To: pml1@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PML1] CC: Christine Smith
From: Mark Tomlonson
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:03:01 -0000

(I've gone beyond my self-imposed limit of 200 words in talking about
this centerfold because I think there is an issue here worthy of
extended discussion.)

In Christine Smith's centerfold (December 2005) she's in that same
warm cozy Texas den that had been graced by Mercy Rooney 33 years
before. Those horn chair arms have lost nothing over the years, but
this time around the phallic symbolism is much more pronounced.

This is a very good picture of Christine. Her voluptuous form goes
well with the classic cheesecake pose of low chest and high hips with
the model looking back at the viewer.

There is however, a problem here that perhaps I'm making too much
of. The problem is Christine's missing foot.

Playboy has asked us to believe that when the 8 x 10 camera was in
use, centerfolds were planned (as Andy Perlman put it) with the
precision of the D-Day invasion. I don't think all of them were, but
in any case an 8 x 10 camera takes a certain amount of deliberation in
the photographic process. It's not a device that easily takes
snapshots.

Digital cameras of any stripe are much closer to that method. The
cameras that Playboy uses now for their centerfold give the
photographer and model a lot more ability to be spontaneous. That's
the upside. There are some downsides.

The first is reproduction quality. Maybe it's not as obvious in a
quarter-page ad, but in a centerfold a digital image just doesn't look
as good as film. We've talked about that a lot, and I don't think I
need to say anything more here.

The second is that when PEI chose to use an 8 x 10 format, they did it
in part because they felt the Playmate was worth it. A Playmate was a
woman who was so important to the image of the magazine that she was
worth the time it took to get a great picture for the centerfold, the
highlight of the magazine. Sometimes they worked hard enough to get
spectacular ones.

Is it possible that Christine is missing her foot because the
centerfold is now just one of many pictures taken in that session? And
the centerfold is now just one of many images PEI distributes of a
Playmate? Could it be that there was nothing special about the
creation of this frame? It is a good picture of Christine and I like
it a lot. But I'm nagged by the feeling that in its past Playboy would
have found a way to get Christine's foot inside the frame. They would
have taken the time to do that because the Playmate in her centerfold
was the most important asset the company had.

Now the magazine is the money losing part of the company. Playmates,
even Playmates of the Year, rarely grace the cover, supplanted by the
latest babe du-yesterday's-jour. Centerfolds don't get the 8 x 10
because to PEI, they just aren't worth it any more. Why bother to find
a way to include Christine's foot if all of PEI's paying customers are
looking at her elsewhere?

But it is a nice picture. Maybe this time the cigar is just a cigar,
and Christine's missing foot is no more important than Anne-Marie
Fox's.

The missing 8 x 10 has bothered me ever since it left. Christine's
centerfold serves as a reminder of one of the reasons why.

Photographers:  Arny Freytag and Stephen Wayda

Scoring:
Pin-up: 3.0
Erotic:  2.0
Artistic: 1.0

Overall: 2.4 out of 4.0

Cyber Club Portfolio Photo I like better than the Centerfold:
#29. Christine seems more human and approachable.

http://cyber.playboy.com/members/playmates/files/2005/12/centerfold.html
http://cyber.playboy.com/members/playmates/files/2005/12/29-med.html

Mark Tomlonson


To: pml1@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PML1] Re: CC: Christine Smith
From: Mark Tomlonson
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 23:22:27 -0000

--- In pml1@yahoogroups.com, Peggy Wilkins <mozart@...> wrote:

> I just thought I'd mention that as far as I am aware, there has been
> one, and only one, digital source photo (meaning, taken with a digital
> camera) used in the centerfold, and that is March 2006 (Monica Leigh).
> Christine's centerfold is a medium format film image.

In my mind I believe I confused digital camera with digital processing
and a medium- format camera.

> I can't explain why they cut her foot out of the frame, though.  That
> is just weird.  But this shot was definitely staged, definitely
> intended for the centerfold, and definitely shot on film.

I'm actually glad to learn that I was wrong on this. I alluded to the
possibility in my review. But I stand by my main point: The Playmate
Centerfold is no longer the hallmark of Playboy or PEI.

Mark Tomlonson