Emily Ratajkowski

Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961

490A84C900000578-5372851-image-a-11_1518193895343 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961

At request, here is 26 year-old model Emily Ratajkowski in a new campaign for DL1961, where the brunette beauty rocks a wide range of denim pieces while posing sultrily for the cameras.

Many more shots inside!

 

490A84B900000578-5372851-image-a-19_1518194882027 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961 490A84BD00000578-5372851-image-a-18_1518194855468 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961 490A84C200000578-5372851-image-a-10_1518193817653 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961  490A84CD00000578-5372851-Picture_perfect_Emily_shot_to_stardom_in_Robin_Thicke_s_controve-m-17_1518194843652 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961 490A857C00000578-5372851-image-a-12_1518194681500 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961 490A858000000578-5372851-image-a-9_1518193464789 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961 490A858800000578-5372851-image-a-8_1518193356612 - Emily Ratajkowski Rocks Denim for DL1961

Incoming search terms:

emily ratajkowski too skinny
Previous ArticleNext Article
Editor of Skinny vs Curvy Website

11
Leave a Reply

avatar
7 Comment threads
4 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
11 Comment authors
aaaaaaGwenjjj2Pixie Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Guest
OldMedusa

Same facial expression in nearly every shot and Emily’s face is looking kinda funny too, like she’s been edited in an awkward way

Gwen
Guest
Gwen

It’s because they smoothed out the shadowing in almost all the shots. Her facial structure is a lot more harsh and not as soft and smooth as it appears it most of these shots. Part of the reason is she lost some weight since she first got famous and because it’s been a few years and as people age the facial fat just melts off. They also seemed to have elongated her face a little because she has a fairly squat face which is more apparent in the B+W portrait which has not been elongated. I think that portrait is… Read more »

aaaaaa
Guest
aaaaaa

just because her legs are short compared to her torso doesn’t mean *she* is short. I mean maybe she is but it’s hard to tell from photos. I agree the B&W is the cutest shot of her, in other her face is pretty bleh.

Cia
Guest
Cia

Did the photographer tell her to look like she’s having sex with the jeans in the first shot?

I AM BATMAN
Guest
I AM BATMAN

I thought it looked like she was really enjoying a poo

Cardie
Guest
Cardie

Height / weight guesses ? 5”6 and 120 ish? Looks amazing

CarrieD
Guest
CarrieD

In real life? Maybe 110lbs or so (not sure about her height but I think she’s about 5’7). I think they photoshopped her to look even thinner (as usual). I’m 120-something, not sure now, and 5’6, she looks significantly smaller than me.

ule
Guest
ule

She is not my cup of tea, but it’s almost refreshing to see some skin texture in the b-w photo.

Pixie
Guest
Pixie

I’m kind of getting sick of her. The look gets old

jjj2
Guest
jjj2

She is just so beautiful. Very nice body, she is just perfect!

Guest
lineplay

This really shows how….not great…she is at modelling at all. Without being half naked she’s got nothing special, and sadly, time will take that too. I can’t help but feel bad for her +20 years.