12.08.11

Kristen Stewart For W Magazine September 2011

Kristen Stewart looks amazing on the cover of W Magazine’s September 2011 issue wearing a Max Mara’s mohair and wool sweater, with big barbarella hair as she stares at us with her piercing green eyes.

She looks breath-taking in the rest of her editorial which was shot by Mert Alas & Marcus Piggott wearing the same Gucci dress Beyonce Knowles wore on her cover for Harper’s Bazaar UK, plus Junya Watanabe, Dolce & Gabbana and Theory.

The cover is my favourite picture as we get plenty of attitude whilst being quite vulnerable.

In her interview she talks about growing up, getting married, and giving birth—as millions look on.

Some extracts are below, but you can read more at WMagazine.com.

On her early career efforts: “I did two commercials, one for Porsche, but I was definitely not the type of child one would cast in a commercial or any TV that you’d typically go out for as a young kid. I wasn’t the type of kid who would be in stuff that kids watch. I wasn’t cutesy.”

On her tomboy qualities: “I have brothers, and that so-called boyish quality was something that I was deathly self-conscious about when I was younger. I was, like, No, I’m a girl. Actually, I’m still embarrassed to say that.”

On whether or not she had any interest in vampires before “Twilight”: “I fucking love me a vampire [Laughs]. I was 17 when I read Twilight, and at the time it was so perfect for me. The script was about young kids who think they can handle stuff that they just can’t. And they’re going to do it anyway. Because, why not? Just torture yourself. I relate to that. Vampires are a little dangerous—and we girls like to test ourselves.”

On the much-talked-about “Breaking Dawn” wedding scene: “Awesome. This was my first wedding. It was insane. And odd. The wedding dress experience was a huge deal. I tried on one version of the dress, and it was like tweak and tweak and alter and tweak and change, and then it’s done. BFD dress. Huge deal.”

On whether or not she enjoys watching herself in action: “It’s not like I sit around watching my movies again and again, but I’ve never quite believed actors when they say they don’t watch themselves. I hear them going around the block to make excuses for why they don’t watch their work. It’s bullshit. Sorry, guys—I know you watch your stuff.”

Credit: Mert Alas & Marcus Piggott for W Magazine

Rose McGowan In Blumarine - "Conan The Barbarian" LA Premiere

Rose McGowan In Blumarine – “Conan The Barbarian” LA Premiere

Sidewalk Style: Lady GaGa In Versace

Sidewalk Style: Lady GaGa In Versace

84 Responses to Kristen Stewart For W Magazine September 2011

  1. Terry August 12, 2011 at 12:04 #

    She’s amazing in this photoshoot. The big hair & cat eye make up suit her so much.

    • Alina August 12, 2011 at 12:36 #

      +1

    • Valeria August 12, 2011 at 15:21 #

      Se looks like Lindsay Lohan, I took a double-take on what the writing sais

      • Anissa August 12, 2011 at 17:53 #

        Exactly my first thought too. It’s not a bad thing persay but definitely thought it was LiLo at first…

  2. roxana August 12, 2011 at 12:10 #

    lovely!

  3. Tahlia August 12, 2011 at 12:20 #

    WOW.

  4. B August 12, 2011 at 12:28 #

    Amazinnnggggggg, she should add more volume to her hair like this. Looking forward to plenty more editorials for the Breaking Dawn advertising

  5. Amy August 12, 2011 at 12:30 #

    I must have been gawping at these images for the last five minutes – simply stunning, new girl crush alert!!

  6. Paddy M August 12, 2011 at 12:37 #

    The best I’ve ever been able to say about Kristen is that she looks good. I’ve never found her particularly sexy.

    Until now. H-O-T.

    • FionaK August 16, 2011 at 21:45 #

      I was about to make a very similar comment! Never really got her appeal but now? Me = WOW

  7. Annel August 12, 2011 at 12:38 #

    Elizabeth Taylor vibe on that cover.

  8. Cara August 12, 2011 at 12:39 #

    wow! ive never thought mum of kristen but she looks absolutely stunning! very envious

    • Cara August 12, 2011 at 12:46 #

      much***

  9. ValTr August 12, 2011 at 12:41 #

    OMG she looks just like LINDSAY LOHAN on the cover!!!

