Why the fascination with Kimmer?

[CarolynF]

Hi..

On the picture thing..gals..I have the article here..There are 9 pictures on the article..

Christin's pictures were listed as lead photos: Charles Bush, hair..etc..
Then OTHER photos: Gene Bednarck (I think took Deni's picture up in the corner), Tetra, etc. (picture of the tape measure): courtesy of Kim Drake (one picture); courtesy of kimkins (one picture)..then the 4 food pictures.

So, I think the two Kimmer pictures were compliments of Kim (herself) and
Kimkins..That's what I think. So, I am assuming since noone saw her
from WW, she sent them in.

[Tennis4.0]

Originally Posted by AllisonB

Most likely, the stock photos are the food photos.

True, but where is the credit for the humans, then? Didn't Tooter say Tetra was credited for the human photos?

[Pleiades]

Until we actually find any of Kimmer's pics on the stock photo sites, I don't think anything can be proven

But keep digging

[Tooter]

Originally Posted by AllisonB

Most likely, the stock photos are the food photos.

Nope!! Read my post and check out the pages of the magazine.

This is who is credited with the Food photos:Michael Tracy/HBB 4 Food Stylist Ellie Ritt.



BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shoot...Did I get excited to quickly? Just food photos?

[AllisonB]

Originally Posted by mum22

True, but where is the credit for the humans, then? Didn't Tooter say Tetra was credited for the human photos?

I believe Tooter was in err.

[CarolinaRocker]

go to her site and hit refresh over and over and look at the numbers....hmmmmm.

another charade perhaps

[CarolynF]

I do think the stock photo is the one of the tape measure cuz I found tape measures all twisted up..The food is "styled" by the WW stylist and photographer when she told them what to put in the shots..

I'm guessing that Gene Bednarck took the one in the upper corner of Deni..cuz it looks pretty professional..

As for our friend Kimmer, I think she sent those both in..

[Tooter]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

I do think the stock photo is the one of the tape measure cuz I found tape measures all twisted up..The food is "styled" by the WW stylist and photographer when she told them what to put in the shots..

I'm guessing that Gene Bednarck took the one in the upper corner of Deni..cuz it looks pretty professional..

As for our friend Kimmer, I think she sent those both in..

Bummer. I thought this all would end. Dang nab it.

Back to square one. A million stock photos.

[Sun_Luvin]

I was questioning also the report that she said she had an exhausting day with the WW photog and that they had her in many awkward positions. So, not only the validity of the photos, but her word in saying that she had a photo shoot with WW, which we now know she didn't.

Again, am I mistaken and confusing one event with another?

[Tennis4.0]

Originally Posted by CarolinaRocker

go to her site and hit refresh over and over and look at the numbers....hmmmmm.

another charade perhaps

very interesting hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Zenngrl]

I'm doing a search on jupiter for red dress anyway. :P

[Tennis4.0]

Originally Posted by Sun_Luvin

I was questioning also the report that she said she had an exhausting day with the WW photog and that they had her in many awkward positions. So, not only the validity of the photos, but her word in saying that she had a photo shoot with WW, which we now know she didn't.

Again, am I mistaken and confusing one event with another?

I do not believe you are, I know I read the same thing. I just need to find it.

[fluffybear2]

Originally Posted by AllieCat0817

Tell me what is a 'stock photo'?

Here is a good definition. I have used stock phtos on my own websites. Some were public domain and I paid for others that were not.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/S/stock_photo.html

[CarolynF]

Well...Maybe someone could find Deni Huttula's picture in the after shots over there. The one in the magazine has her leaning against a desk and I'm guessing that this was a professional picture done by Gene Bednarck..

[rhlong]

the photos of the food in the magazine were the stock photos. That is not to say that the red dress lady isn't a stock photo. But she wouldn't be stupid enough to credit a stock photo agency for that. That photo was courtesy of kimkins site.

[fluffybear2]

Originally Posted by AllisonB

Most likely, the stock photos are the food photos.

Stock photos can be of ANYTHING. They can be of scenery, people or things.
The photographer makes their money on the volume of usage rather than displaying them and selling them as art. They are used by magazines,etc. They can even be of celebrities. I have a celebrity fan website and have used stock photos on it.

