Currently unavailable for purchase
Paris Hilton outside the Ed Sullivan Theater before a taping of the David Letterman Show on January 29th, 2008.
actress, bag, beautiful, beauty, cameras, celebrity, chanel, crowd, dress, face, fans, fashion, hilton, legs, letterman, make, model, movies, paparazzi, paris, people, runway, sexy, shape, star, starlet, television, tv, up, woman
This was fun, first time I was a “paparazzi”!
paparazzi, nothing to be proud of.
Made me proud, guess you had to be there.
Here, copy and paste this, it’s a video I made on Youtube from the TV show and photos I snapped: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQM0AZgIBbQ
Paparazzi is a plural term for photographers who take candid photographs of celebrities, usually by relentlessly shadowing them in their public and private activities.
Now lets think about that one for a moment. You sit in wait for a woman to arrive at a predefined location; You blast her face with a flash which is far beyond too powerful; You do all this with complete disregard for the aesthetics of the photograph you’re plunging her into.
Then you plaster your photographs over the internet, and claim to be ‘proud’?
The paparazzi are the scum which give professional – and I mean real professional photographers and photojournalists – look as pathetic as this. To say they deserve their own level in perdition is an understatement many will agree with.
Now lets look at your next abomination of photography – you place an image like this into the group entitled The Fine Art of Photography! What planet are you from? And here I was thinking that “Fine Art” depicts a sense of beauty, a degree of aesthetics and, lets face it, at least the skill of an enthusiastic amateur, as opposed to a stoned mountain goat!
With that said, I agree with you – you want to be seen as paparazzi? Congratulations, objective achieved. Lets just hope that someone in the red bubble administration picks up on the garbage you are posting on the site.
As you can see from my portfolio I’m not a paparazzi photographer but yet it is probably the highest paid job in photography. To dismiss that type of work as garbage is very immature and condescending on your part. My few photographs of Paris Hilton are just as important as any beautiful nature shot as she herself is a beautiful part of nature! Have a great day.
Andykazie> I tend to agree with you on this one.
Justin Schaller> Just because Andykazie took a few photos of a celebrity does not make him a paparazzi, from the looks of the other photos in this shoot he was behind a police line, which suggests that it was all set up for the photographers.
A paparazzi according to your definition seems to almost exclusively take photos of celebrities, and sometimes even follows them around during their public and even private activities.
Now, lets look at the scene. Andykazie takes photos with other photographersfrom behind a police line. In the description Andykazie says “Paris Hilton outside the Ed Sullivan Theater before a taping of the David Letterman Show on January 29th, 2008.” which suggests that Paris would have known beforehand that there would be photographers there, so she is prepared for them. If she didn’t want to be photographed, she would not have hung around, and probably would have shied away from the cameras, which she clearly is not doing.
Andykazie took photos of her in a public place. That meets only a small amount of the definition of a paparazzi. The thing that gives away the fact that he is in fact not a paparazzi is shown in his gallery. Out of ~135 photos he has 4 photos of Paris Hilton. This equates to ~5.4% of his gallery to be celebrity shots.
Many people will take photos of celebrities if they turn up at the same place/time as the photographer, simply because the celebrity is famous – I know I probably would take a few photos, maybe I would ask first though if it was in private, and if they said no, I would respect that.
Also, in the description of one of the images, Andykazie says “Paris surprised me and walked over ever so close to my camera to sign autographs…” – this again suggests that Paris was not fazed by the photographers, and was probably turning up to something that she knew was going to have photographers/fans/autograph collectors.
Just my 2c.
Oh, and Andykazie, I prefer the full body shot, it looks a lot more natural :)
Thanks for the support. I really appreciate the time you took to nvestigate this case. Furthermore I didn’t have any press and was not allowed to stand where the actual papparazzi was. In any case my series of photos show Paris Hilton and the papparazzi whichdocument the frenzy surrounding her. Any way I was thrilled to get good clear pictures of her and I wanted to share them here. If you find the video on Youtube you can see her posing for quite sometime.
One thing, and one thing alone kids – you see, I am not a Christian for example, I am a die-hard Atheist. So why in the name of all things would I call myself a Holy Man!? Not sure whether you follow princess, but my point is made.
Have a nice day yourself.
One thing I don’t understand is why do they use big flashes and get a shot that makes it look like a point-and-shoot camera taking a photo at night?
If they crank the ISO up to 3200 or something on the later model cameras, and put the f/stop down near the 1.8 range, they can get away with no flash, and a better looking shot (minus the noise of course.)
That’s a good question, it was overcast and Manhattan streets are very dark especially around 4:30-5:00 PM in the Winter. It was difficult, I had the flash on she came close and it was too bright, I turned it off and it was too dim, my Olympus E500 was slow on the shutter, not a good papparazzi camera. After the show she came out with a yellow dress and it was insane, was just shooting with the camera over my head blindly. Those blurry shots can be seen in the video towards the end.
Receive exclusive deals and awesome artist news and content right to your inbox.
Free for your convenience.