|
Post by margaret1234 on Mar 23, 2009 10:03:39 GMT -10
Have been away from here most of the day....just caught up with what has been discussed today on this thread. First we started having a conversation about that ring......and then all of a sudden we seem to be in a bit of a fight about who Anne Marie Lynch is and is she a date or not a date. Does it really matter?.....DC just had a nice night out with a friend or girl friend whatever......he and she look very happy and she has a lovely smile and he was obviously enjoying her company and looked very comfortable with her. This is all that surely matters.
Thanks for the pictures Lian......the one of DC and Greta is gorgeous........and I actually like the pic of him with Anne Marie Lynch.
Margaret
|
|
|
Post by lucymalta on Mar 23, 2009 10:33:43 GMT -10
Oh, I don't think we're in a fight Margaret - it's just a discussion about what Anne Marie does as a job... I'm sure there are several people out there who coincidentally have the same name... I don't think anyone will disagree that she looks lovely - and that David looks happy, regardless of who she is.... All I can say is.... I now live in hope..... David HAS at one time been out with a blonde - even if they were just friends.... ;D I might get a chance after all........ Lucy
|
|
|
Post by margaret1234 on Mar 23, 2009 10:40:47 GMT -10
But, Lucy if you look carefully I do not believe she is a blonde. ;D
Margaret
|
|
|
Post by sanne on Mar 23, 2009 10:41:00 GMT -10
Even more Lucy: David's first wife, Cherry Maugans (not sure about the spelling here ), was/is a blonde............ But I have to say, Lucy.....I'm not saying the lady doesn't look nice, but I really think Rachel is the most lovely one of the 3 women in the article-pics (I don't count Greta in for this one). But that's just my humble opinion, of course. Sandra (who promised she would shut up )
|
|
|
Post by margaret1234 on Mar 23, 2009 10:44:04 GMT -10
Now Sandra....you are far too quick.....I was just going to delete my post in response to Lucy....fell into the trap of getting involved. ;D
Margaret
|
|
|
Post by lucymalta on Mar 23, 2009 11:22:41 GMT -10
No need to delete girls.... i have to agree that Rachel is a beauty, she just seems to have that little extra 'something'... I guess I'm just a little jealous..... Lucy
|
|
|
Post by Lian on Mar 23, 2009 11:51:38 GMT -10
You and me both Lucy... ;D Lian
|
|
Jewelz
New Member
[ss:Gold&BrownDavid1]
Posts: 16
|
Post by Jewelz on Mar 23, 2009 15:36:01 GMT -10
Thanks Krystal and Sandra for posting the "mirror Pictures".
Jewelz
|
|
|
Post by KRoseLynn on Mar 24, 2009 19:29:12 GMT -10
@krystal: I guess that ring was "part of his character" in that movie, just as the longer hair..........but maybe at that time he liked it as well...... Sandra Hey, Sandra, here is a candid photo of David wearing that turquoise ring, or at least it looks it to me. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by sanne on Mar 24, 2009 20:45:43 GMT -10
I don't think it's a "candid" pic, Krystal, as I have several from the same occasion. Not that I know what the occasion was though , only that I have about 5 similar pics ....... Let's see....I see a handsome face......lovely blue eyes.......chest hair......more chest hair........MORE chest hair............ .........Nope......sorry, I don't see a ring Mmmmmmmmm.....maybe if I try to take my eyes off of the chest........and wander down a little bit.......(not too far ;D)........YEP....noticed the ring.........too bad the pic is a bit blurred....I've searched through the other pics I have from the same occasion, but none of them show his hands, except this one I agree that the ring looks the same, but it seems to be a slightly different color: darker-green....but that could be the lighting of course. It also seems a bit "larger", don't know exactly how to put it....as if it covers more of his finger (if you understand what I mean). But it's not really clear, litteraly with this blurred pic , it could be the same one......but I'm not completely sure. By his "looks" (compared to the first posted pics) I'ld say this pic (and the others I have from this same "shoot") is/are taken around the same time the other pics posted here were taken/CAtH was made: mid 90's. And as has been said before, that was a time many men were wearing signet rings, it was some sort of 'hype'.....so for that matter I'm not really surprised he followed that 'hype'. Before and after that, I hardly can remember seeing pics of him wearing any jewelry anymore, except for his watch....if you want to call that juwelry. I really can't say it's the same ring, but I also can't say it's not.....it looks similar, but there seem to be some differences as well. But those could be explained by lighting and pose as well as by the fact that it is indeed another ring Maybe someone else has ideas (and/or better eyes ;D)......... BTW, have you noticed that he's holding his shades like H....... Sandra
|
|
|
Post by KRoseLynn on Mar 25, 2009 3:41:56 GMT -10
I call it a candid because it's not from a photo shoot and it's not a screen cap. It's taken of him at some sort of function, or get together or event that he was gracious enough to stop at someones request for a few photos. I have the other ones too, and they are all poor quality, like someone tried to enlarge them too much.
Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by 'signant ring' Sandra, because I understand a signant ring to be something the male members of house wore to put their 'seal' in wax on somthing like a document, scroll, or letter (I got that from watching medieval times set movies and tv shows). I've also heard some refer to their class rings as 'signant rings.'
|
|
|
Post by sanne on Mar 25, 2009 4:48:23 GMT -10
With "candid" pics I usually think of pics taken without David knowing or approving them to be taken........but that's a detail You're right, Krystal, originally a signet-ring was used for that: seal official letters and so on. But later on they became more "common jewelry" for men and available in all kind of forms: with initials, with stones......Let's put it this way: most men don't like to wear juwelry except a weddingring and sometimes a (golden) "chain-necklace", but a signet-ring is a very "manly" kind of jewelry, because it used to be priviliged for "the man in the house", the godfather of the family, so to say.......he wore the, usually family-, signet-ring, passed it on to the eldest son and so on. I think that's why men often choose a signet ring to wear. These days however quite some women also have/wear signet-rings. Sandra
|
|
|
Post by margaret1234 on Mar 25, 2009 13:54:03 GMT -10
Will just comment here and confirm that what Sandra is saying is correct.......signet rings were originally used for sealing letters but later became common jewellery for men......hubby has several and I actually have one as well.
Margaret
|
|
|
Post by KRoseLynn on Mar 26, 2009 6:35:22 GMT -10
With "candid" pics I usually think of pics taken without David knowing or approving them to be taken........but that's a detail Sandra Your talking about 'stalkaratzzi' pictures - when he isn't aware someone is there photographing him. When he's aware someone is there taking his picture, it's a candid.
|
|
|
Post by sanne on Mar 26, 2009 8:39:45 GMT -10
"Candid" to me means something like "hidden", so that's why I had a different explanation for that in mind, but I guess you have a point in making a difference between "candid" and "stalkerazzi". Will try to remember Sandra
|
|