Tyler Shields Allegedly Refused Kardashian Cover Shoot for Vogue


Have intellectual property theft, cratering wages and general unfairness left you feeling a little down on the photography business?

Then here’s a little restorative tonic: A well-known, in-demand shooter refuses a celebrity cover shoot for Vogue just because he doesn’t like the particular celebrity. Who happens to be Kim Kardashian, fiancée of photographer-basher Kanye West and a major cultural annoyance in her own right. Come back to Mama and Daddy, faith in humanity!

Deets come from a super-secret anonymous source harvested by Radar Online, who reports that Tyler Shields passed on the gig, despite heavy lobbying from Vogue editors and Mr. West, not always the best choice for a photographer to get mad.


“Tyler is the hardest person to hire for a shoot. You have to know him or it has to make sense to him,” the source told Radar. “He prides himself on shooting only the people he knows or likes.”

The source further explained that Shields is focusing on his art photography, particularly work for a new show at his gallery, and doesn’t need to take some cheesy celebrity modeling gig to stay in the black.

(via Radar Online via PetaPixel Reader Tip)

Image credits: LG ‘니트로 HD’, 세계적 사진작가 타일러 쉴즈와 만나다 by LGEPR and Kim Kardashian 4 by Luke Ford

  • Stephen

    PetaPixel can do without sansationalist click-grabbing headlines. “Tyler is the hardest person to hire for a shoot” is rather different from, “He refused to work with Kim because he dislikes her.” How about y’all stick to photography and let other sites create gossip. If I wanted to read TMZ, I’d have bookmarked that instead.

  • harumph

    How is this supposed to restore anyone’s faith in humanity? It’s petty and obnoxious. So he only shoots people he knows and likes? Fine, that’s his perogative. But don’t turn it into a tabloid story.

  • Rob S


    “Will someone not ride me of this meddlesome woman?”

  • stevengrosas

    Slow day in news that you have post something like this? What a shame. Petapixel gets worse by the day.

  • davin

    YES!!YES!!YES!! This retores my faith that these over paid celebs cant do and have what they want after Mcginley sold out Shields is the last hope!

  • Karen

    R.I.P. Vogue. Can editors really not take a hint!?
    If top photographer refuses to shoot conveyor belt pop peddling producer’s fat wife then there is probably a reason behind it that reaches beyond a personal dislike…

  • DLCade

    Constructive suggestions are always welcome Steven, our goal certainly isn’t to get worse. If you’d like to see something different, please feel free to say so.

  • davin

    You would rather see more Articles about Karl Taylor who has never shot anyone in his life then a post about one of the biggest photographers in the world turning down a cheesy reality star in the hopes of taking a stand for Vogue the biggest magazine in the world?

  • Jamie

    I do not care what anyone says everytime I see an article on petapixel about Tyler Shields I get excited.. I just wish there was more!

  • harumph

    This article is clearly just an invitation to bash Kardashian, so coming up with any sort of constructive criticism of this type of click-bait is difficult. It’s just a goofy way (“deets”?) to insult an overexposed celebrity. If you want to write an actual article about it, then interview Tyler.

  • Jamie

    I do not agree I would like to see more about Tyler Shields, why did you guys not post his space series?

  • davin

    I would love to see petapixel interview Tyler.

  • Jamie

    Interview! Great idea…

  • AbinSur

    Kim who?

  • tsayguy

    DL, I’ve appreciated the work you’ve done on this site. As a long time reader, though, it always puzzles me to see pieces like this that, as others have pointed out, seem super click-baity or make PP look like a photog gossip rag or, worse, an obnoxious photography editorial section. Whining or harping about “selfies” and or, loosely, “people who aren’t serious about photography or professional”, which includes some of David’s work, seems really out of place. In fact, it really dilutes the quality of the entire site that has some really, really good work, particularly on reporting relevant photography-related news, gear/equipment announcements, historical photography pieces, and reports on legal/ethical issues surrounding modern photography. Honestly, David does some good reporting on this site; but he (and practically all of Ms. Frost’s work in particular) also sprinkles in (bluntly) crap like this that makes it hard to take PP seriously and inches me closer to unfollowing and looking for another blog. I mean, don’t they have personal blogs where they can opine as much and with whatever style they want, and just write professionally when submitting work to PP? I don’t want to leave, but if you’re not concerned about losing readership, then I guess this screed is for nothing.

  • DLCade

    Thank you very much for your comment @tsayguy:disqus. Feedback like this helps me to make important editorial decisions about what does and doesn’t get published on PetaPixel, so we’re always improving.

