SARAH'S TATTOOS

[eadweard]

Here we have a couple of pretty good close-ups of two of Sarah's tattoos:

[Apollo]

Nice work Ed

[recordable2]

Thanks!!

[sarahbrazilianfan]

Thanks for these Ed ! I cant wait to get a tatoo, my mom wont let me just when I turn 18.

[andrew r]

All in good time Sarah, make sure it's something you really want. Excellent pics Ed!

[ohiofan]

I was just wondering why none of her tats showed up in the Vaseiline ad campaign. I guess they took that into account when picking the angles for her pics.

[andrew r]

Yeah, especially the ankle one. Lesser on the dragonfly one. Could the tattoo on her ankle been airbrushed out along with her dress?

[sarahbrazilianfan]

Yes, it probably was Andy...what cant photoshop do, right ?

[andrew r]

Me? Nooooo.

[eadweard]

Originally Posted by andrew r

Yeah, especially the ankle one. Lesser on the dragonfly one. Could the tattoo on her ankle been airbrushed out along with her dress?

So, we are accepting as fact that Sarah didn't actually pose nude for the ads? Then, if so, Sarah has perpetrated a fraud and has also engaged in false advertising. Sorry, if true, there is no excuse for her actions. Personally, from her comments on various talk shows we have seen lately, I think she did pose sans clothes.

[spdub]

Originally Posted by eadweard

So, we are accepting as fact that Sarah didn't actually pose nude for the ads? Then, if so, Sarah has perpetrated a fraud and has also engaged in false advertising. Sorry, if true, there is no excuse for her actions. Personally, from her comments on various talk shows we have seen lately, I think she did pose sans clothes.

I'm with you

On that CW13 interview with John she said it was her first time .

Well it wouldn't be the first time to pose in provocative clothing even if happened to do the vaseline pohotshoot ahead of the Maxim one

On the Rachel Ray show she said this

RR Is it weird to go pose naked ,I mean how do you get the courage to do that

SMG You walk out on the street first and try it out and see how people react ..You know it's funny .I thought I would be more nervous than I was and instantly (change of tone of voice ) also the beauty of airbrushing don't forget that and I was well aware of that , but when you are doing it for a good reason and you know the reason you are doing it , it makes a difference.

On the View she said that something shocking had to be done to attract attention nowadays but because it was for a good cause it was an easy decision to make

I have to agree with you Eadweard I would think less of Sarah if she had after all those comments engaged in a ( pardon the pun) coverup whereas I would have no problem if she appeared in a nude but covered photoshoot or even in Playboy .

Edited to make last paragraph clearer

[lilbufbuf]

Originally Posted by eadweard

So, we are accepting as fact that Sarah didn't actually pose nude for the ads? Then, if so, Sarah has perpetrated a fraud and has also engaged in false advertising. Sorry, if true, there is no excuse for her actions. Personally, from her comments on various talk shows we have seen lately, I think she did pose sans clothes.

Are you bloody joking me right now? I've got to laugh out loud at something like this, when someone suggests a person is committing fraud when there's nothing really fraudulent in the advertising.

The skin is amazing campaign isn't about nudity, it's about skin, being amazing. From what I can see Sarah has amazing skin (even without the airbrushing) so really there IS no false advertising. If she had terrible skin then I would see why someone would accuse her and Vaseline of false advertising. She's selling a product for Vaseline and selling the brand based on the idea that their product helps her skin, on the idea that she takes care of her skin. If the advert had been about her nakedness as opposed to the niceness of her skin then yes, it probably would be false advertising. The advert isn't about that however so I'm not certain where you're coming from.

I suppose Sarah's committing fraud every time a magazine airbrushes or photoshops her photos then.

[eadweard]

WE practice civility and politeness here. Please read the entire conversation. TRY to understand what is being discussed: if Sarah wore a dress that was airbrushed out and her skin was photoshopped , then we are not seeing Vaseline's effects; we are looking at a fake. That would be a fraud. Get it, yet? I have also, at least twice before in this forum, stated that I do NOT believe that is the case: Sarah herself has stated she did pose nude for this campaign. TRY, try to read ALL before going off half-cocked with a virulent tone. Oh, and welcome to the forum...I think.

