Kate Upton

Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue

article-0-1A8AC10D000005DC-340_634x824

article-2350028-1A8A6F9F000005DC-95_634x849 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue

Kate Upton continues her success story: here she is on the cover of Brazilian Vogue, rocking a high-waist pencil skirt paired with a bra-like top and her trademark cleavage.

And Kate on set this week:

FFN_g_51141475 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue

More candids and magazine shots next!

 

article-0-1A8AC10D000005DC-340_634x824 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue  article-2350028-1A8AC104000005DC-160_634x824 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue article-2350028-1A8AC808000005DC-559_634x472 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue article-2350028-1A8B01F7000005DC-711_634x477 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue

FFN_g_51141476 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue FFN_g_51141487 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue FFN_g_51141582 - Kate Upton in Brazilian Vogue

Incoming search terms:

kate upton weight, kate upton weight gain 2013, kate upton weight gain, kate upton measurements, kate upton weight loss
Previous ArticleNext Article
  • Candy

    Like I said in the previous K Upton post, this cover is gorgeous. It’s like a Tom ford/ carine routfeild photo. I’m starting to like her, she’s not perfect but she looks great here.

    • dutchie

      Agreed! I used to think she was boring and banal, but I have finally come around to team Upton. And I really, really hope her success is symptomatic of a new era of seeing more diversity of body shapes in fashion.

  • ccla

    removed

  • anushka

    She looks like a total bombshell in this shoot.

    • Pixie

      I agree!!!! 🙂

  • Veronique

    She looks amazing in Vogue (although the contoured the hell out of her face, like whoa she actually has cheek bones!) but rather plain in the candids. I like her though, wish I had those legs!

  • Jan

    She looks beautiful! But that waist? Really???

    • Marie

      so offensive? Really ?

    • ceedee

      you say that like it’s her fault…what is she supposed to do? shift around some organs and shave down some bones or something

      • JaneParker

        Lol @ your comment. Any guesses what her waist size is? I don’t think it’s any bigger than 26 inches, it just looks bigger becuase the rest of her is slenderer, but I kinda suck at estimating these things.

        • PinkLadi

          I would guess around 28 ish (still not at all “large” especially given her height) from the look of it in relation to the width of her shoulders (which aren’t particularly narrow). She is generally slimmer front to back than side to side in photos but I still think 26 is a bit small and her waist would appear more narrow from the front at that size.

        • Casey

          I would put her at 29 or 30. People forget, she is actually model height. Look how much taller she is than Cameron Diaz, who isn’t short by any means. This means that all of her measurements will be wider than you would expect.

          But waist measurements by themselves are meaningless; it needs to be ratio’d with her bust/hips to hold meaning.

          • PinkLadi

            Yes and no, it also depends a great deal on body shape and frame size. I’m also tall at 5’11” and have a 25-26 in waist. Granted, I have a skittle/hourglass body type but with a weight around 145-150lbs I’m not very thin and I also am not small framed. I agree that people can underestimate the difference height may make but it is also easy to overestimate the increase in measurements at a given height. Just from my personal experience, I’ve often had friends/family gift me clothing that are 2-3 sizes too large because they assume I wear a lager size because of my height and/or they’re surprised I can fit in a smaller size because of my height.

          • Tiina

            I’d go with JaneParker on this one and say she’s about 25″, tops 26″. I think that her waist measurement is actually quite small in inches, it just looks bigger on her frame.

            She has pretty much model-sized limbs, close to model-sized hips and a waist that’s pretty narrow, but in comparison to her hips and limbs looks big. And of course there’s the cleavage that makes her look heavier than she is in anything that’s not structured enough and pinched in at the waist (see: all her casual wear).

            And in addition to that there’s that awful, evil Sports Illustrated cover that made her famous. I don’t know what the menfolk think of that dental floss bikini bottom of hers, but it certainly did her figure no favours. Her midriff looks huge mostly because so unusually much of it is exposed.

  • Jan

    She looks beautiful! But that waist? Really?

  • Anni

    She looks good but she is also SO overexposed.

  • Pixie

    She looks gorgeous in this shoot!! 🙂 Even more so in the candids. Luv her!!!! 🙂 🙂

  • lauren

    Hats off to the photographer and creative director of the shoot, if it wasnt for all the make up they have slathered all over her face, she would look so incredibly plain. It is amazing what money can do behind the scenes to promote and create a brand. She has no bone structure to speak of in the candids from the movie set. she seems like a lovely girl and acting might be more her calling… just another cookie-cutter blue eyed blonde off of the LA/hollywood conveyer belt.

    • Ash

      Exactly! She’s a perfect example to show how great makeup artists and stylists are.

