> I was a fashion photographer for many years, so I do understand some of the problems and a little about target markets too;
I saw one of your photos in a thread. It was very nice.
> but this is different - it is anatomically incorrect, not a "thinness" problem at all. Think childbearing hips...
Agreed. I commented above that shortly after Leo finished Mo’s portrait, there was period in art where elongating some body features and truncating others was considered high art. As was done in the photo, the artists during this period (often called high renaissance or mannerism), the artists made caricatures of their models. During this period, many works (painting and sculpture) were done to elegantly emphasize key body features and create strong emotions on the part of viewers as a result. As a digression, a lot of Renaissance art was about anatomical accuracy in minute detail. It was a huge thing at the time. Following that was a trend towards mixing anatomical accuracy with select variations.
Here the goals are probably similar. For younger people, I bet they are so inundated with the cult of thinness that most accept the image. For older folk, it is probably less appealing.
Perhaps had the photographer shown Colorwave’s imagination and put Mo’s face on the model he would have improved the image. She’s hotter than the model he used and i bet most wouldn’t have recognized her as Mo...
