>>4064780>intimateAs I clarified, I have a personal definition of this word that excludes this positivity you attribute to it. I don't think the dictionary disagrees with me either. I can't be bothered with whatever shifting connotations normies hold. This is a common problem in my life. What words mean to me are often their starkest definitions, or connotations that I seem to hold on my own. I can't do anything about that and I'm too old to give a fuck.
>copeI think what I think. I can't speak for Gilden. I'm not shooting people who are run down, sickly, or anything that might make one objectively unattractive to look at. While I can't say every person I photograph is hot, I have seldom felt like I made them look worse. Here's an example. I think this every feature that is attractive about this woman is retained, despite them being buried in freckles. She has a strong jaw and a noble nose. I know her. If anything, she looks better here, because her features are normally light enough to lower the prominence of her eyes, which also normally sit behind glasses. The glasses created eyeliner-like highlights of less sun-damaged skin underneath the eyes. Altogether an interesting shot that does show a beautiful woman.
