Kim Kardashian debuts first Snapchat still photo of beautiful baby Chicago West

kim vogue india

Kim Kardashian and Kanye West have never debuted the first photos of their children in a magazine. They prefer softer debuts, like Kris Jenner’s now-canceled talk show, or social media or whatever. I figured we would eventually see Chicago’s first real photo on Instagram, but Kim actually debuted Chi West on Snapchat, and then put a still on IG and Twitter. Chicago is less than six weeks old – she was born on January 15th, so it feels like we’re seeing her earlier than we saw North and Saint. Here you go:

Honestly, this child is gorgeous. North and Saint are beautiful too, and you can really see which Kardashian genes and which West genes come through in each child. If anything, Chicago looks a bit more Kardashian than West, which I think happened with Saint too. Anyway, beautiful baby. My only question is… did Kim put a little bit of makeup on her baby? Or is that just a filter?

Meanwhile, Kim’s on the cover of Vogue India. This is her seventh Vogue cover overall.

Photos courtesy of Kim Kardashian’s social media, Vogue India.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

104 Responses to “Kim Kardashian debuts first Snapchat still photo of beautiful baby Chicago West”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. CidyKitty says:

    Cute little face even with the Snapchat filter.

  2. Anonymouse says:

    Did she really photoshop her kid? Looks that way to me. Hope not. Ugh.

    • LORENA says:

      Its a snapchat filter

      • Imqrious2 says:

        Looks like mascara and blush, with a bit of lip liner and lipstick. Wouldn’t surprise me in the least.

    • Alissa says:

      it’s just a filter. sheesh.

    • MostlyMegan says:

      It’s the times we live in, but I think newborn babies are adorable enough without making their eyes bigger and lips poutier etc with a filter.

      • Mgsota says:

        I agree. I rolled my eyes so hard that the first picture we see is a Snapchat filter. But the baby is beautiful.

    • klc says:

      Yes she photoshopped little ears onto her babies head.

      She is hoping that all of us believe her child has teddy bear ears and a little white nose.

      It’s a Snapchat filter, it’s not a controversy.

      • minx says:

        It’s not just the embellishments, they exaggerate the size of the eyes, the cheeks, and the shape of the face to make it more pleasing. They make the chin tiny and the lashes larger.

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

        Yes, all true, Minx. The baby is a baby who looks like other babies. Not like this filter represents.

      • AnnaKist says:

        Thank you, minx. The baby looks beautiful, but unnatural. I think that, in time, we will see what she really looks like.

      • TwoPac says:

        It’s a total cliche trashy snapchat filter for “cutesyness”. What else do we expect from cheese ball Kim K?

    • Sabrine says:

      That would be no.

    • Jordan says:

      Filter. It shrinks the face. I think she’s got the cheeks like her siblings. Which are cute (baby cheeks)

  3. Tanguerita says:

    Damn, these two produce some mightily fine offspring.

  4. Clare says:

    Say what you will about her, but her and Kanye make gorgeous babies.

  5. Nicole says:

    Pretty sure it’s the filter. Cute kid so that’s a positive. I generally don’t have many good things about this family.

  6. queenE says:

    it;s the snapchat filter

  7. Tate says:

    I don’t get putting filters on your kid.

    • SK says:

      Loads of people take photos with filters with their kids. It can actually be a “settle down” thing with older kids. Seriously, there is nothing wrong with this.

      • PrincessMe says:

        Exactly, it’s just silly fun. I don’t get why everything has to be so serious. I’m sure we’ll see her face without the filter at some point.

      • jwoolman says:

        Except the baby isn’t old enough to even see the photo very clearly (baby vision doesn’t mature until maybe about 6 months old, it gradually sharpens and things gradually come into better focus). So there isn’t much point doing it for the child at that age. I can see a much older child getting a kick out of it, though.

      • Tate says:

        I get it with older kids. But a newborn?

    • Lucy says:

      She didn’t put her on her kid. Only in a picture of her.

  8. smcollins says:

    She is no doubt a beautiful baby, but I wonder what she really looks like without the filter causing such exaggerated features.

  9. Annabelle Bronstein says:

    Beautiful baby, but kind of weird for the first public photo to be a Snapchat pic with a filter. Is this a mea culpa for Kylie’s snap stock debacle?

