Kate Moss by Gui Paganini for Valisere Lingerie 2010 Campaign

Joanna Elizabeth

/

Published October 21, 2010

Kate Moss strips down for the latest campaign from Brazilian lingerie label, Valisere. Photographed by Gui Paganini and with retouching by Alex Wink of Studio AW, the British supermodel wears sexy lace garments paired with simple tees and elegant jackets. It makes us wish it were spring already!









Recent Updates

LV Flight Mode

Louis Vuitton Flight Mode Summer 2024: Travel in Luxury

Louis Vuitton goes on a journey of fashion-forward travel by unveiling its Flight Mode collection for summer 2024. Celebrating the ...
kirsten Dunst Featured

Civil War Star Kirsten Dunst Takes the Spotlight for Flaunt

Kirsten Dunst graces the cover of Flaunt Magazine's Issue 191 with an unmistakable aura of confidence. Photographed by David Roemer ...
Mavi Spring 2024 Featured

Mavi Spring 2024 Campaign: Denim with Coastal Vibes

Capturing the essence of Southern California's serene beaches and laid-back vibes, Mavi's spring-summer 2024 campaign highlights new season jeans. Shot ...
Bantu Knot Hairstyles Featured

Bantu Knot Hairstyles: The Top Ideas for 2024

Embracing heritage and modernity, Bantu knot hairstyles offer a bold and versatile way to style natural hair. Bantu knots are ...
Sabrina Carpenter SKIMS Featured

Sabrina Carpenter Channels Retro Style in SKIMS Ad

Sabrina Carpenter steps into the limelight as the new face of SKIMS, highlighting the Stretch Lace and Fits Everybody collections ...
Courreges Spring 2024

Courrèges Spring 2024 Campaign: Floating into the Season

Courrèges introduces its spring-summer 2024 campaign with an ethereal blend of motion and stillness. Photographer David Sims captures the essence ...

51 thoughts on “Kate Moss by Gui Paganini for Valisere Lingerie 2010 Campaign”

  1. She can still work it so they have no problem hiring a great retoucher. Nothing wrong with that.
    Although I’m not exactly sure how I feel about her shooting for a lingerie campaign… lol.

    Reply
  2. She can still work it so they have no problem hiring a great retoucher. Nothing wrong with that.
    Although I’m not exactly sure how I feel about her shooting for a lingerie campaign… lol.

    Reply
  3. If her name weren’t in the title, I would never guess this was Kate. It doesn’t look at all like her; this could be any random, photo-chopped throw-away model.

    Reply
  4. Uncrecognizable. Holy mother of BAD photoshop. This is just AWFUL. I agree with comment above, one of the worst editorials I’ve ever seen.

    Reply
  5. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
    • Nobody is questioning the line between fantasy and reality in fashion. At one point, when you exhaust any emotion or humanity out of an editorial, you get this. This isnt fantasy, but this isnt reality, this is JUST PLAIN BAD. Most of the comments are negative on here for a reason, so dont pretend to be a know-it-all and simply express an opinion. Thats all.

      Reply
    • Nobody is questioning the line between fantasy and reality in fashion. At one point, when you exhaust any emotion or humanity out of an editorial, you get this. This isnt fantasy, but this isnt reality, this is JUST PLAIN BAD. Most of the comments are negative on here for a reason, so dont pretend to be a know-it-all and simply express an opinion. Thats all.

      Reply
  6. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  7. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  8. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  9. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  10. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  11. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  12. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  13. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  14. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  15. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  16. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  17. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  18. All you haters don’t know how much Photoshopping went on post production. There’s also the lighting and make-up during the actual shoot and the time exposure/aperture the photographer set on his camera. Oh and it’s a lingerie shoot so sexy hair and half closed eyes are to be expected. Bottom line, I’ve said this before, you want reality don’t look at fashion magazines.

    Reply
  19. seriously! ir you’re going to hire Kate Moss and photo shop her….. you could hire any other model and pay much less!! ’cause for paying kate moss and doing this to her is like A TOTAL WASTE! I don’t get it at all……….. and if you ‘re not talking money, then this is an awfull editorial any ways! it is jst nonsense!! I agree with almost everyone above

    Reply
  20. what a waste of time, no creativity or edge to this shoot whatsoever. Compare this ru~’#sh to the La Perla S/S 2010 campaign with Guinevere VAN SEENUS and then you know what has gone wrong. Guinevere rocks lingerie, Kate sadly lost it a long time ago, let’s say circa CK/Marky Mark days!

    Reply
  21. what a waste of time, no creativity or edge to this shoot whatsoever. Compare this ru~’#sh to the La Perla S/S 2010 campaign with Guinevere VAN SEENUS and then you know what has gone wrong. Guinevere rocks lingerie, Kate sadly lost it a long time ago, let’s say circa CK/Marky Mark days!

    Reply

Leave a Comment