Ms Faye

image

The beautiful and talented Ms Faye is so pretty that she can only be truly captured by the (beautiful and talented?) photographer, Tony Yang. I emailed Tony directly for his permission to use these photos, as not only has he managed to choose the most beautiful models in the world to work with, he also does an amazing job capturing that beauty.Tony mentioned that Ms Faye is one of his most enjoyable models to work with. She is an actress from Toronto, Canada, is 24 years old, and he has recently completed another photoshoot with her that, with his permission, I hope to also create a post for as Ms. Faye is one of my favorite models I have come across.

I emailed him a few more times about other models and the like, but have not since heard from him. Keep this thread positive, because having Tony Yang on our side can only help the AS community.

Stats:

Age: 24
Height: 5’7
Located: Toronto, Ontario

Photos:

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

Links:

Gallery 1
Gallery 2

(Visited 94 times, 1 visits today)

0 thoughts on “Ms Faye”

  1. I think someone who “can be only truly captured by one photographer” almost certainly isn’t really that pretty. On the other hand, I actually find her more attractive in the last photo than the others, and that one doesn’t appear to be one of Tony’s. In Tony’s photos, she looks a bit too harsh for my taste, and I suspect her skin probably isn’t very good in reality either.

    I will say that she does appear to have a nice, trim and taut body though.

  2. She looks great with all photographers, I just really like Tony’s photos =). Also, you are very negative. Positive Lee! Positivity! It is good for the soul.

  3. Hmmm…

    I just read Tony’s comments regarding live view in DSLRs. He said himself that it allowed him to take shots that just wouldn’t be possible otherwise, yet he still dismisses it as a gimmick! Sounds like classic old-school snobbery to me. I personally would never use a camera without it – it just opens so many possibilities. That’s a big reason why I’ve only just recently started using a DSLR, depsite their many other advantages over compacts.

  4. Indeed, but you twisted a sentence that was clearly meant to compliment a photographer as a way of insulting the model. I think you are starting to think too negatively. Positive thoughts – if you look for the positive, you will start to see things more positively. You can do it. I have faith.

  5. Perhaps that is where we differ – I have no faith whatsoever. I believe in making people aware of the reality wherever possible – I do not think illusion or delusion is a good thing, however comforting or apparently beautiful it may be. I am an atheist. 🙂

  6. Ha, okay. Interesting reasoning. But there is still a negative slant in many of the comments. “I like the last photo the best” is obviously more positive than “I think the first photos are bad.”

    Or, as it can be applied, a comment such as “I really hate her belly button” is obviously more negative than “I really love her toes.” Negativity is not always necessary, even when used to prove a point or dispel myths.

    I would guess in your case that you would like this website. There are no touch ups in the slightest, however good or bad that may be. Though I am also of the opinion that generic photography actually enhances flaws rather than masks them, making the beautiful less beautiful by default (since no one is flawless). I am far more fond of good photography like Tony’s, that I (personally) believe enhances a beauty that is already there.

    Clearly we disagree. But I have noticed a trend with my opinion of these models. The great photography makes these women look amazing (with touch ups). Bad photography (like the standard camera) makes them look far worse, but then in real life they look amazing again. I have seen this a few times with models I have come across in person, where standard photography actually insults their beauty. That is why I have no problems if a photographer touches up a piece in order to remove flaws that may be enhanced by the camera.

  7. I never said Tony’s photos were bad – he is indeed very good at what he does, as I said in the Yennie Hoang thread. If anything, his photography is perhaps a little too realistic for this model – her slightly harsh features and skin tone/texture benefit from a little more PP, as with many of her other photos (realism in glamour only works well if a model’s skin tone/texture is smooth enough). Also, I’m not sure what makes you think the SF Bay Models pics aren’t touched up – they are in fact heavily (and badly) processed, and not very well posed or staged either.

  8. Oh, and before you think I’m contradicting myself: I can appreciate (well done) artificial photography on its own merits. However, I will make people aware that it doesn’t represent reality, as many people mistakenly think it does.

  9. Ah atheists. Always so thoroughly evangelical, even to the point of wanting to convert us to “realism” in the estimation of pretty girls! Realms of fantasy, like sex and female beauty, are no places for your sort Doc. That what comes of becoming a cosmetic surgeon.