    We definitely don’t want to lose long term readership. After all, it’s for you guys (and gals) that we do what we do!

  • BrokenHelix79

    You’ve got to be kidding me. PetaPixel is a casual photography blog. No one comes here for hard-nosed “reporting”, nor should they. I found PetaPixel last year because they seemed to have a good variety of interesting/entertaining/informative articles relating to photography, and they’ve maintained that standard day in and day out.

    The sanctimony on display with all these whiny “this-isn’t-TMZ” comments is ridiculous and misplaced. There is always room for lighter fare. Frankly, I found it rather interesting that a hugely successful photographer challenged one of the most highly valued magazines in the world.

    Plus, I hate the Kardashians.

  • tsayguy

    Actually I agree that “this isn’t TMZ” is misplaced. And I agree there’s room for lighter fare. I’m all for lighter fare.

    Honestly I just think some of the lighter fare here kinda sucks. They can do better.

  • BrokenHelix79

    So what would you propose? Maybe if you complain enough they’ll start catering directly to YOU! Wouldn’t that be nice? All the perfectly reported articles tsayguy could possible want, in one convenient place.

  • BrokenHelix79

    What exactly are you missing? Just a glance at the most recent posts show topics ranging from historical Olympic photos to Photoshop tutorials to copyright issues to lens announcements to stop-motion videos… And that’s just in the past few days.

  • tsayguy

    Hey, so might you consider cooling off a bit?

    Besides, If I complained enough, it would easier to block me and/or make me find another site. That’s what I would do if a commenter was annoying enough. Anyway, it’s their blog, and it’s their calculation.

    And, since you asked- I think certain posts (complaining about amateur photographers, dumb people on Craigslist, the “selfie” phenomenon, and yeah- who’s refusing to shoot which celebrity) are kind of dumb and bring down the overall quality of the blog. On the other hand, there are plenty of photography topics that are perfectly relevant and even cool that appear here- some of which don’t interest me in the slightest but don’t bring out any complaints. I haven’t asked anyone to cater to my preferences. I was just pointing out my opinion that they can do better than certain posts they’ve done. You’re free to disagree. And DL and the PP staff will do whatever they decide to do.

    I’m one reader. And if DL considers my opinion at all, I’m flattered. This is the last from me on this page. Be well, @BrokenHelix79

  • BrokenHelix79

    I’m quite calm, actually…enjoying tea and the sunshine.

  • Logan S.

    “if my fiance is a hobbit… then… ” …..

  • madmax

    Agree. Awesome lack of professionalism. He ought to photograph her or at least give them an elegant excuse. He is acting as a cretin.

  • Helk

    Alwayood to see an alleged story from an unnamed source create such commotion on the boards

  • Auto Motive

    Why are some of the comments so rude? If you don’t like the articles in PP quit reading them. So far I’ve read two articles and the same comments come from the same people. It seems they are very angry people. I read the article and try to understand the reason why someone would refuse to shoot a celebrity. I try to reason with them and rationalize why THEY did what they did. END of Story. NO personnel feelings, no animosity, no moral judgment. Regardless of this photographers hard to work for attitude he made a moral judgment and stuck to it. I call this character in which a lot of you lack.

  • Marc Hill

    He doesn’t owe these people anything and turning a down a job isn’t a lack of professionalism. In this case taking a job that isn’t right for you would be a lack of professionalism.

  • BigEnso

    I must not get out enough. Who is Kim Kardashian? Weren’t they some type of alien on the old Star Trek series?

  • BrokenHelix79

    Couldn’t agree with you more.

  • madmax

    Wrong. You better read again. If he didn´t wish to do this job for whatever reason, he should excuse in a more educated way, not saying he don´t like the model. Lack of manners=lack of professionalism.

  • Brandon

    Please can the “faith in humanity”/click-bait kind of language. This isn’t Upworthy.

  • Marc Hill

    I read it again. The article simply states he passed on the gig. Nothing uneducated or rude about it.

  • Jeremy Taco Patterson

    Kudos to Tyler for having the gumption to turn down a (assuming) lucrative project based on his morals. I can’t help but feel proud that such a well-known photographer has more ethics than he has need/want of money.

  • Say What?

    I call BS. No way Tyler Shields would be asked to shoot for Vogue

  • david lee

    Tyler sucks ass and there is no way he would ever be considered to shoot the vogue cover. He is a hack and a pr genius. He fed radar the story and got published everywhere. I’m sorry . He is no annie leboitiZ. Terry Richardson is way better than him too.