  • Justine

    I love me some Kate Upton. Sure, she might not be the best in the business for high fashion/couture, but so what? I think as she progresses as a model, she will get better at doing that type of work…I actually think this shoot is proof of that. The cover is gorgeous and the 2nd pic (white coat with black floral) is my fav, although the last pic (side profile) isn’t nearly as strong. I’m not sure why she gets so much hate cause I think she can be more than a SI model (if she continues to improve editorially) and she comes across as likable, plus she’s sexy.

  • Sharon

    Holy crap she looks amazing in this shoot… The right makeup, lighting and styling

  • wonderwoman21

    I love her face and that she represents a figure that is more attainable, but at the same time i feel put off by how lacking her body seems. I’ve been brainwashed havent i?

  • asdf

    Brooklyn Decker is livid :P…she took all of the jobs she would normally book and she is following in her movie making footsteps as well. let the catfight begin

    • Candy

      I don’t think Brooklyn would even get a vogue editorial, much less the cover of American, Italian, British, and Brazilian vogue.

      • asdf

        lol so true… just pointing out a changing of the guards. note that there is always one super busty blonde model that gets hot and then she turns 26, gets a fine line on her face, is considered ancient so she gets replaced by a 19 yr old blonde with big boobs ;p.

  • kia

    it’s the first time i don’t find her beautiful,in the street pics

    • Ozge

      I totally agree with you. Normally I find her gorgeous but not in the street pics.
      Is it only these pictures (street) or has she really have a very thick and short neck? If so, I think we have the answer to the very common question about her “why is she pretty but lacks elegance?”

  • Nana

    She looks good in the shoot, but I don’t understand how someone can think she is attractive. My 54 year old mother has better proportions than she does.

    • mary

      agreed. will never understand the appeal…shes cute but her face is so forgettable

    • serena

      Her proportions are not bad at all. She’s 5’10, has very long, slim legs and arms, and big boobs. Her weakness is her midsection where she’s got a little extra flab and not much waist, but that’s covered by clothes. Face is very cute but not beautiful imo.

      So if your mama looks like this at 54, hats off to her 🙂

    • Tori

      Well i don’t really like her bodytype either but I know that a lot of guys think that skinny girls with big boobs are like the holy grail of all body types.. And I think that in North America especially big boobs are considered attractive.
      Too bad I’ve got small boobs 😉

  • missmasy

    I don’t like her but i have to admit her face is really beautiful especially in the candids 🙂

  • mary

    ANother Vogue cover to check off the list….not even surprised anymore. she’s so plain in candids, from the awkward body shape to stringy hair…i dont know, just not a fan. nothing about her has the wow factor

  • JaneParker

    I like it, particularly her hair and make-up, looks so classic. I’m not envious of her waist but I’d kill for those legs. But then again I’m a Kate shipper. I don’t think she’s the best model ever but I do think she totally deserves to be one, and does a fine job at it. I’m getting tired of models with “weird” faces – too androgynous, too alienesque, too something. It’s not different if they all look the same. People say her face is plain but I think she’s just pretty – “regurlarly” pretty yes, but there seems to be a shortage of that in the model industry these days.

  • Ro

    Sorry, but no. She looks good in the Vogue shoot, but only because she poses in such a way as to hide her utter lack of hips or waist definition. In the candids, she looks plain and dumpy. I’m not saying everyone’s perfect, but as a model she is lacking.

    • Winnie

      i don’t really like this shoot either, but for argument’s sake, wouldn’t that make her a good model since she is posing in ways that hide all her flaws? just saying

  • Winnie

    i might be in the minority but i actually prefer her in the candids. her features are better suited to softer/more natural make-up in my opinion. i do like the way her body looks in this shoot though. she was definitely styled in a way which played to her strengths

  • Casey

    I don’t mind her waist, that is her body shape and I’m not sure what she can do except drastically decrease her overall body fat.

    However, I dislike her legs.

    While they are very long, they are also very thin and shapeless, and unlike her waist, that is something she can change. Squat, girl! And not with the sissy weights.

    I think if she were to get some tone and muscle on her legs, her overall frame would be much more evened out. Right now she just looks awkward with very thin, spindly legs and arms and a wide torso.

    • Winnie

      i actually don’t agree with you about her legs. her thighs are fine, it’s her calves that are the problem. i also have very long, thin limbs and my legs used to look a bit like Kate’s when i was younger. i liked my butt and thighs but my calves were thin and shapeless. i’ve done pretty much all i can to improve muscle-mass and definition in my calves, and they have improved significantly, but at the end of the day, i still have tiny ankles, and my calves can still look disproportionately skinny because the inner calf portion of my gastrocmenius muscle does not seem to get much bigger than it already is

      • serena

        I actually like the shape of Kate’s legs in these candids, though She might benefit from strength training her legs as Casey suggested, to give her her calves a nicer shape (they probably won’t get much bigger though). However Kate’s legs are pretty good. In fact if Kate lost some body fat and strength trained more her body might look similar to Adriana Lima except with bigger boobs.

