I’m seeing more and more paparazzi shots of actors working on the set of movies. Often seen walking back and forth from their trailer in costume.
I don’t recall this happening in the past. There were promotional photos released by the studio. But, not these candid movie set shots. Often they catch them in skimpy costumes with lots of skin showing. The typical crap the paparazzi always gets as they stalk these people non-stop 24/7.
So how are the scumbag paparazzi getting these shots? Aren’t movie sets still guarded and gated? You’d think the one place actors are safe from the press is the movie set. How can they possibly work with the paparazzi around?
Emma Roberts on set filmed drama Empire State in New Orleans. They even got photos of her going into her trailer.
Lindsay Lohan playing Elizabeth Taylor. Several articles with set photos in just the past week.
this one has a couple promotional pics (released by the studio) and also some on set photos.
Looks more like a long telephoto lens to me, based on the perspective. I’m guessing the answer is that digital cameras have made huge leaps in light sensitivity over older models and film cameras, and that this has enabled relatively sharp shots, even with the small apertures you tend to get with long telephotos (as well as the high shutter speeds you need). Image stabilization has helped a great deal as well. These shots could be taken from literally a mile away.
There have been incidents lately where men have gone up to the urinal next to a celebrity, held their cellphone out, and took pictures of the celebrity pissing. Which were soon posted on the internet.
It used to be that they would say “I would never appear in a full-frontal nude scene”.
Frankly, I think celebrities should just give up on that. With the ubiquity of cellphone cameras, there is going to be a nude photo of them on the internet, eventually – better it should be a still from a movie, where they are in shape, prepared, with scenery, make-up, etc. all designed to make them look good, rather than a ;ow-quality shot grabbed in some restroom.
Celebrities and studios notify paparazzi in advance of where they’ll be. If necessary, they’ll pay them to take the pictures. You don’t really believe that there are photographers hanging around all of the Mexican beaches with telephoto lenses in hope that LeAnn Rimes will show up do you?
I have not seen a cell phone camera that took a picture that good. Those are SLR quality.
Lindsay Lohan has a damaged career. Her plan to revitalize it with a sure-fire tabloid blockbuster with her role as Linda Lovelace blew up in her face when she got fired. Elizabeth Taylor was another tabloid queen and Lohan’s portrayal is certain to bring her many covers.
Some of the photos linked above seem to be standard behind-the-scenes stuff that the producers release. Some celebs love publicity, so they encourage such shots to keep their names and images in the news.
The Lohan wardrobe malfunction seems to be an outsider with a so-so zoom lens. The scene was being shot at a marina, so there’s other people around not too far away, and being a Lifetime (?) film, the producers have no budget to seek a more secluded spot and close down things around them. Doesn’t even look like a professional paparazzi shot.
I am getting increasingly puzzled why video paparazzi shots aren’t taking over the celeb side of the Internet. Why are still shots the norm? Cheapo cameras usually can take video too.
I run across filming all the time in Chicago. It’s rather surprising how close you can actually get to most movie trailers. They’re often just parked on a side street with minimal security (depending on the size of the movie and level of star using them).
Yeah, I noticed a shoot for the Starz show Boss (starring Kelsey Grammar) outside my workplace here in Chicago. They’d only closed off maybe a quarter-block of the sidewalk for that scene, and their trailers were all parked along a stretch 2-3 blocks away, with that area not blocked off at all. I’m sure anyone important probably gets driven to the shoot, but that setup provides a ton of opportunity to get casual shots if anyone cared to.
By contrast, I saw a couple different film shoots that took over the Great Hall in Chicago’s Union Station. They put up huge curtained barriers and blocked certain entrances, but there were still gaps here and there, and opportunities someone could take advantage of if they were half-determined.
Because print is not totally dead. Video is pretty much restricted to on-line and a few celebrity gossip shows on TV. Stills can be sold to any media and used. Even then, many stills you see are frame grabs from video.
It doesn’t even need to be print–photos work better to go with text. The video is not going to be capturing the celeb for long–you don’t want to get caught. And the video you do get is probably going to be worse than shaky-cam quality–who wants to watch that on a loop?
Ironic that back in Elizabeth Taylor & Richard Burton’s star period I’ve read that the studios controlled all the promotions and publicity very closely. Any gossip or pictures that got out from the set where taken by invited celebrity columnists and photographers. Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons were a couple of the better known ones in the 40’s & 50’s.
Now with TMZ paying, anyone with a cell phone or digital camera can make a quick buck.
Do you work near 600 W Chicago? Because I work there and see the Boss trucks in the residential area (with all the fancy townhouses and mansions) just south of here quite often.