  10. I’m not trying to “convert” anyone to realism – fantasy can be enjoyed on its own merits, as long as people know it actually is a fantasy. I am merely trying to make people aware of what the reality actually is – after all, that’s what everyone asks me about. 🙂

  11. maybe we should have a thread elsewhere for discussion on photography and other non model related topics. All is interesting but I would like to learn and see more about Ms. Fay.

    Perhaps a Tangent thread so when things go off-topic, we can move over to the tangent thread. Some of these long threads are hard to navigate when i surf with my mobile during the day to get my AS fix. Just a suggestion.

  12. Thanks for the feature Travis. I can’t please everyone, but I can sure please the models so that’s all that matters. If they come back to me for more, that just means I’m doing something right for them. In terms of reality versus fantasy, I’ve always been one to remind girls not to trust my photos or anything in the media, which is why I’ve created this website

    http://www.knsaber.com/airbrush/

  13. Hi Tony,

    I have to say bravo to your putting up that page!

    Regarding Ms Faye, don’t you think that a model like her, with relatively “edgy” features, would be better served by softer lighting? Many of the shots you’ve done of her have very contrasty lighting, which I normally like, but I feel don’t suit this model very well. Still, it seems everybody else disagrees with me, so perhaps you should just ignore what I think. 🙂

  14. Your point is very valid, but she does have such strong features that I don’t want to flatten them to look like every other flat faced Asian (as much as I do love flat faced Asians). You could say I’m keepin’ it real, which is what most of my fan base prefers. I am inspired by glamour photography, but I don’t want to copy it airbrush by airbrush.

  15. Ironically, I applaud your realistic approach in general, and I am brutally realistic with my own photography (I don’t retouch at all!). I guess I just don’t feel Ms Faye is suited to this approach – it probably just comes down to her not being to my taste (she is a little too “islander” looking for me).

  16. She’s beautiful, thank you Travis. The shots are beautiful too. Artistic, glamour and natural all have their place.

  17. I was determined not to get sucked into the conversation:) but Dr. Lee do you really think anyone here (or anywhere else for that matter) is dumb enough not to understand that glamour photography is touched up to make things look perfect. That is the whole point!

    Secondly, using softer lenses or whatever you suggested for her features is really just another version of getting results like airbrushing. Either you want pictures to be exactly who they are or not.

    The only reason I ever even started commenting on these threads (I was here for a long time before I wrote a word) was the constant negativity that came from a handful of people. It’s also part of the fun though…

  18. there are a lot of hot asian girls out there,but very few who,when at first glance really catch your eye,she is one of those girls.she is one sweet looking women.1,2,5and 6 wow.

  19. @Slackekring: Doc stands outside movie theaters with a sign whenever Disney movies are shown. “Caution: Fantasy! There are No Flying Elephants and Marionettes Don’t Come to Life”
    He doesn’t want us to be confused, bless him.
    😉

  20. @salckerking: I suggested softer lighting (not softer lenses), which is still absolutely real – a photographer can choose to shoot in whatever sort of lighting they want. Also, while people may be aware that retouching is done (though surprisingly many aren’t), judging from the comments here, it seems many people are unaware of just how much this retouching can alter our perception of reality.

    @urgal: I don’t need to do that, as everybody actually knows that is fantasy. 🙂

  21. I think negativity is something that is natural when you have a rabid fanbase for ANY genre. It’s just part of who we are.

    The more we know – the more we’re exposed to something – the less easily impressed (or surprised) we are.

    As per Ms Faye, she’s cute, but seems rather typical to me. Then again, it’s always nice to see girls featured here who are living in (or are from) the Toronto area.

  22. Yeah, except I wouldn’t call it negativity – I’d call it objectivity. When you see as many Asian girls as we do here (and as I do every day in real life), isn’t it inevitable that we’ll get fussier over time?

    I think Travis took my initial comment the wrong way – I simply disagree with his opening sentence on an objective basis, in as much as I think the prettier a girl is, the less she should be dependant on a particular photographer to capture it. It is not twisting what he said to insult the model.