    • Fashion Critic August 12, 2011 at 12:53 #

      not for me

  10. Amy August 12, 2011 at 12:42 #

    Ooh yes – I see this now too!

  11. Kaz August 12, 2011 at 12:43 #

    Best I’ve seen her look. Ever.

    I’m getting a young Priscilla Presley vibe from this shoot and it’s fantastic.

    • Fashion Critic August 12, 2011 at 12:52 #

      THANK YOU…I was trying to figure out who she looked like.

      Priscilla Presley is spot on.

      • Kaz August 12, 2011 at 12:57 #

        You’re welcome :)

    • Rebecca Z August 12, 2011 at 16:18 #

      My thought exactly

      • Suha August 13, 2011 at 00:15 #

        Me too..very clear

  12. Jones19 August 12, 2011 at 12:49 #

    WOW I’ve never seen her look this beautiful, who knew that the Barbarella look would suit her so well?

    • mm August 13, 2011 at 13:45 #

      Right. Love this cover. I think she might be the best of the sept magazines for 2011

  13. couturecoco August 12, 2011 at 12:50 #

    Stunning, just stunning. She has lovely bone structure and hope she grows more in confidence seeing how good she looks. I have a soft post for people with dark hair and green eyes. The last shot is my fav.

  14. jo August 12, 2011 at 12:50 #

    She doesn’t look like herself (in a good way). But I’m not stunned by this photos, a little bit too much photoshop for my taste.

  15. noo August 12, 2011 at 13:12 #

    Wow :D the 60s hair and make up bring out how gorgeous she is!

  16. Sam August 12, 2011 at 13:20 #

    Kristen looks gorgeous in this shoot. Yes there’s photoshop going on, but her facial features can look this way in real life too. Just have to look at pictures of her at events. She has beautiful bone structure and features.

    Love the 60s glam. I will be buying this issue of W.

    • Rahel August 12, 2011 at 13:36 #

      No, her photoshopped feature can’t look that way in real life. She has another nose, a diffrent face shape, other lips and so on and so on. Especially the last one. It’s very beautiful but it’s not her.

      • Fashionpassion August 12, 2011 at 14:06 #

        Ummm if you haven’t noticed, this is actually a fashion editorial which more often than not, stylists & co usually conceptualize a certain look they’d want their model to have. Obviously the model is not necessarily going to look the same as what you’re used to seeing her/him. It’s called creativity ;)

        Well, kudos to Wmag’s creative department ::thumbsup:: will surely visit my local magazine stand for this

        • Rahel August 12, 2011 at 21:46 #

          I’m talking about photoshop. They used it to make her unhumanly beautiful. Now it doesn’t even look like her but it’s funny to read how people think that it’s only makeup. Yeah sure.

      • Wilson August 12, 2011 at 20:20 #

        You are wrong Rahel. It’s a MAKEOVER! She is supposed to look different. But that is definitely her, there is a bit of airbrushing on the cover but they did not change or edit her facial features at all.

        Just look here, http://icydk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/kristen_stewart_allure_5.jpg or here, http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9430/sn1cr01.jpg. All the features are the same. I suppose you think those were Photoshopped too?

        • Rahel August 12, 2011 at 21:44 #

          Good look here:

          http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t122/loisen187/toomuchphotoshop.gif

        • Wilson August 13, 2011 at 02:32 #

          Lol, did you take the time to make that yourself? And are you trying to prove my point? The nose, mouth and eyes are identical. The whole face is. Thanks for that.

          Where’s the photoshop? Do you not understand the effects makeup and styling? Do you realize the pictures are taken at different angles so it won’t superimpose perfectly? Besides that I see the exact same person. You’re gonna have to do better than that, or atleast explain yourself a little…

        • Julie August 13, 2011 at 15:55 #

          Rahel is correct. They’ve made her face wider, lips fuller, raised her brow bone, evened out her teeth, rounded the chin and enhanced her eye color. I’d actually be insulted if I were Kristen.

        • jenny August 14, 2011 at 02:24 #

          Rachel- you do realize your comparison pic is a HEAVILY photo-shopped promo image for new moon right?

          So you’re attempting to prove that one pic is over shopped by using another that is shopped.

