Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Dan OMell wrote:
Dan OMell wrote:
Many (including me) believe what is natural is not ugly.
Still, I allow a model to remove any image she personally dislikes, after a photo session. Looks like your're coming from "comme il faut" attitude? 
Well, even retouchers leave at least traces of pores and even wrinkles on the faces to make people looking still a bit human. How you deal with all this "junky" stuff, depends on the standards of beauty, social and personal preference and cultural differences. I know many models love to look like the plastic Barbie dolls EVERYWHERE, in all places. And I'm not necessarily totally against it, therefore, I'm partially on your side .
I also agree with your opinion on the male "junk". But, looking at the ancient Italy costumes, traditions (junk sand bags?), modern ballet dancers outfits, some rappers, urban fashionistas in NYC, etc. I would say how do you define "normal"?
Plus, sometimes, the best way to not draw any attention is to remove the cover, if this is an option. I don't shoot nudes. But if I did, I could draw attention to anything I want, including a "junk" and still make it totally aesthetically pleasing in classic sense. I'm not scared by anything or anyone.
Many seemingly "right" things aren't necessarily that natural. For Nature, for example, our brain looks like just a gigantic carcinoma with all those problems, fobias and prejudices it's created for its own sake.
It's in your mind. There is no absolutely right or wrong. There are some opinions. I'm open to other opinions, and respect yours, for example. But I don't propose mine as the most righteous.
I know that many women disgusted by camel toes, psychologically speaking. And even more, http://docakilah.wordpress.com/2011/11/ … r-vaginas/ Thats all well and good and if you want to make art with camel toes...cool.
Point is, it has a time and place, and that time is not "always" and the place is not "everywhere in every picture ever". Not wanting camel toe is not always about "ew its so ugly and gross" but rather "it just doesnt serve a purpose to the image, so why would you leave it there?"
Photographer
HHPhoto
Posts: 1111
Denver, Colorado, US
If the model is unaware of a visible camel toe, it should be deleted, cropped or photoshopped.
This would be no different than a "nip slip" in an otherwise non-adult shoot.
If neither party is concerned, or it is purposeful, than it is no different than parameters agreed to regarding a nude or implied nude shoot.
One last thought, and I didn't see this posted anywhere above. The trend towards little or no pubic hair has contributed greatly to the increased prevalence of camel toe in the last decade. True or false?
Photographer
Dan OMell
Posts: 1415
Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Laura UnBound wrote:
Point is, it has a time and place, and that time is not "always" and the place is not "everywhere in every picture ever". Not wanting camel toe is not always about "ew its so ugly and gross" but rather "it just doesnt serve a purpose to the image, so why would you leave it there?" +1
Photographer
ChadAlan
Posts: 4254
Los Angeles, California, US
Models usually ask me to let them know if they're sporting a cameltoe, and I normally edit it out or lessen the severity if it's a fashion-ey type shoot.
Photographer
Gary Melton
Posts: 6680
Dallas, Texas, US
CHAD ALAN wrote:
...sporting a cameltoe... ...Am I on Candid Camera?
Photographer
ChadAlan
Posts: 4254
Los Angeles, California, US
Gary Melton wrote:
...Am I on Candid Camera?
LOL, I don't know but I hope I never am.
Whenever I get asked this, I'm sure it makes me blush.
Model
Jen B
Posts: 4474
Phoenix, Arizona, US
I want you to tell me when you seeit so I can smooth the clothes out anx get the hell rid of it please.
Typos due to tablet troubles.
Model
Jen B
Posts: 4474
Phoenix, Arizona, US
HHPhoto wrote:
If the model is unaware of a visible camel toe, it should be deleted, cropped or photoshopped.
This would be no different than a "nip slip" in an otherwise non-adult shoot.
If neither party is concerned, or it is purposeful, than it is no different than parameters agreed to regarding a nude or implied nude shoot.
One last thought, and I didn't see this posted anywhere above. The trend towards little or no pubic hair has contributed greatly to the increased prevalence of camel toe in the last decade. True or false? false. Pubes dont cushion out the toe.
Photographer
Verco Handel
Posts: 293
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
this thread makes me LOL.
Model
Alabaster Crowley
Posts: 8283
Tucson, Arizona, US
It's undesirable. I'd hope the photographer would notice and ask me to adjust.
Photographer
afplcc
Posts: 6020
Fairfax, Virginia, US
Laura UnBound wrote:
Its not really so much about "ugliness" as it is about drawing attention to something that wasnt meant to be the main focus of the image. You wouldnt exactly draw an outline of your junk onto your pants for normal every-day wear, unless your intention is to have everyone staring at your junk Well said. It's like a woman's nipples showing through an outfit--sometimes that's appropriate and adds the right atmosphere to the clothing or shot, sometimes it's a distraction.