  • retrobanana

    I know u either like her face or hate her face but god that’s the only thing I can tolerate about her I think it is quite pretty….its cookie cutter but its all American classic to me…I never liked blondes but she has a pretty mug (besides Marilyn ,doutzen, and a few others)…I like the shoot and the candids too..i root for her as an actress…I don’t think I ever mentioned this b ut to prove how commercial she is…my mom who prob despises all things fashion , media, tabloidy, celebrity, so she doesn’t know who the heck kate upton is happened to catch the snl rerun she was on..and said “my god since when do they have such a young and pretty girl working on this show…shes so much prettier then all the other actors they ever have (meaning the cast mates not the guest hosts)” and I had to laugh..because she didn’t even notice she was a model…which proves she looks somewhat normal and obviously has mom appeal…in other words shes not high fashion appeals to the masses

  • Emily

    Ok though to People saying she has a forgettable face. Let’s not deny she looks beautiful here. As she did in American Vogue, tanned, toned, stunning. Although the Pictures are beautiful, and there is no denying that. It’s hard to really be on her team when thr girl in thr photos is not Kate Upton. I mean yes technically it is, she makes up beautifully and that’s a models job. But I’m sorry it’s not her. That’s legitimately not what she looks like though the final effect is of course, stunning. Ever seen Mila Kunis in friends with benefits? “I have the perfect face for photoshop. My legs get…longer…this gets more…angular” someone google the pictures of her on set in the Hamptons recently wearing a white bikini. While there’s nothing “wrong” with her body unphotoshopped, by vogues standards, most of us could be supermodels. That’s all.

  • Cathia

    Cute face, otherwise not particularly interesting. She does look older than her age.

  • lc

    Not impressed, and I think that cover is ridiculous. Her looks are a dime a dozen, and these pics were heavily photoshopped.

  • sofie kittie

    She makes the same damn open-mouthed face in all pics

  • kristina

    im sorry, but she is just way to fat to be a model

    • Sheza

      You’re joking right?

    • lc

      Not as thin as typical, couture straight size models, but I wouldn’t say “fat”.

  • siennagold

    She looks great in these photos. I really like her because she’s not the typical skinny model.

  • snugglepup

    I’m usually all about bootylicious waists and legs, but Kate just owned me from the first time I ever saw her. Her face is cute but tempting, just classic beauty. I really think she’s that type who continues Marilyn Monroe’s legacy of soft and feminine icons. Maybe Kate won’t be most succesful or stay for ever honored in the modeling hall of fame, but I still like her very much and she has many jobs ahead.

  • alex

    i absolutely love the dress on 3rd photo, anybody knows where i can get a dress like that ?

  • Emeline

    The shoot is nice, but her face is not really ‘high fashion’ imo

  • tequilla

    cant help but like her!

  • Jo

    She’s the plainest, most overrated and overexposed model I have ever seen, who’s ascended to fame in the tackiest way imaginable (cheesy nude posing and basically selling herself as a sex-symbol).
    There’s nothing unique about her at all, if she hadn’t had those huge boobs, nobody would have given her a second thought. I see so many girls in real life who look far more interesting and exquisite than her, and it’s such a shame that delicately-featured, truly beautiful women with greatly proportioned bodies are overshadowed by this round-faced, generic, boxy girl. And it angers me so much how so many swoon over her when all they ever see is the photoshopped version of herself; her body and face look so vastly different in candids. Oh, and the comparisons to Marylin Monroe are ridiculous: Marylin had curves, an hourglass shape, a chiseled face and oozed glamour and an aura of sophistication, whereas all Kate could do was bounce around to wiggle her cleavage and show her tits. Plus, Marylin was so expressive, whereas Kate has the same generic, mouth-agape face in all her shoots. It’s so boring.

    I genuinely don’t see her appeal at all. I can think of a million prettier women of all shapes and sizes. Also, as a fitness enthusiast, Kate’s body screams indifference and neglect to me. Her shape is unfortunate but she could be so much more proportional if she just moved her flabby ass to a gym and started lifting some weights.

    • Wizzer

      Cue the hysterics. LOL

    • Candy

      Please, everyone. Who net Marilyn said how plain she was, just because she’s an icon doesn’t mean she isn’t all hype. I know people who “adore” and don’t know a single movie. If you think Kate’s slathered in make up, Marilyn looked completely different without the bleach and war paint. That’s a woman I don’t understand why she’s an icon.

    • anushka

      MY, that was one long anti Kate rant 😀

  • Wizzer

    Oh and what nude posing has Kate got famous from? Miranda Kerr is buck naked 80% of her shoots, same with Candice Swanopoel, Edita V, et al I don’t see them being sl*t shamed for it.