[fluffybear2]

Originally Posted by rhlong

the photos of the food in the magazine were the stock photos. That is not to say that the red dress lady isn't a stock photo. But she wouldn't be stupid enough to credit a stock photo agency for that. That photo was courtesy of kimkins site.

Well whether Heidi was stupid for posting that photo or not is debatable, but one thing's for sure, she must be learning a LOT about starting a business NOW!

[CarolynF]

Maybe that picture of the gal in the leopard dress is really a Kim Drake..hmmm.
Ya think??

[Tennis4.0]

Originally Posted by fluffybear2

Well whether Heidi was stupid for posting that photo or not is debatable, but one thing's for sure, she must be learning a LOT about starting a business NOW!

I think she said she wasn't stupid enough to credit a stock photo, not post the photo. Just wanted to clarify.

As far as learning about starting a busines, she may have wanted to learn this before she started. I guess narcissm can get in the way of good decisions, huh?

[AllisonB]

Originally Posted by fluffybear2

Stock photos can be of ANYTHING. They can be of scenery, people or things.
The photographer makes their money on the volume of usage rather than displaying them and selling them as art. They are used by magazines,etc. They can even be of celebrities. I have a celebrity fan website and have used stock photos on it.

I know, I own and/or manage 38 different websites. In the case of that article, the most likely objects to be credited to a stock photo agency were the food images.

[Tennis4.0]

Originally Posted by AllisonB

I know, I own and/or manage 38 different websites. In the case of that article, the most likely objects to be credited to a stock photo agency were the food images.

Interesting, you own/manage 38 different websites. So, are you affiliated with Kimkins, is that one of your websites? A simple yes or no will do.

[AllisonB]

Originally Posted by mum22

Interesting, you own/manage 38 different websites. So, are you affiliated with Kimkins, is that one of your websites? A simple yes or no will do.

No, I am not affiliated with Kimmer or her business in any way, with the exception of being a paying member of her site.

[Carolina Rose]

Originally Posted by CarolinaRocker

go to her site and hit refresh over and over and look at the numbers....hmmmmm.

another charade perhaps

Oh, yeah, I've never believed those numbers. Doesn't matter what time of the day or night, week day, weekend, holiday ... the numbers are always like that.

But I imagine anyone who raids PMs, bans on a whim and deletes threads that don't suit her can easily mess with the number tickers too.

[fluffybear2]

Originally Posted by AllisonB

I know, I own and/or manage 38 different websites. In the case of that article, the most likely objects to be credited to a stock photo agency were the food images.

That could be true, but not neccessarily. According to the links posted by Tooter, those stock photo agencies have images of persons too, including models.

[Carolina Rose]

Originally Posted by Sun_Luvin

I was questioning also the report that she said she had an exhausting day with the WW photog and that they had her in many awkward positions. So, not only the validity of the photos, but her word in saying that she had a photo shoot with WW, which we now know she didn't.

I do remember a similar post over at Kimkins. I've tried doing a search over there, but it seems almost everything associated with Kimmer and that Woman's World article has disappeared. I might give it another go though (the search engine there leaves a lot to be desired).

[jayed]

Originally Posted by Sun_Luvin

I was questioning also the report that she said she had an exhausting day with the WW photog and that they had her in many awkward positions. So, not only the validity of the photos, but her word in saying that she had a photo shoot with WW, which we now know she didn't.

Again, am I mistaken and confusing one event with another?

This has been bothering me as well so I went searching last night and found this post from Kimmer:

People kept bugging for a new pic -- what else is new? My teen son took the old photo on our patio. With the new website, our PR Director, Nicole, said a new picture was needed. So, here it is. But it's the last so ... commit to memory!

Notice the filter lens, strategic stretching, twisting and turning? Hides a lot, LOL. So do bribes to the photographer.

She does not say that the picture was related to the WW article or taken by WW photographers.

[Mavis]

Email the fellow who is married to Catherine to ask Catherine where the stock photos on KImkins site came from. Catherine should know this since she did the website for Kimmer.