          For a true comparison try a papz shot from a premiere or something. Otherwise you just look like one of those ridiculous haters that clicks on every blog about Kristen Stewart just to make a negative comment….oh wait

      • Mia August 13, 2011 at 18:08 #

        to Rahel, umm honey do you use make-up or have it done professionally on special occasions? To say that is not her lips, nose and face shape is definitely an ignorant remark. I’m not a professional make-up artist but I know the basics and I can assure you they are all Kristen’s features.

        First the nose, you can make the nose appear thinner in front by using a darker foundation on the sides than your regular skin shade ones. Thus, the shape of the nose looks different depending on the make-up artist or fashion director’s command (nice trick huh??). Also camera angles can vary nose sizes too.

        Second the lips, lip liners are make-up artist’s best friend to highlight it (LOL!). In this case, they use the lip liner outside the rim of the lips of Kristen to make it look voluminous especially at the top bow and center lower lip (you can easily see it in the close-up colored photo with the ring). Then they apply the lipstick and maybe a gloss.

        Third the face, you could make it appear that you have a gaunt face by a different stroke of the blush on. In this case, the stroke of the brush is downwards that is why it changes Kristen’s face shape in your perspective. Maybe because you regularly see her blush on applied on the apple of her cheeks so to you it looks different somehow. (I have a chubby face so yeah I definitely use this technique to make my face appear thinner * wink)

        Last, I will not tell you how to use eye liner, brow pencils and other eye make-ups because well that is very obvious. By the way, I believe Kristen has olive green eyes but it changes color because of the light (I think we are not contesting that right?)

        Why can’t we not just give credit to the excellent make-up team, fashion director and photographers who worked hard in this one to make Kristen a 60’s glamorous lady?? This very Priscilla Presley and Brigitte Bardot look.

        P.S. I’m a photoshop artists who works in a publishing house that mostly makes yearbooks in my country. So yes, I edit faces an average of 20 faces a day, and I can guarantee you that this shoot only use it to change or vary the lightning of the photos, airbrush some pictures to make some lines or blemishes disappear or to soften some edges, and crop wayward imperfect hair (yes I have seen her other photos so I have a point of reference). But there is no way they would impose somebody else’s lips and nose on Kristen’s. LOL! It can easily be detected in HQ pics by people who use it darling.

        To the people who run this site, sorry for the long post. I just need to explain and feel free to criticize my make-up tutorial if I’m mistaken. By the way, I love this shoot and definitely buying. Peace.

        • Fashion Critic August 13, 2011 at 22:11 #

          Can we just enjoy the pictures from an artistic and fashion perspective?

          Thanks

        • Anna August 14, 2011 at 02:22 #

          Firstly, to say someone’s comment is ignorant because they have a different opinion than you is insensitive and insulting. Secondly, the commenter was saying that the photographers heavily augmented features on Kristen using photoshop, not imposed another persons. Thirdly, there’s a
          huge difference between yearbook and high fashion magazine/editorial photoshopping (ie covers for Madonna and Kate Winslet)

        • Rahel August 14, 2011 at 10:45 #

          Did you even see the gif I posted? I don’t think so. So why are you answering to me? No darker foundation can change the shape of a nose. No. It doesn’t work. The rouge also doesn’t make your face appear wider. Nothing you named works IRL:

  17. Matt R August 12, 2011 at 13:45 #

    Wow. Kristen is looking BEAUTIFUL. Part of me wonders if she could really pull off that Gucci dress on the red carpet or not. I know that I’m browsing Style.com right now to see what outfits would work for her on her promo tour though. Hopefully she will go out with a bang and surprise us all.

  18. Gaber August 12, 2011 at 13:52 #

    The Gucci shot is fantastic!

  19. Giuseppi Giraffe August 12, 2011 at 14:18 #

    I just saw this somewhere else and was hoping you’d cover it too- this is truly the best photoshoot I’ve ever seen of her. The hair is perfect. She looks grownup, Hollywood glamorous, but like herself. She needs to do more work like this- I wouldn’t have thought W could top last issue’s Tilda Swinton shoot, but this is wonderful.

  20. Maria Claudia August 12, 2011 at 14:24 #

    I dare to compare this picture with angelina jolie..
    AMAZING.

    • Lara August 12, 2011 at 16:15 #

      It reminded me of Angelina’s Vanity Fair cover in 2008. Kristen looks absolutely beautiful.