[shalaane]

This has nothing to do with whether you think she did pose nude or not. Did you or did you not say that if she didn't pose nude then she "has perpetrated a fraud and has also engaged in false advertising. Sorry, if true, there is no excuse for her actions." ? And did Spdud not agree with you?

This would be no different than, say, the entire Maybelline campaign. Do you really believe any of the ads were not digitally retouched? Do you really believe there are ads for cosmetics that aren't digitally retouched? Do you really believe there are ANY ads that aren't digitally retouched? But of course this would be ALL Sarah's fault and a totally valid reason to think less of her... Get it, yet?

Oh and of course every celebrity that endorses a product has been using that product for years and uses solely that product because, you know, it's the ONLY one that works for them...

[lilbufbuf]

Originally Posted by eadweard

WE practice civility and politeness here. Please read the entire conversation. TRY to understand what is being discussed: if Sarah wore a dress that was airbrushed out and her skin was photoshopped , then we are not seeing Vaseline's effects; we are looking at a fake. That would be a fraud. Get it, yet? I have also, at least twice before in this forum, stated that I do NOT believe that is the case: Sarah herself has stated she did pose nude for this campaign. TRY, try to read ALL before going off half-cocked with a virulent tone. Oh, and welcome to the forum...I think.

Oh please, don't get offended just because I don't agree with anything you've said. I obviously wasn't being hostile and it's sort of petty of you to pull that card, really. Talk about civility, you're being awfully disrespectful. I completely understand the argument and I think it's completely delusive.

Whether or not she actually posed nude is not the issue I was responding to. The suggestion that if she didn't, then she's a fraud, is what I was replying to. I don't really care whether or not you think she actually posed nude. I think the argument that it's false advertising is completely moot considering everything is airbrushed and photoshopped. She even mentioned the photoshopping on Rachael Ray so yeah, she is photoshopped in that picture and there's a possibility that she isn't completely nude. There are other celebrities who posed for the campaign that weren't completely nude either. Their nudity isn't at all important to the campaign so whether or not she's or anyone else is actually nude shouldn't be such a huge issue.

I used to mod here, so I know how it works, thanks.

[andrew r]

Please everyone, if this gets out of hand, I'll close the thread.I didn't realise my comments would be so incendary. I mention the fact about her tattoo, was because I didn't see it. Maybe that was edited out due to the campaign, as having ink done can be seen as unattractive. So maybe they edited it out. As for her being nude or not, I'm not 100% sure. Shear reason is that on the videos that have been shown, Sarah's posing like she is in the pic below with a small dress on. Nowhere, as far as I know, has it mentioned ''Sarah naked'' in the same sentence mentioned by them. I.e. ''Vaseline presents Buffy actress Sarah Michelle Gellar in the buff''. It's been the tabloids that have done that. The pose has Srah with her knees up close to her chest, and at the angle it's at, will cover a dress if she was wearing one underneath. There maybe photoediting going on there, but you can not be 100% certain, as her back has been cropped out of the pic. Now if there was a pic including her back, and it was bare, (say showing the dragonfly tattoos), then I'd believe that that she'd be nude. Even a side on pose which showed her legs and back in one complete go would also show this. As for Playboy, I wouldn't mind an interview, but I doubt she'd do pose topless or full frontal. Maybe a sexy shoot similar to Maxim though. Here's the pic I'm referring to.



Also welcome back lilbuffbuff. How've you been? It's been a good while sine I last saw you on here.

[spdub]

Shear reason is that on the videos that have been shown, Sarah's posing like she is in the pic below with a small dress on

In looking at the video I can't spot that shot ( the hand on knee shot ) , only the shot I have provided the thumbnails for and if Sarah's hands are not on her shoulder the photographer is always close to her with the camera pointing at the face or shoulders




If the hand on knee shot is in that video then I am missing it

[sarahbrazilianfan]

I really dont care if she posed nude or not.......I mean the reason behind all of this is to help people and I think we should all just be proud of her for doing something to help those people....even if she did get some money for that...but at the same time I do get what Ed's trying to say...

[ohiofan]

I'm with Priscilla on this one.

[andrew r]

I think it's time to draw a line under this now. For the moment no one can be 100% certain either way. Unless Sarah states herself either way what she did for the shoot.