Your thoughts on these hotties and style of photography?
 

OK, I got these from my friend Jay over at http://www.graceandbeauty.com ... 3 questions for everyone:

1. what do you think about this style of soft core art nude photography

2. would you promote it

3. who would be your first choice to "hit"

http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/1.jpg
http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/2.jpg
http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/3.jpg
http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/4.jpg
http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/5.jpg

1. Very nice, but I don't promote it... maybe I should try.

2. See 1.

3. Last girl. Totally!

1) I'm a big fan of outdoor photography but the dreamy/hazy style, I feel, mutes the color palette and blurs the detail... which I'm not a big fan of :P

2) I promote just about anything as beauty is in the eye of the beholder so I'm not the best judge of that, hahah...

3) http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/2.jpg

Her skin has ended up being wrecked by the blur.

Dunno how well it would sit against everything else similar I promote being crystal clear.

2nd and 4th pics have way too much Portraiture or whatever plugin they used, otherwise, sure, nice photography.

Agree. I think there's a point where it doesn't add, it starts to take away. It's nice though.

Thanks for the feedback and comments all... keep em coming!

way too much of that digital soft focus filter, makes skin look like plastic too much, otherwise ok :)

I agree way too much photochop
Id hit girl#3
Whoever is shooting these girls should take a look at Met Arts site they have nailed the Soft Core Art Photography niche

this looks like Met-art style a little

hit? hard to compare fairly with the different poses but #3 looks the hottest

little too much photoshop, some of the photos look too soft.

I'd totally fuck 'em all, but this one really caught my eye:

http://www.deltahousemarketing.com/pics/gb/4.jpg

They look like natural girls but guys that like natural girls don't want to see any of that photoshop. They want to see the girls as they are.

The girl on the sink is the best one of the group I think, looks very natural and not a lot of touch up.

Just perfect!

I wonder how they would look wearing knee pads:-)!!

Beautiful girls, I like what I see, and I would promote them :)

I like that second pic,she's hot

I like the last one. Photography is too soft/dreamy for my tastes.

The two-girl one is an absolute great picture, it would sell well too. The other pictures look too worked on and indeed more of a "this is YOUR chance to get your own glamour shoot" than it is "porn" material. On the other hand it has a feel of amateur, average girls exposing themselves for the first time and if marketed like that I think that could work, for a site (besides met-art etc).
I would lose the blurring, too 80's.

The first one is very nice. Has a beautiful feel to it.

The others are just an amateur trying to be artistic.

Bad cropping and posing is the basic problem. Don't cut a girls hand off at the knuckles or arm at the elbow or get a cupboard with what looks like a mirror and then a blind cord in the background. It's distracting for the theme and showing lack of set up. Aslo it's about location, location, location, location. Can't be shot well in a cheap apartment.

To shoot this type of soft core you need to really think the whole set through. You need a ton of experience and talent. Joanie Alumn, Bob Twigg and Kevin Maklin were my favorite for this type of content.

Also the shooter needs to shoot a whole set. Loads of guys can shoot a set and pull out a few good frames. Takes planning to shoot a set with 120 different frames. Then there's the video. :Oh crap

It's not the area for the newbie to excel in. This is the level it competes with.

http://definitiveimages.net/blog/wp-...portrait-2.jpg