You have a good build, well sculpted, the hair color on your skin tone is vibrant. Your face reminds me, Michael C. Hall, the actor that plays Dexter.
On the recent photo.....the lighting is good. The pose is a bit awkward. You should look into the camera more, with some light bounced from below that highlights your eyes.....it's Michael C. Hall. Piercing eyes.
The feminine? That's ok man....nothing wrong with expressing from within. But the women's bikini bottoms are a little out of place. Speedos or something like a good pair of plain designer briefs would be better. "The sausage" is not well placed and combined with your pose it looks a little bit like an erection, but again....it's not the sausages fault, it's the women's bikini bottoms. If you're gonna tuck it right, then wear something more supportive, or wear nothing at all.
With that lighting, if you were nude, and your feet were well planted somewhere, you could have been a cupid, or a wondering fellow, or hold a torch and make it a story.
Anyways, here are some parting suggestions...
1. Lose the women's swimwear.
2. Get more black & white, deep tones, into your portfolio.
3. Relax your shoulders more.
4. Gaze downward while looking upward, like in the portrait shot (with a light reflector below).
5. If you want to add color....do it with paint rather than creative underwear.
6. Theme..... Game of Thrones.....you could seriously OWN that genre.
A good photographer works hard to make everyone look their best. Shooting a person at their more flattering angles, more flattering light, poses, etc., is why what we do is an art form. Everyone has a different body and different features.
This photo, and most of this set, is not working for you.
You can do better.
But you need to work with better photographers. If this guy is paying you, milk it. Otherwise work with someone who can take better corrective control.
Guys in panties? Can be very hot. This photo? Not. If I were your photographer I would have told you to lose them after viewing the LCD screen and seeing it wasn't working. They're out of place and unflattering on you. In my opinion, the b&w is the best from the set, without them.
Everybody starts somewhere, if modelling is of a real interest to you work harder to get quality photos. Dress or undress and style yourself appropriately. In this shot, on a barn fence, I would have said 'okay, let's do nude or just Wranglers with a cowboy hat and a beer' or something. Leaning against, not sitting on. See where I'm going? Tell the story. Pose, dress, and style appropriately for the story. Work with better photographers, even if you have to shell out money.
You've gotten some good advice here too. These are the things you can do to improve.
amb300 wrote: A lot of what you said had some actual basis, except this. I am very good looking in facial features. You are the first person I have ever heard say this, I have had several women say I was very attractive, and part of the reason I got into modeling.
You keep saying that, but repeating it ad absurdium doesn't make it true.
This is most definitely not a "very good looking" face:
The "ugly" thing seems personal. I'm not sure why you would bother saying something that is obviously untrue.
Don't misquote me.
As far as the height thing goes, 5'9" is average for males.
You're talking about the general populace. I'm talking about the modeling populace.
Here are some "regular" pictures of me, not trying to pose.
This is me with short hair, about 9 years ago. Short hair really doesn't fit me at all.
This is me in 2010, I do look a lot more handsome in this photo.
This one is about a year old, before Borderlands 2 and all the beer.
Strangely enough, I look better in some of these than in professional pics, odd.
What you looked like nine years ago or three years ago don't mean shit now. And the year-old shot is nothing to boast about. (And there's that gawd-awful hunched-over posture again.)
Technical issues and pose issues notwithstanding. (already well covered)
The image is damned close to being out of bounds for MM's erection rule - Putting a tent peg under a tarp - clearly does not hide the tent peg. And hiding it under a tarp does not make it invisible, or all right.
If this was in a new profile - pending the gatekeeper's approval. I would not be surprised if it was rejected with this image - and sent it to the mods for disposition.
amb300 wrote: No, you keep repeating it when it is obviously untrue. I'm not sure what your point is, but it isn't working. I've had way too many positive responses from girls over the years, and other reasons. I'm a hunk.
Okay, now you're clearly trolling. Over the top trolling. Delusional trolling.
Stop...please stop. You've clearly got a thick enough skin to hang around the forums but you've gotta quit doing this (although if this is trolling, it's absolutely brilliant.)
Mr. Greenshirt, you are not conventionally attractive in either a classical or a contemporary way. There are people who will find you attractive. There are people who will find you very unattractive. Girls stare for a number of reasons, many of which are not complimentary. "I am looking at you" does not equate to "I want you."