  23. first and foremost i think Ms Faye is beautiful… but ive visited this site for years and i cant remember the last time doc had a positive comment about an asian siren. we always hear stuff like she’s “too western” and “not asian enought.” Or, “too thick” and “stocky” Now this time its “too islander” and too “skinny.” Is there ever pleasing Doc?

  24. But it is, because it should have been clear from the context that I was not really commenting on the model, or the photography – I was simply trying to compliment the photographer. In my opinion, Ms. Faye looks great with every photographer she has worked with, but in an effort to compliment Tony, I stated that “can only be truly captured by the (beautiful and talented?) photographer, Tony Yang.” While yes, if you actually believed that I thought she looked bad with other photographers, then you could have made the judgment “I think someone who ‘can be only truly captured by one photographer’ almost certainly isn’t really that pretty.” But since the context was fairly clearly meant to simply be a compliment to the photographer (in fact, there is a photo not taken by the photographer that I clearly liked and placed in the post), that was a strangely negative comment to make, even if it was objectively picking apart a word choice.

    As an example, if I pulled this sentence out of context:

    “I just read Tony’s comments regarding live view in DSLRs. He said himself that it allowed him to take shots that just wouldn’t be possible otherwise, yet he still dismisses it as a gimmick! Sounds like classic old-school snobbery to me”

    …And claim that you have called Tony a snob, as a person, even though the context was his camera choice. That is essentially what you did – pick a sentence that didn’t necessarily have to be a negative sentence, and turned it into a negative sentence, even if you are trying to turn that sentence into something more objective. You can still have negative objectivity. “This glass is almost empty” and “this cup has a little bit left” are both objective and one is still more negative.

    To be sure, I am not offended by anything, obviously. Simply pointing out that trying to claim something is objective and thus not negative is false. I like all of the photos of Faye, but I really like Tony’s photos as well as his poses and color, and I think he captures her best. Why must that be turned into “”I think someone who ‘can be only truly captured by one photographer’ almost certainly isn’t really that pretty”? That was an unnecessary negative slant, even if it can still be considered “objective.”

  25. I think we simply have a misunderstanding here. If you’d simply said what you meant i.e. “I think she looks good in all her photos but I think Tony captures her the best”, I wouldn’t have had any objections. I simply would have said “actually, I think she looks better in the last photo, which doesn’t appear to be one of Tony’s”.

  26. Well, not exactly a misunderstanding. I understood what you are saying. I am just pointing out that I could just has easily have meant:

    “I think she is the most beautiful woman in the world. She has millions of photos where she looks amazing, but Tony’s are clearly the best! He is the only one that can capture her true beauty!!!”

    Both are plausible from the sentence, hence the reason that your response, while objective, is still leaning towards negative.

    This has been an interesting thread. Who knew intellectually discussing objectivity and its relation to negativity would happen on a website about Asian girls?

  27. Regarding the comments on Tony’s thought on live view, that is really what I think: the only reason I can see for somebody dismissing live view as a gimmick – especially when he recognises that it allows him to take shots he otherwise couldn’t – is old school snobbery. I see this sort of thing from professional photographers all the time e.g. you can only be a pro if you shoot full frame, or Canon, Nikon etc. Subframe in fact has many advantages over full frame, as do other brands apart from the “big boys” e.g. the Olympus 4/3rds system I prefer.

  28. @iceman24: I don’t believe I called this model – or any other non-fashion model we’ve featured here for that matter – “too skinny”. Which is interesting when I think about it, as I see a lot of skinny Asian girls in real life, but they almost never seem to do glamour modelling.

    And I certainly have been very complimentary toward many of the models featured here, but recently we haven’t had many of the slim, light skinned, delicate featured orientals that I prefer.

  29. Arguing words online is like competing in the special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded. 🙂

    Yes I am a snob online. Read my latest blog entry. My purpose of putting down gimmicks in the latest digital cameras is to dissuade all the newbs and measurebators from thinking the next innovation is what will push these lazy photographers to the next level of their work. People always hound me with questions “are you going to get the next body? zomg it has full frame, it has video mode, it has live view!” and I would just reply with STFU it still doesn’t make you a better photographer.

  30. Well I can certainly agree with that! 🙂

    Actually, I think video on DSLRs really is a gimmick so far – it is far too limited compared to a real video camera. But the Panasonic GH1 looks promising.