  10. minx says:

    Altering the kid’s picture right out of the womb.
    Not even a new baby is good enough for these people.

    • Tate says:

      That was pretty much my reaction.

    • SK says:

      Whilst I agree that these people have some serious body dysmorphia issues, taking a snapchat of you and your baby or child is completely normal. In fact with older kids and can be a fun thing that gets them to settle the hell down. There is nothing wrong with this, plenty of people do it, it is cute. I get why she posted this too: people can see the baby but not too clearly – since they seem to have kept the older two hidden for much longer.

      • minx says:

        Of course there is nothing wrong with it, but these are the Kardashians. Everything is appearance, I don’t believe they did it to be cautious. If they didn’t want to publish a picture, don’t.
        This is a big example of “gilding the lily.”

      • AnnaKist says:

        Spot on, minx. It’s the first photo of their daughter, and she does this. I can understand kids having fun with the filters, but she’s on her way to being 40. There’s “silliness” and then there’s Katdashian. If she didn’t want the baby’s face to be properly visible, no one would blame her for holding off for a few months, or forever, for that matter, before showing her daughter off. Everything they do is about appearance, otherwise they wouldn’t do to themselves – and their photos – the things they do.

      • Kitten says:

        ITA with all your comments here, Minx. It bothers me because of WHO is doing it and their family history of creating an illusory version of themselves for the public.
        Does this family have some sort of contract with SnapChat? Honestly, my first thought was maybe this is Kim’s way of trying to offset the damage Kylie did with her recent criticisms of the SnapChat update. Like, give Snap a bit of a boost by driving traffic to the site?

        I hate that everything is sinister with this family, at least from my perspective. I can’t just look at it as a simple pic of a newborn baby, there must be something else at play here…

    • The dormouse says:

      Thanks, @minx, for your comments here.

      My own sad theory: the three new girl babies were planned after Dream turned out to be an adorably happy baby who also happened to have long dark eyelashes.

      • Argonaut says:

        three new girl babies? khloe hasn’t officially announced yet but people says it’s a boy.

      • The dormouse says:

        I agree with others here that they were planning for a girl bonanza because that’s where the money lies. Current talk of a boy doesn’t change that – though if true it suggests that particular pregnancy came about the old-fashioned way.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      I guess that goes for the millions of other parents who use snapchat filters on their babies too.. smh.

      • Kitten says:

        Mmmhmmm yes now that you mention it, that goes for the millions of other parents too. Still very weird to me but that’s ok because we are allowed to have different opinions. The people who use SnapChat filters probably think my cat pictures are absurd so….whatever, who cares. Block my cat-loving ass the way I block your selfie-loving ass. No biggie.

        I also think it’s weird when grown adults use these filtered pics as their profile picture on social media. Why would you want a profile pic that looks NOTHING like you. I don’t get it.

  11. Loopy says:

    Just read Klhoe is having a boy…i think deep down the Kardashians want girls as they know that is what makes bank for them.

    • Nancy says:

      Tristan’s gf who he dumped for Khloe while she was pregnant has a boy about a year old. I don’t get how they do this, these are children, not toys. Kim’s baby looks nothing like her siblings, maybe bc of the damn filter. Been saying it for years now, wish they’d go away….but it is better than reading how boring Jennifer Aniston is for the 300th time in two weeks.

  12. Brittney B says:

    That filter is designed to make ANY face cute. We still don’t know what Chicago looks like.

  13. littlemissnaughty says:

    I honestly don’t think she’d put makeup on her babies and this is definitely the filter. They are super cute, all three of them.

  14. jferber says:

    Great way to start off your little girl: you are not enough as you are but will always have to be tweaked, enhanced, reduced, altered and transformed– artificially. Welcome to the world, baby.

  15. SoulSPA says:

    No offence but I’ve always perceived India as a very conservative country so I am surprised to see Kim half-naked on the cover.

  16. Enough Already says:

    I finally get it. Kim wants to look like a biracial Jennifer Lawrence! Or Carly from General Hospital.

  17. mint says:

    Kim should wear colors more often. The red looks really good on her.
    Adorable baby. But what irritates me- that a 38 ( dont know her exact age) year old uses those filters. I get that teenagers or 20 somethings do it. But with almost turning 40 you want to put animal filters on your face? thats weired to me.

