Quoted By:
Here's the thing about this kind of work. And I know y'all gonna roast me because I'm Sugar but fuck it.
Yes the chicks are hot as all hell. If you wouldn't knock the bottom out of these girls you're straight up a dick-riding faggot, I'd give them the worst 37 seconds of their lives to see them titties flopping up and down.
That's the thing though, the only merit these photos have is that the girls are hot. Literally anyone can pay one of these MM girls, some cheap lights and a bedroom setting and it's cruise control for good photos.
There is very little if any compositional merit to these, ask yourself this. Would these pictures be worth a shit if the girls weren't in it? Would the photos still be good if they had their clothes on? The workflow is almost 100% subject driven, whoop-de-fucking-do you paid some girls to take their clothes off and pose nude in front of your camera. Remember the difference between porn and fine art is a penis. Would these photos have the same merit if they were nude men?
Your backgrounds are just out of focus crap, make them work with your models. Golden ratio, leading lines, rule of thirds nigga this is Photo 101. Ooooohh naked chick walking through a field of flowers big fucking deal.
A lot of you noobs forget that the background is just as important as the foreground and you can't circumvent that rule by just shooting wide open all the time. Look what I did here, I have subject isolation AND framing. She's in the left 3rd and she is framed on top by the branches of the trees she is under, which by the way all point to her, while she is framed on the right by the trunk of that tree. And this one has her clothes on, and I shot it on 6x7 film too. It's not technically perfect but the basics are there.
Naked tatted up chicks are cool and all but you can take your photos to the next level by adding basic compositional elements into the background that compliment the model.
tl;dr: git gud