  21. rebecca August 12, 2011 at 14:25 #

    Favorite shoot ever from Kristen! Very glamorous and gorgeous, yet she doesn’t look uncomfortable like she does in most other photo shoots (see Vogue)

  22. Vidhya August 12, 2011 at 14:53 #

    LOVE in really BIG letters.. so so awesome

  23. Victoria August 12, 2011 at 15:03 #

    The images are incredibly beautiful, but without the caption I would’ve recognized her in two at the most. And not the cover, for sure. Which is not necessarily a bad thing :)

  24. Francois August 12, 2011 at 15:41 #

    She reminds me of Bambi Northwood-Blyth is this photoshoot !

  25. Susan August 12, 2011 at 16:06 #

    I loved the Vogue photographs. I thought it showed a vunerability and softness that suited the clothes. In fact, i think it showed the clothes in an extremely favorable light.

  26. Fashionpassion August 12, 2011 at 16:17 #

    You know what I’ve suddenly realized about this girl, she embodies an interesting chameleon-like aura in her. Like when you see her in her normal habitat (jeans and shirt), she actually just seems as normal as a peasant (like us) could get. Then when you see her dressed like a grungy, rocker chick, she blends in perfectly but somehow manages to be the biggest rockstar there is. I really feel like you can actually make her look like anything or anyone you want and she’d be it but still stand out at the same time (as long as she is on the same page as you of course). I think that is very rare and impressive if I may say so.

    • Rahel August 12, 2011 at 16:54 #

      Actually I think that you can make everyone look like that if you have the right stylist and enough photoshop.

      • Fashionpassion August 12, 2011 at 18:54 #

        Well if that is the case then what is the problem with this girl looking so “not like her”? It is so easy to point our fingers to these models and say “soooo photoshopped” but what about the talent behind the art. I mean hinting at all the negativity behind the shoot is pretty much taking the credit away from all these amazing artists who clearly did a great job. If you’re familiar with the photographers, stylist, make up artist etc then you’d know that the possibility of this actual shoot being fully photoshopped is nil.
        Plus who would want to look at a fashion editorial with the same look every time? Certainly not I. I expect no less from W mag.

        P.s. I can honestly claim I don’t have that chameleon quality that I was talking about, nor does my mom. If you do, then I’d say you are blessed for not everyone is as lucky. Unless of course you bring up prosthetics cos then that def changes things. Looking like IT, is one thing but having the air of BEING IT, is another.

        • Rahel August 12, 2011 at 21:53 #

          Very funny. Look at my comment and then look at yours. I said that the right stylist can make you look like that and you said that she’s a chameleon. But I’m the one who’s taking away the credit.

    • mol August 12, 2011 at 17:28 #

      I think your comment is spot on – she really does have that chameleon quality…..

    • Lin August 13, 2011 at 15:50 #

      @Fashionpassion’s, I completely agree with you about her chameleon quality. That is why people can also see her as Elizabeth Taylor, Lindesy Lohan, Brooke Shield etc. She even look like Joan Jett when she was dress for it. That is very amazing indeed. To have the bone structure that can transform you into anyone you like. That is a lot of beautiful people she can transform into.

  27. robbie August 12, 2011 at 16:29 #

    she looks beautlful but they photoshopped her a bit too much.

    • BeeBee August 12, 2011 at 16:54 #

      I agree. Those pictures are beautiful, but it’s not Kristen Stewart. They changed every single feature of her face and that’s not fashion editorial creativity .

      • Anna August 12, 2011 at 17:49 #

        couldn’t agree more. My first thought when I looked at these pictures was “that’s NOT kristen stewart”. I’m not saying that she’s not an attractive girl, because she is, and she would have looked amazing only with the make-up and overall styling of the editorial. But what they did was to change her features so drastically that if I hadn’t seen her name I would have thought it was some upcoming model.

        • Wilson August 12, 2011 at 20:42 #

          You people are being ridiculous. They did not “change” her features. Seems like you are way too easily distracted by a big makeover and some makeup. The face behind that is absolutely Kristen’s. Can’t you just give credit to a stunning and beautifully done photoshoot?

          As a fan who has seen countless pictures of her I can assure you it is all her, I had no problem seeing her right off the bat. Yes she looks different but that’s the point! If my other posts gets approved then you can see the comparison links I posted. There is no discrepancy in her facial features.

