I'm too sexy for my high school yearbook.

CNN Story:
http://www.cnn.com …y-sexy-yearbook-photo.cnn

We've been kicking this story around in the senior photo thread. Consensus seems to be that she is little too hung up on her right to free expression.

If yearbooks were full of shots like that, it sure would make class reunions more interesting, 30 years later.

Yeah we had a mini scandal in the class of 82. One of the girls did a studio shot with the local pro. It was off the shoulders with a thin drape and a hint of nipple bump through the top.. scandalous.

Anybody got a screen cap of the "too sexy" pic? My connection here at work is so slow that the 35 second ad before the actual video starts will probably take 5 minutes..

http://gma.yahoo.com …-201606793--abc-news.html

In 1973 I had some photos done at my Senior YRBK shoot with an off-the-shoulder drape but was told they were only for my personal purchase and not allowed for the yearbook. Everyone had to wear a solid color sweater for the yearbook

Consensus on the news threads is that both the student and her mother are stupid, crazy, or both.

I say, crazy like a fox. She's getting national name recognition from this, and the big money offer from Playboy to do a magazine spread is right around the corner.

Or maybe they're just morons. Trashy morons.

Maureen Souza wrote in post #13681035
In 1973 I had some photos done at my Senior YRBK shoot with an off-the-shoulder drape but was told they were only for my personal purchase and not allowed for the yearbook. Everyone had to wear a solid color sweater for the yearbook

You can't just tease us with a description. You have to post it. Really.

I don't even think the picture is as bad as the comments make it out to be. It's not a senior yearbook photo but it's not bad as a senior photo. Heck I only say it's not a yearbook photo because it breaks the consistency. Most every photo, in mine at least, were headshots with the same background. If everyone was allowed to submit any photo at all whether it's with their car or against a tree or whatever, then I'd say let her have it in the yearbook.

cdifoto wrote in post #13681141
I don't even think the picture is as bad as the comments make it out to be. It's not a senior yearbook photo but it's not bad as a senior photo.

Maybe my tastes are a little more conservative. It's not just the outfit, but the pose with her bent over and sticking her rear end out like that. One of the commenters on one of the news sites said it looked like an ad for an escort servvice in the back of a magazine. I was pretty much thinking the same thing.

Curtis N wrote in post #13681354
Maybe my tastes are a little more conservative. It's not just the outfit, but the pose with her bent over and sticking her rear end out like that. One of the commenters on one of the news sites said it looked like an ad for an escort servvice in the back of a magazine. I was pretty much thinking the same thing.

She wasn't bent over.

Curtis N wrote in post #13681354
Maybe my tastes are a little more conservative. It's not just the outfit, but the pose with her bent over and sticking her rear end out like that.

Now that I'm at home and can take a look, it seems that we should all be clear about which images we are talking about. There are 3 images:

1. Yellow skirt posing on the stairs.
2. "poofy" gray skirt laying on the grass
3. Tight fitting dress in a "brick" corner that is very much a glamour shot.

If we are talking about shot #3 then I agree that the dress and the pose are not suitable for a HS yearbook. That, and the vignette was not needed and the B&W conversion is not really the best I've ever seen.

But the other two don't seem out of line to me.

cdifoto wrote in post #13681850
She wasn't bent over.

That uber creative tilted camera technique (scuze me while I puke) made her look more upright.

Curtis N wrote in post #13682675
That uber creative tilted camera technique (scuze me while I puke) made her look more upright.

Yes, it did. But she still wasn't bent over.