look slightly thick looking, and she is a slim girl. i blame the photographer. the make up isn't especially pleasing either.

i think she looks better in the candids.

Quote
stonesrule
Like Patti, the girls are amazingly photogenic at the hands of a "fashion" make-up artist.

Hi stonesrule! so do you think that it's the make up that makes them pretty - that they're plain in person?

Quote
CindyC
some of the photos are crap as well - a few of the poses actually make her look slightly thick looking, and she is a slim girl. i blame the photographer. the make up isn't especially pleasing either.

i think she looks better in the candids.

I agree and would add the designers to the list. Who ever decided that this is an attractive look for a woman is certifiable. She is a beautiful girl, but you sure can't tell from these photos.

Saw the two Richards daughters in Newark. I would never call them plain, even
without fashion make-up. Photogenic, sure.

~"Love is Strong"~

This is more my style

Quote
CindyC

Quote
stonesrule
Like Patti, the girls are amazingly photogenic at the hands of a "fashion" make-up artist.

Hi stonesrule! so do you think that it's the make up that makes them pretty - that they're plain in person?

I don't want to sound mean, because it's not intended that way, but I find them (and all the Stones kids) pretty "plain" even with the makeup. Plain might not be the right word, normal might be a better description, but I'm not sure any of us would look twice if we saw them on the street if they weren't offspring of the band. Nor do I think they would have fashion careers. Same goes for Kurt Cobain's daughter, or any of the many rock offspring that have gone into the fashion industry.

I find Patti pretty attractive, she did make it into modeling on her looks alone and not on her name, so it makes sense.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though, so neither stonesrule or I can definitively say they're not remarkable looking but I really think it's more about who their dads are and not that they are necessarily prettier than, for example (even though I've never seen any of you), any of the ladies here on IORR, or that you might run into on the street. Much the same way that so many rockstars wouldn't be getting laid if they were instead working at an insurance agency instead of rocking out on stage. Being on stage doesn't make you more attractive, it's the perception of them because of their fame that changes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-02-01 01:34 by NoCode0680.

Meh

CindyC! I thnk they are attractive girls but a deft hand in application and flattering colors make almost any woman look better.

Key ingredient in making Patti and her daughters photogenic is great eyes and bone structure.

The photos shown here represent top of the line photographer and his or her make-up artist working with lights and for picky magazine editors spotlight the latest fashion colors and blah blah blah. They weren't going for a "day look."

Alexandra was without makup when I saw her and her most interesting feature was her mouth. Just like Keith's.

Just business - making money - may be trying to create art....

but it has definitly nothing to do with the real person that is modelling - we all know that is a fact, so it has nothing to do with anybody who saw the Richards girls or others in a private situation - they are just doing their job

to NoCode0680:
art and fashion is a world on its own, beyond consumer´s habits - expression of personal creativity in order to get some attention and influence new styles - that might have a positive response on the market....that´s my opinion

Alexandra Richards models some bizarre outfits

At what point does(is) an "Outfit" become(actually) a "Get up" ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-02-01 03:37 by Max'sKansasCity.

Through the Lonely Nights, thanks very much for your thoughts on art and fashion.

Quote
stonesrule
Through the Lonely Nights, thanks very much for your thoughts on art and fashion.

Ditto, though I'm still not sure I understand it. But it wouldn't be the first time I wasn't able to grasp a concept. I mean I understand a traditional fashion show, where the models come out in outfits that will go on sale, give consumers/buyers a glance at what they can buy.

But I can't grasp how somebody dressed as a Xenomorph/Longhorn hybrid helps move dresses.



But there are plenty of things I'm interested in that if I probably thought about it too long might not make a whole lot of sense. I got some dirty looks during last year's Super Bowl when I asked the people who only wanted to watch the commercials why they'd make an evening of watching something that the other 364 days of the year they try to avoid, and will be re-run many times over the next 364. Sometimes things just are the way they are, and you shouldn't dwell on it too much. Because it apparently works, or these people wouldn't be making money off their fashions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-02-01 06:24 by NoCode0680.