        • Julie August 13, 2011 at 16:01 #

          They’ve completely re-worked her features and it’s not just a trick of makeup and styling. I think PS should be used in a minimum, but they made her someone else entirely (not in a good way). As I’ve said before, I’d be insulted if I were her. And I thought the Vogue Photoshopping was overdone.

      • justme August 15, 2011 at 19:06 #

        My thoughts exactly.

  28. zoe August 12, 2011 at 17:31 #

    wow! her beauty really shines through here.

  29. ro August 12, 2011 at 18:22 #

    Love, love this shoot. She looks gorgeous – a bit photoshopped, but she’s got great bone structure to begin with, so I don’t think it detracts from the look at all. W did a great job with her.

  30. Jackie August 12, 2011 at 20:37 #

    Loved hearing her thoughts especially since Kristen just seems like that awkward but cool girl who we don’t really hear speak. Now we’ve heard a little of what goes on in her head!

    And this shoot was a nice change in looks for her! Refreshing to see something different for Kristen.

  31. molly August 12, 2011 at 20:53 #

    Its amazing what some airbrushing can do. I really like the shoot, but its a little overdone.

    • Julie August 13, 2011 at 15:56 #

      It’s Photoshop gone wild. I can’t help but think this is an insult to the actress that they altered her so much.

  32. Parvati August 12, 2011 at 21:08 #

    Wow, she’s unrecognizable. If I hadn’t read the article, I wouldn’t have guessed who she was.

  33. mol August 12, 2011 at 23:12 #

    The second shot down looks like a bit like her, the others, not so much. I don’t want to fight over whether it’s makeup or photoshop, but only that the final result has changed her completely. Priscilla Presley’s hair, Liz Tayor’s eyes and LiLo’s mouth is what it looks like to me, with a little bit of Anne Margaret thrown in for good measure, a nice melange to be sure, but the more I look at this the less I’m liking it. I did agree earlier that she is a chameleon in her ability to adapt to a look, but the more I look at these images, the more I think other factors pushed that ability into something too fake for me.

  34. Rebecca Z August 13, 2011 at 00:57 #

    What a hullabaloo. She looks fantastic and she is a beautiful young woman. Yes, they photoshopped her and probably a little too much, but but she is not unrecognizable. Can’t we just enjoy it?

  35. Anna August 13, 2011 at 16:35 #

    No one is stopping anyone from enjoying the photos, if they are. People are just expressing their opinions, which is their right. I agree with those that say while these photos are nice, they are heavily manipulated. Makeup only goes so far. It doesn’t change your whole bone structure. If you look at Kristen’s photoshoots from before or even her screen test, there are some jarring differences. Her face is widened, her jaw shortened, her nose is thinned, and her chin is also shortened but widened. When you change the face like that it makes is unrecognizable. She’s not herself. If you were/are a fan, and you like her for herself , you should be pissed because that’s NOT Kristen Stewart. Besides, Mert and Marcus, the photographers/editors are famous for their surreal quality (i.e. photoshop skills) in their work.

  36. Mana August 13, 2011 at 17:29 #

    Can you spot why does she look so different? Cause they made her eyebrows thicker. Eyebrows can do a big difference in someones face. Most of people pay a minor attention to eyebrows, but it can do a lot for you. Imagine the same photos with her normal thin eyebrow and It would defenitely look like the same boyish kristen. The eyecat make up helps her a lot as well, it suits her.

  37. Delilah August 13, 2011 at 20:47 #

    She looks less and less like herself in every photoshoot.

  38. serapart August 13, 2011 at 21:18 #

    oh people, just replace her eyebrows to the thin ones and there you have the real kristen again. you wont believe how thicker eyebrows can change one´s facial expression etc…. love her in this shoot, love the makeup and lightning…

  39. Kate August 14, 2011 at 02:45 #

    People who say this is “overly photoshopped” are simply haters. Why not insult only the actress but all of the make artists, stylists, etc involved as well? She looks GORGEOUS! And she looks like herself, just glammed up.

  40. Just my opinion, but... August 14, 2011 at 02:46 #

    Well this is just one professional photographer’s opinion, but…

    They definitely used photoshop, just not THAT much. It’s WHERE they used it that is the “problem”, if you consider the use of photoshop a problem. I personally don’t. When shooting an editorial I have a particular image in my mind that a model can’t always create organically. Enter photoshop for me to enhance the model so he/she attains my idealized look.