    • Snowflake says:

      Yeah, I don’t get it either. I’m 42.

    • minx says:

      My 18 year old daughter used them last year with her friends, and even she doesn’t think it’s cool anymore.

    • Nick2 says:

      I have a ton of older people on social that do this.

    • jwoolman says:

      What’s really weird to me is that instead of looking at the adorable baby, Kim is doing that Zoolander thing while looking at the camera. I don’t think it’s just that she’s goofing around or the constraints of the filter. Kim naturally looks away from her children and toward the camera in almost every photo. I suspect she has to be told to look at the kid for the exceptions.

      It’s not that parents never take photos with their kids where everybody is looking at the camera. It just seems that a lot of such photos have the parent looking down/at and engaging with a baby, putting the focus on the baby. That doesn’t seem to be the natural posture for Kim.

      Can’t help but wonder if she still has some bonding issues with infants, although I had hoped she was improving after Nori (who acted as though she didn’t know Kim for at least the first year and a half or more). Outsourcing the daily work probably hasn’t really helped her with such issues, which are likely an aftereffect of being raised by Mama Ten Percent.

  18. HelloSunshine says:

    Lol I definitely don’t like the Kardashians by any means… but it’s a Snapchat filter and everyone I know uses them with their kids (including me). It’s not a photoshop thing, she’s trying to get some attention by showing but not fully showing her kid’s face.

    • PrincessMe says:

      You use snapchat filters on your children? You’ve successfully given your children an inferiority complex about not being born with animal ears on their foreheads. You monster!

      • HelloSunshine says:

        Hahah right? All the giggles from my one year now aren’t worth the years of therapy he’ll need to recover from not actually being a bear or dog 🙄

  19. Babs says:

    Kim looks good these days. Very pretty.

    • Lady D says:

      I’ve always thought she was gorgeous. I know everyone talks about how plastic she is and they’re right, but to me she is a stunningly beautiful woman. You might say her beauty is on par with her ability to lie. Both exceptional.

    • psl says:

      In certain angles of pictures, yes. But watch her face in motion, and she looks like a rubber faced alien.

  20. serena says:

    I don’t get why so many of you are upset just because of a filter. What’s the big deal? It’s just a cute-animal filter, very fitting for a baby imo, it doesn’t mean she wanted to put make-up on or photoshop her. It may be childish (I personally find it harmless) but I think she often plays with filters of any kind.

    Baby Chigago is beautiful, she looks a lot like Saint I think.
    Ps. Kim looks oddly fine in those cover magazines.. usually she’s a trashy mess but this time they did a very good job (especially the second one).

  21. Lucy says:

    Smh over the filter discussion. Let it go, people. The baby’s adorable! All of her kids are.

  22. sisi says:

    looks like a toddlers and tiaras quality photo, so you can’t realy tell what the baby actually looks like *shrugs*

    that red dress looks nice on her

  23. Nev says:

    Great cover!!!

  24. AngieB says:

    Why would any kid need to settle down for a selfie? Or is it just another app on the phone for the here’s my phone now be quiet for a few minutes thing? (I don’t have Snapchat)

  25. Dorky says:

    I could swear they put some lashes on that kid.

    • Lady D says:

      It’s the snapchat filter she used. It added lashes, a white nose and teddy bear ears. I believe it enlarges the size of the eyes also.

      • Dorky says:

        LOL, ohhhh. Man, I was like, YIKES! I’ve never used a filter (or Snapchat, for that matter), and I’m clueless about this stuff.

  26. Dorky says:

    And all of her kids are freaking gorgeous.

  27. reverie says:

    I use filters with my kids all the time. They love it! Grant it, Chicago is just an infant but I’m sure she uses them when playing around with her two older kids so why wouldn’t you with the baby. Seems like normal mom behaviour to me.

    I swear the willingness to pick apart this family is as garish as their willingness to put it out there.

    • rahrahroey says:

      Your last sentence is perfection!

    • minx says:

      But if they don’t want it picked apart, they don’t need to it it put there. People are free to say what they want.

      • Nick2 says:

        They literally don’t care if they are being picked apart. You’re talking about them and that’s what they care about (frankly, you talk about them quite a bit. You’re all over this thread). You’re free the day what you want but the more you do, the more articles about them you’ll find.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Spot on! The pitchfork brigade really gets off on the Kardashians and the Kardashians get off on pissing them off. It’s a match made in heaven. And it’s what REALLY keeps them famous.