  31. Professional grade equipment and consumer grade are totally merged together now. There will always be the true photographers that can create art with anything you give them, and then there’s the rich engineer who loves technology taking horrible photos with the $8k 1-series. One of the better photographers I’ve seen took amazing photos with a Canon G-series. I actually don’t like talking about equipment.

    What do you define as a “pure oriental”?

  32. That’s interesting – all my published photos so far (my photos of Sachiko) were taken with a Canon G2! I was often frustrated by its technical limitations (which is why there are several bad exposures, some flash shadow etc.), but DSLRs were outrageously expensive at the time, and I really find live view invaluable for my style of shooting (I now have a live view DSLR).

  33. My photographer friend would love live view for his nature shots where he doesn’t have to use a “L” view finder on the ground – and for those purposes, I have no objection to needing such innovations. But you’ve taken my previous entry out of context, when I was explaining how an amateur was abusing it.

    I said it would be useful for hard to reach places (for my friend’s example), but I never said it prevents ME from getting any shots I want. I also think ultimately it just makes the majority of users lazier. Yes I am old school, I actually started with film.

    As for my taste in Asian women, I think I am only attracted to 2% of the women posted on this blog. However I won’t feel the need to critique each one – instead I search for the ones that sparks my interest and I go out and photograph them.

  34. I couldn’t care less about the secrets the photographer used to create the images of this model. She looks fantastic, and I’m guessing that was the result the photographer was aiming for.

    There are a lot of features I really like on this girl. No negative comments here Travis.

  35. TravisStroup: Thank you for the pleasure of being featured on this site. I’m glad Tony sent me the link as it has been a very interesting read.

    As a performer, all comments are always absorb whether it be negative/positive and it’s always interesting to see how others view your work.

    You will never win them all in this industry, but I work/shoot for myself and my love for it so I will continue to do so.

    Thank you all once again.

    Many positive thoughts and good energy.

    Faye

  36. Welcome to Asian Sirens Ms Faye! Glad you found it a good read. 🙂

    @Wingsfan: yes, that picture looked very familiar to me too. Perhaps it was a past ID request whom we didn’t identify? I do remember being asked to ID this photo anyway.

    @insidious: I have to agree with Wingsfan – surely you can make your posts a little more meaningful than this?

  37. DAAAYYYUUUMMM! This girl is Gor-Geous and I have no idea what the majority of you posters say about “nit-picking” this and that about any model here or the presenters i.e. photographer, videographer, A&R etc. but Ms. Faye is a woman I can just appreciate if she just asked me to come with her just to shop for groceries. My piece is now my peace.

  38. Great legs and body in such a great
    shape. Then the eyes and the smile.

    Need to get me to Canada sometime, lots of asian beauties…

    Amazing, I’ve read this whole thread. Ms Faye really got my attention and the rest of the talk too.

  39. I do agree her body’s nice and she does appear to be in very good shape. But her face just isn’t very attractive for me at all, although I seem to be very much in the minority here. 🙂

  40. What a bunch of party poopers. She’s Asian and hot…I don’t care how you all want to split her hairs.

  41. Smooth, Sleek and Super Sexy!!! If there were more Asian women like this out there, I would have never gotten married to a Dominican. But unfortunately my chances with someone like this are probably one in a million. Since I am her height, probably make less than her, and probably being Asian myself cuts down my chances even more.

  42. Gorgeous model. I don’t know what the poster meant when he said her features were too “edgy,” but if he meant angular then I agree. And her angles are quite lovely!

  43. By “edgy”, I did mean angular. One reason I prefer Asian (more precisely oriental) women is because I prefer soft, delicate features to harsh, angular ones.

  44. As least no one accused her of being tranny hot (at least I don’t think so, it’s such a long post) Good for Ms. Faye on being able to handle all of the comments here. Nice piece of Canadian bacon, eh? 🙂

  45. I have been visiting this site for years but never registered an account. But, ms Faye is so stunning, so beautiful, I have done so. With that, I would like to make another comment about the “negativity.”

    What is wrong with “negativity”?
    Is it illegal?
    Is it immoral?
    Is it wrong?
    Or is it something else?

    Inherent in language is a symbiosis – of thought. And words are just that – words. They are symbols to represent our thoughts because we cannot read minds.