    Every photo is airbrushed, but every photo in every magazine is airbrushed, unless it’s one of those “look what I really look like” editorials. Her eyes are not enhanced, but they have shone bright light directly into them, in order to brighten them. You can see the lighting set up reflected in her irises. This is a cheap and easy way to brighten lighter eyes. It’s a very common trick and once you know to look for the white circles or squares from the lights in irises, you start seeing them in every photo. Her brows and browline I think are also makeup. In the closeups you can clearly see where they’ve just drawn Audrey Hepburn brows on over her own. Maybe they used some enhancement to darken those areas so they pop even more, but you can see the makeup contouring so clearly. Ditto for cheeks–I have my makeup artists do long, under the bone sweeps of blush or bronzer whenever I have a thin-faced model. If you want to do this for yourself, don’t apply blush to your apples, just sweep it under your cheek bone and blend back toward your temple.

    Her lips are defintely drawn on with makeup, too, and she was likely directed to pout, but I do think there’s some enhancement happening. The question is, what kind? Did they just use a collagen-enhanced lipstick to plump them up for a couple hours or did they fluff them with ‘shop? Eh. That’s up to you. They whitened her teeth, so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they did some electronic enhancement, too.

    But the biggest thing they did, the egregious thing they did, is photoshop her nose. It’s especially obvious in the photo with the red flower. That’s just a different nose. Kristen Stewart is beautiful and I’d love to shoot her, but that isn’t her nose. Her nose is round at the tip, that nose is pointed. In every photo they’ve squared her nose a bit and in that one they went too far and made it straight-up pointy. It’s amazing what tinkering with a person’s nose does to the rest of her face.

    My opinion is that this is a magnificent makeup job with some airbrushing and too much photoshoping on her nose. But I think that’s actually 90% Kristen Stewart. We’re just not used to seeing her done up like this.

  41. Nancy August 14, 2011 at 04:34 #

    I wouldnt have recognised her if I didnt read the title. Thats way way too much photoshopping. anyone can look like this with either photoshop or some fantastic plastic surgery!! This photoshoot is a joke and kinda insulting too. how far will they push?

  42. Dan August 14, 2011 at 05:31 #

    What a stunning photo shoot. Kristen is naturally beautiful and I’ve preferred her looks with less makeup. This is definitely an exception. I agree with Fashionpassion. Kristen indeed is a chameleon!

  43. Caitlin August 14, 2011 at 11:20 #

    She looks amazing, but in some of the editorial shots she looks like Jennifer Garner, like, spitting image.

    Although I L-O-V-E the Barbarella hair on her!!

  44. hollie August 15, 2011 at 08:58 #

    Love this shoot so much! Kristen looks stunning!

  45. serenissima August 15, 2011 at 15:16 #

    she looks AWESOME. who’s mad about beauty? not I.

  46. JT August 16, 2011 at 02:16 #

    What is all this “chameleon” talk? Who needs to be praised are the people behind the photo shoot, the makeup artists, the photographers who will literally rearrange her body for her to get that perfect shot. Undirected she is a mess as is indicated by how she behaves on the red carpet, sure she can look decent even fabulous at times, but she is awkward and noticeably uncomfortable. And bone structure…it’s called lighting people, not to say anything about the little tweaks here and there that would have been done in photoshop. The point is anybody can look good even great under the right circumstances, but normally this girl is very average looking.

  47. BMH August 16, 2011 at 02:35 #

    I looked at the two photo’s side by side the allure and the last one. Definitely some changes. Her eyes are beautiful without making them another color. It seems every change they made was unnecessary. That’s a shame because she truly is a beautiful young woman without the photoshop.

  48. lilou November 15, 2011 at 17:19 #

    Je ne l’avait même pas reconnu. Cest incroyable comme elle est belle. J’ai juste deux mots a dire :
    SUPERBE et MAGNIFIQUE

  49. Sara June 20, 2012 at 22:26 #

    I love Kristen but is really shame what this magazine did with Kristen, one actress than already is beautifull, in put very photoshop and turn she with one appearance than in real live not have :(

Leave a Reply

Latest on Red Carpet fashion Awards