    • Jo

      I’m not slut-shaming. Nude posing is totally okay and I’m a huge fan of artistic (emphasis on artistic) nudes. Heck, I’ve posed partially nude once too when modelling. BUT, the difference here is that Miranda, Candice & co. did not rise to fame by posing nude. They worked hard as regular models. Also, the nudes they do are (more or less) artistic. Meanwhile, Kate basically started her career by posing naked, covered only in body paint for Sports Illustrated, doing racy photoshoots aimed at men and dancing provocatively/jiggling her boobs. That’s a perfectly good career start if you intend to work in the sex industry, but it strikes me as unfair to become such a “celebrated” high fashion model by climbing the popularity ladder the easy way, while there are so many gorgeous, modest, hardworking models out there who actually try to become famous by doing their job, not catering to men’s sexual fantasies.

      It’s totally okay to be as provocative as you wish, but I feel Kate is not appropriate for high fashion and her being a “supermodel” now is unfair.

      • Winnie

        ACTUALLY, Kate’s been modelling since she was 14 or 15. she did a Garage campaign and Roxy ads, i believe. her SI cover catapulted her to fame, but she did not “basically start her career posing naked”. that would be child pornography. she like every model who makes it, just happens to have a niche market. one which you happen not to respect. but at the very least, do some research before you talk sh*t.

    • Jo

      I’m not sl*t-shaming. Nude posing is totally okay and I’m a huge fan of artistic (emphasis on artistic) nudes. Heck, I’ve posed partially nude once too when modelling. BUT, the difference here is that Miranda, Candice & co. did not rise to fame by posing nude. They worked hard as regular models. Also, the nudes they do are (more or less) artistic. Meanwhile, Kate basically started her career by posing naked, covered only in body paint for Sports Illustrated, doing racy photoshoots aimed at men and dancing provocatively/jiggling her boobs. I’ll never forget that awful shooting of her dressed like a nun in a bikini; you can see that kind of thing only in porn. That’s a perfectly good career start if you intend to work in the sex industry, but it strikes me as unfair to become such a “celebrated” high fashion model by climbing the popularity ladder the easy way, while there are so many gorgeous, modest, hardworking models out there who actually try to become famous by doing their job, not catering to men’s sexual fantasies.

      It’s totally okay to be as provocative as you wish, but I feel Kate is not appropriate for high fashion and her being a “supermodel” now is unfair.

  • truwordz

    appart from her breasts, she just looks like a normal model really. Like i’m happy shes doing so well [even with all the slagging off she gets] but honestly dont get the big fuss. she has real boobs. wow . amazing . didn’t know women normally had them, strange innit?

  • roonie

    Doubt I’ll ever be a fan. Her face is just so not attractive to me and neither is her figure. This shoot may be the best I’ve seen her in though, but it’s still lacking.

  • blee

    Yeah her editorials look great photo shopped with professional hair and make up… but I just can’t find her attractive and I don’t know why

  • anushka

    I have to say this.
    But yes, Kate does not fit into the typical model stereotypes, she has a large waist, full breats, her face isnt ” high fashion “,.
    But she is still making it as a model. She is STILL doing shoots for Vogue, not 1 but 4. She is still doing quite damn well as a model. You can reason that by saying things like
    a) She slept her way through it, i.e definitely a form of slut shaming. You are quite openly degrading a woman who is doing well in her career by stating she only got it for her boobies.
    b) She has selling power. As for as I knew, thats the whole point of a model on a cover page. It needs to have selling power. WHY? cause she appeals to alot more people that we would like to admit.
    c) Because she is a relatable plain jane, and women are not intimidated by her. Im an Indian, more tan, short chick, and my proportions are not in any way like Kates. Would you say I find her relatable?

    Kates look does not appeal to certain people, and that is fine. You cant expect everyone to love her.
    But maybe we should question the model stereotypes we have built in our brains. Cause this woman is doing great, even though she defies a large no. of them.

  • cameron baum

    She looks quite good and I like the photography.

  • Mickey

    Pretty face but my absolute least favorite body. It’s not her fault of course, but I hate that leg shape and flat feet. Somehow, it looks great in the photo shoot though.

  • Kara

    Rad photo shoot. I don’t think she’s very striking in the movie shots. Then again she’s a model and I either feel like models are different and beautiful looking in real life or just plain/easy to contour there faces with makeup

  • Raquel100

    She photographs incredibly! I know so many women hate her bimbo-esque image but I’m sorry she is absolutely STUNNING and has star quality that others do not have today!! She reminds me of Marilyn Monroe. She oozes sex appeal & it’s interesting to see her transformation from everyday pretty sorority girl walking down the street to glamorous Hollywood icon in a photoshoot. She has that “it” factor and I think she’s gorgeous when she’s all done up!