We are not lying to you when we tell you these are not good images. We're being a little more blunt than usual because your cocky online persona invited a bit of ridicule, but the central message here -- that the images are bad and that you, personally, do not fit the image you're casting yourself -- is rock solid.
You consider yourself androgynous. You are not. Your facial features are decidedly masculine. Your images show facial hair. Your shoulders are broad, your hips are narrow, and no one will ever mistake you for a woman.
The women's underwear thing -- that is fine for real life. Someone very special to me used to periodically borrow my clothing. He wore his hair long. He was absolutely, spectacularly beautiful to me but I can retain objectivity here -- he did not look like a woman. I would not have told him he was passable and photographed him as such, at least not wearing just the things he wore.
You, also, are not passable. You are not androgynous. Your images do not convey androgyny. It appears to be an average sized, average build, frizzy haired white man sitting on a fence with his dick just kinda chilling in women's underwear. There is nothing redeeming about this image. It is not a good image. The pose is not good, the expression is not good, the photography is not good, and there's no need to retouch it; it won't save it.
You want to argue with every statement being made. Don't. Consider, for a moment, that you are wrong. Look at the things you are denying, back up, and check your picture. You are not, for a model, tall. The pics you just linked to are even worse - blank expression, bad posture, you might as well be posing for a mugshot in them.
Again, seek out someone who knows what they're doing and work with them. You may have to pay them for the privilege. Just be honest with yourself about what you are and what you are not and the quality of your images should improve substantially.
I don't see any androgyny in your looks at all. In fact your features are leaning way over to the male side of looks: prominent brow, jaw, nose. Nothing feminine or even ambiguous about them to me.
The women's underwear thing doesn't work for you in pictures. If you prefer them in real life, that's OK - but they probably should not be in your shoots. I prefer sweatpants and slippers but I wouldn't wear them to have pictures taken - esp. pictures that are supposed to sell my look.
I think it is hard to tell your musculature that you say you have because that pic in the OP is pretty blown out. Not your fault - but if you were given the choice of pics and you chose that one, perhaps rethink. Also the pose is a bit off - it makes you look kind of squat. Leaning on the fence and extending your legs would probably have worked better.
Perhaps go for a more typically male / "manly" look next time. If you could tame the hair a bit, it might work very well loose and fan-blown.
amb300 wrote: I was thinking classical attractiveness, at least when I see the pics with my shirt off. Pale skin, thin build, toned, like a Greek statue. At least that is what I am reminded of.
Well...pale, yes. And yay for pale. If this is the look you're going for, I'd check into...I don't know, maybe personal training. If you want to be thin, get thinner. If you want to be toned, get toneder...toner...more gym time. I'm not sure what to do about hair.
I do find it odd that you would say I am not attractive, the other guy is saying it to try and get a reaction. I have had many complements from women over the years. I've never had one even say anything remotely about me being unattractive, even ones that were angry at me and wanted to find something hurtful to say.
I did not say that you are unattractive. Everyone is attractive to someone. However, by most standards, I believe (and anyone here can feel free to dispute this; I am typically unattracted to men in general and therefore not much good at this) that you are normal. You are not the super-attractive god among men that you seen to believe you are but you don't make me cringe or anything, you know?
With regards to girls...I think everyone has had many compliments from both genders. That doesn't mean anything. And in arguments...do people typically go to "you're unattractive" in an argument? I'd aim more for things like, you know, "you're delusional," "you're unmotivated and unambitious," or "why is the cat in the ceiling," or "seriously, you lit the house on fire again WTF!?"
Hearing someone say that to me is like saying 1+2=4, or the earth is flat, or the bible is true.
I cracked up. Based on this, we can be friends.
It's so obvious a fallacy that it isn't believable for a second.
Based on this, I'm back to "quit it!"
Now, the other comments made sense, and I could kind of see where they were coming from. I do hunch over a lot, and I need to work on that. I've always had an issue with posture. For the women's underwear thing, they do look really good on me, but that is not the reason I wear them. I can do without them in a photo shoot, in the future.
I'll leave this be. If they're not in the photo, good enough.