    There is no negativity, per se, in “a word.” The negativity is in one’s thoughts, in the associations (the listener’s reaction) that one makes with those words.

    Words are relative because thought is relative.

    If words, language, exist (dare i say evolved) as a crude attempt to convey one’s thoughts to another, then where precisely is the problem, the negativity? Does the offended have a problem with “the word” itself (the symbol)? Or, perhaps the offense is due to his/her own cognitive reaction to “the word?” Or, does the problem lie (meaning the negativity originates) with the speaker’s thoughts? One’s words are an attempt to convey one’s opinion, one’s thoughts, are they not? So, are we attempting to be “thought police?”

    Not to get all Zen, but, they’re just words.

    If someone wants to speak their mind in a so-called negative manner, then so be it (IMHO). So long as not to be threatening and/or ribald.

    By the way, pointing out that someone’s comment is negative, seems a bit negative to me. Oops, now there I go… Hmm…is that a paradox?

  46. Her face is so amazing I don’t even miss a tasteful set of implants. Those eyes are incredible – she has a great smile even when she doesn’t show any teeth. If I had a product to advertise she’d be my choice in a nanosecond.

    Faye, you need to move to So Cal! We have 2 hockey teams – and one even made the playoffs! 🙂 And plenty of beaches. And the men are much more mellow and not as nit-picky like the Aussie Dr. Lee.

  47. @ronrhodes: excellent comments! People who complain about negativity are indeed being negative themselves, which prompts the original poster to defend themselves, and so no it goes. The best way to deal with comments you perceive as negative is to ignore them, and post your own positive comments.

    And as per our posting guidelines, any truly nasty, insulting or derogatory comments will be removed.

  48. @ronrhodes: I am very happy the photos of Faye have made you sign up! Even though I’m not an active member myself. Stay tuned I am almost finished editing a whole new weekend full of photos of Faye.

  49. After four days of looking at Ms Faye’s photos, I do believe she has one of the looks I would classify as being perfect, in my opinion. I think she’s beyond gorgeous, and them legs are driving me crazy. There’s just something about that smile of hers, kind of playful and naughty just like I like.

  50. Her face is “interesting”. For me in a way that makes me take a second look to wonder “how *does* she really look”.

    This is different from girls you can glance at and quickly conclude: “yeah, she’s really pretty”.

    The first picture is probably the worst (face wise).

    I like her smile. Apparently so does the photographer.

  51. I would agree with FredF’s comments. She certainly isn’t what I’d call classically pretty, but to be honest, I’m not exactly sure how she really looks! Her face certainly is “interesting” to be sure (I also agree it looks worst in the first pic).

  52. The last photo is by far my favourite. I’m just not that into the sharpness of her features in the others.

    Good work on the before and after photo site, it’ll certainly open the eyes of a few.

  53. I like her face. The link Wingsfan reminded us of is lovely but I also think Ms. Faye looks terrific and stylish in the 2nd & 3rd photos (bw). Very shapely legs, and long, slender figure
    @ronrhodes: Look, this is AS not Metaphysics 101. We’re not debating “negativity”. We’re debating “bashing”. The girl is obviously quite pretty, although her features are also unusual: angular chin, squarish jaw line, upturned mouth corners that give her a very unique impish smile, that can almost look jack-o-lanternish (1st pic)

  54. I could use stems like hers. I must admit I’m jealous. (: I like that she isn’t a porcelain doll with giant eyes and a pre-pubescent look. And she works the tan quite well. I can definitely understand her appeal in North America.

  55. @urgal: I am sorry if I offended you. I assure you that it was unintentional.

    But, I wish to point out that “bash” was not a term that was used one time. “Negative,” on the other hand, was used 26 times, by my count. According to proper denotation, negativity is properly inferred from words like “bash” and/or “criticize.”

    But, all is good since my point was that one can make such opinions without the listener, me, feeling negative about the comment.

    I just wanted to take this time to distinguish fact from opinion, not to be critical. Thank you.

  56. Ms Faye is a winner! Fitness, beauty, a smile, and a healthy attitude toward comments make her that much more desirable.

    I find her most attractive in the last picture and least in the first, go figure.

    Thank you Travis for the continued
    variety.

Leave a Reply