  28. Mar says:

    Even though I can’t stand her- I love these covers and they nailed her styling.

  29. Lady Keller says:

    I can’t believe I’m about to defend this vapid piece of plastic but it’s just a silly snap chat filter. She did not put makeup on a baby she did not photoshop her baby. I’m old and I don’t go in for this nonsense but my sister in law does snap chat filters with my toddler all the time. He thinks it’s funny. She probably does photos like this with North and Saint all the time too.

  30. Blonde555 says:

    Baby looks more like surrogate mom so that’s a good thing. The Photoshop is ridiculous but does help soften her M.J face.

  31. Sansa says:

    Poor North, Kim will no doubt make this new one her favorite because, she looks just like her Mom.

  32. psl says:

    Hey, look who remembered she has an infant at home! Those Snapchat filters are lame AF. They creep me out, and I usually unfollow people who use them.

    First pic of the baby, and she does this? Come on, if you are going to show the baby, SHOW the baby – not some blurred/filtered/animal eared version of your baby.

    Gah, I cannot STAND this woman.

  33. KS says:

    Love both vogue covers! She looks amazing

    • jwoolman says:

      She does look good in that red dress. The color works well for her and she looks so much better with clothes completely on. Really, no snark. Well-designed clothing that actually fits the body properly typically does enhance beauty, having various body parts falling out of it or squeezed to the max typically doesn’t.

  34. Argonaut says:

    i like that she used a snapchat filter for the first public photo. show people what they want but not the real thing.

  35. Chelly says:

    I was blocked by Tamra Barney, or Judge. Which ever name she’s chosen to go by this time for asking why she would filter her newborn granddaughter’s pics. It’s a baby! If you’re gonna post beautiful pics of these beautiful babies, post them, they don’t need filters. (& no it’s wasnt cute snapchat filters, it was the kind adults who want to present themselves better use). But I was genuinely curious. Anyhoo, I’m sure she’s super cute

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      I would have blocked you too. If you don’t like Snapchat filters on your kids then don’t use them. Simple as that. Not your place to tell anyone else if they should

  36. Shannon says:

    Meh. I think those snapchat things are dumb as hell, and it’s not how I’d introduce my kid into the world, but whatever. I’ve got friends my age (almost 42) who constantly use those snapchat bunny ears or whatever sh!t. The inner me is screaming, “OMFG wtf are you TWELVE?” Then I remember that I’m thinking this wearing footie PJs with mice on them. I can’t stand her, but I would necessarily judge her on this one. She does come off as pathetically thirsty lately though – pink hair, snapchat-filtered newborn baby? Girl, calm down.

  37. Valiantly Varnished says:

    All of this debating about Snapchat filters? Really? If it were anyone else I highly doubt half the people on tbis thread wagging their fingers would have cared. But because it’s Kim it’s of course an issue. The people who claim to dislike her are honestly her biggest fans.

  38. me says:

    You can’t really tell what the baby looks like because of the filter…but of course she’s super cute, she has good genes to work with! Why is Kim on Vogue India? Remember all that backlash her and Kendall got a few years ago where they said “Indian food is disgusting”.

    If it wasn’t for the snapchat filters, I don’t think she’d be showing us Chi so soon. She waited around 3 months to show us her other kids. Kim also “hid” out of sight for months after her first 2 children but with the third she’s already in Japan ! People said she was “hiding” because she wanted to lose all the weight/get procedures done, but since the third was with a surrogate, no need to hide ! At the time she acted disgusted by the thought of people thinking she was “hiding” and said she just wanted baby/mommy bonding time. So why no bonding time with the third child then ???

  39. Sarah says:

    Unless that baby just happens to look like an anime creation, you can’t tell what she looks like…just saying…:)

  40. stinky says:

    Kims hair is HEINOUS in that lovely cover-shot!
    Who keep lying to her??

  41. raincoaster says:

    That is BOTH makeup and a filter, and probably some serious photoshop as well. Until I see the child in person I’ll never believe it doesn’t have three heads. That photo is more doctored than the voting results of the last election.

    There’s no reason the child wouldn’t be lovely, but you sure can’t take a Snapchat photo for proof, especially not in that family (size four, remember?).