Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. This picture got me thinking

This picture got me thinking

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
26 Posts 14 Posters 377 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Doctor PhibesD Online
    Doctor PhibesD Online
    Doctor Phibes
    wrote on last edited by Doctor Phibes
    #16

    You should see me with my game-face on. Un-freaking-recognizable.

    And when I say "game", I mean as in "I am in danger of getting shot", rather than "in the game" or even "on the game..."

    I was only joking

    1 Reply Last reply
    • Catseye3C Catseye3

      I have thought about this in the past, not so much the people she has met, but the events she has witnessed. She is a living historical archive.

      F Offline
      F Offline
      Friday
      wrote on last edited by
      #17

      She is a living historical archive.

      It's a shame she will never write a memoir. Just think of all the wisdom and anecdotes she could provide.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

        @Catseye3 said in This picture got me thinking:

        I saw a picture of J-Lo without makeup once. You would walk past her in the grocery aisle and have no recognition of her whatsoever. She looked less like her made-up self than Marilyn.

        People like that get into this trap. It must take them hours to get ready because they cannot go out without all this preparation and makeup.

        Good thing I do not have to worry about that! LOL

        JollyJ Offline
        JollyJ Offline
        Jolly
        wrote on last edited by
        #18

        @taiwan_girl said in This picture got me thinking:

        @Catseye3 said in This picture got me thinking:

        I saw a picture of J-Lo without makeup once. You would walk past her in the grocery aisle and have no recognition of her whatsoever. She looked less like her made-up self than Marilyn.

        People like that get into this trap. It must take them hours to get ready because they cannot go out without all this preparation and makeup.

        Good thing I do not have to worry about that! LOL

        Faith Hill was doing magazine covers and fronting for a cosmetic company 20 years ago. If you saw Faith without her make-up back then or today, she'd look like any other somewhat attractive lady her age. You'd never give her a second glance.

        I run across Faith Ford in the grocery store now and then. My wife has known her since she was a kid. She did some modeling in NYC and a decent amount of tv work as an actress. Even when she left for New York, you could have found a dozen girls in her high school just as cute.

        Especially when talking about women in the entertainment industry, they have to have a certain personality and looks the camera likes. And once they are lucky enough to make it, it's a grind to stay there, even at a level where you are just making a middle class living.

        I guess the make-up, diet and exercise regimes are just part of trying to stay employed.

        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

        1 Reply Last reply
        • AxtremusA Away
          AxtremusA Away
          Axtremus
          wrote on last edited by
          #19

          QE II 1956 close-up showing the entire face:

          alt text

          https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/queen-elizabeth-ii-in-sweden-23rd-june-1956-picture-id51920512?s=2048x2048

          Marilyn Monroe, 1956:

          alt text

          https://i.redd.it/v8an0hrnclh61.jpg

          1 Reply Last reply
          • JollyJ Offline
            JollyJ Offline
            Jolly
            wrote on last edited by
            #20

            Candid vs. Posed.

            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

            AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
            • JollyJ Jolly

              Candid vs. Posed.

              AxtremusA Away
              AxtremusA Away
              Axtremus
              wrote on last edited by
              #21

              @Jolly said in This picture got me thinking:

              Candid vs. Posed.

              1956, cameras were few and far in between. Subjects are seasoned public personalities very aware of being the focus of attention wherever they go and always had handlers/bodyguards around them. Never truly "candid".

              LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
              • JollyJ Offline
                JollyJ Offline
                Jolly
                wrote on last edited by
                #22

                Utter bullshit.

                “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                • JollyJ Jolly

                  Utter bullshit.

                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua Letifer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #23

                  @Jolly said in This picture got me thinking:

                  Utter bullshit.

                  Ya think??? 🤣

                  "Few and far between"? In 1956? That's when 35mm SLRs came on the scene. I mean holy shit, the post-war years were literally the boom in the consumer camera market that we still have today.

                  Come on Ax, if you're going to make shit up, at least google something before you try to pretend you know what you're talking about.

                  Please love yourself.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • AxtremusA Away
                    AxtremusA Away
                    Axtremus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #24

                    5B709D9A-6546-4830-BA43-6C13A90B9438.jpeg

                    Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                    • AxtremusA Axtremus

                      5B709D9A-6546-4830-BA43-6C13A90B9438.jpeg

                      Aqua LetiferA Offline
                      Aqua LetiferA Offline
                      Aqua Letifer
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #25

                      @Axtremus said in This picture got me thinking:

                      5B709D9A-6546-4830-BA43-6C13A90B9438.jpeg

                      Good for you?

                      Now do 1900 to 1950.

                      Please love yourself.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • AxtremusA Axtremus

                        @Jolly said in This picture got me thinking:

                        Candid vs. Posed.

                        1956, cameras were few and far in between. Subjects are seasoned public personalities very aware of being the focus of attention wherever they go and always had handlers/bodyguards around them. Never truly "candid".

                        LuFins DadL Offline
                        LuFins DadL Offline
                        LuFins Dad
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #26

                        @Axtremus said in This picture got me thinking:

                        @Jolly said in This picture got me thinking:

                        Candid vs. Posed.

                        1956, cameras were few and far in between. Subjects are seasoned public personalities very aware of being the focus of attention wherever they go and always had handlers/bodyguards around them. Never truly "candid".

                        You can’t have it both ways. On one hand you say cameras and pictures of celebrities were rare and on the other you say celebrities were always prepared for photos…

                        The Brad

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • Users
                        • Groups