And Laura...as for your earlier post saying that there are actual photos of you wearing clothes and underwear...I say prove it! Making wild claims like this is how someone gets their credibility destroyed ; )
Ed
Model
Jen B
Posts: 4474
Phoenix, Arizona, US
A-M-P wrote:
As a girl I think camel toe looks awful so I would instruct your model to fix before taking photo. The same if the model had a wedgy I would instruct her to fix it.
Is funny how most pro camel toe in the thread have been the male photographers.
Anyhow I don't think camel toe is natural as most have stated. It usually only happens if you are wearing clothing that doesn't fit properly. I agree. Its about as natural as walking around with very erect nipples.
Im long waisted and often pants will compete between myhips pulling them up and having camel toe. Argh. Im also sensitive and have prominant nipples and while I hadnt initially cared I have been insulted by women for both nd it left a mark. I am comparing because while both arenatural both completely draw attention. I heard, "your pants are so tight I can count the hair on your lips!" Thing is they werent tight but the cut had them exagerrate the area.
Model
B R E N N A N
Posts: 4247
Charlotte, North Carolina, US
K I C K H A M wrote:
I personally hate it.
Sometimes the clothes don't allow for anything else.
What do I want you to do about it? ANYTHING. Tell me about it. Photoshop it. Hell, crop it. Just pretty please don't leave it in the picture. Yup.
Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
afplcc wrote:
Well said. It's like a woman's nipples showing through an outfit--sometimes that's appropriate and adds the right atmosphere to the clothing or shot, sometimes it's a distraction.
And Laura...as for your earlier post saying that there are actual photos of you wearing clothes and underwear...I say prove it! Making wild claims like this is how someone gets their credibility destroyed ; )
Ed Ive been slowly adding them into my portfolio but nobody likes them. Go figure.
Photographer
Gary Melton
Posts: 6680
Dallas, Texas, US
MyrnaByrna Jen B wrote:
...Pubes dont cushion out the toe. ...a phrase I would have never expected to encounter in my lifetime...
Model
Big A-Larger Than Life
Posts: 33451
The Woodlands, Texas, US
I am strongly anti wiener wedgie. I'd want any tog dude to let me know so I could fix it. If I saw it in final shots I'd get all angry and want to kick him in the baws. 
Photographer
Kev Lawson
Posts: 11294
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Photographer
Awesome Headshots
Posts: 2370
San Ramon, California, US
Innovative Imagery wrote:
How do MODELS feel about Camel Toe? Should only be allowed on Wednesday's...... 
Model
V Laroche
Posts: 2746
Khowmeyn, Markazī, Iran
The labia in that photo don't bother me nearly as much as those disgusting nails.
Photographer
highStrangeness
Posts: 2485
Carmichael, California, US
V Laroche wrote:
The labia in that photo don't bother me nearly as much as those disgusting nails. I hadn't noticed until you pointed them out. But yes, they're ugly.
I'm not one for fake nails, much less really long ones (claws)... Ungh.
Photographer
Verco Handel
Posts: 293
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
any english-speaking countries have same term? UK, Canada, Australia? I wonder.
Photographer
highStrangeness
Posts: 2485
Carmichael, California, US
Verco Handel wrote:
any english-speaking countries have same term? UK, Canada, Australia? I wonder. I think it's the same term, in both the US and Commonwealth countries.
Photographer
Miss Havisham Studios
Posts: 297
Los Angeles, California, US
This is kind of a dumb thread, however, as long as it isn't going to end up in a catalog, I don't see the problem. It's like looking at men's underwear photos and saying "OMG I can see the outline of a penis". It's called anatomy people. Get over it.
Edit:
The more I think about the thread I guess it isn't that stupid. One of the models in my portfolio had rather large lips and it was more than noticeable during a shoot. They were literally squeezing out one side. I had to say something at that point.
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
udor wrote:
NOOOOOOoooooooooooooo...!!! 
Don't mess with the toe... it's a beautiful marvel of nature!!! Elizabeta Rosandic wrote:
It's actually just a vulva with cloth over it. No need to get so obsessive. I am a vagitarian, and a toe is like juicy advertising on a menue!
... and you tell me not to get hungry?
Not fair!!!!!!
Photographer
Julian W I L D E
Posts: 1831
Portland, Oregon, US
Good Egg Productions wrote:
How do YOU feel about Mooseknuckle? +100
Photographer
Bjorn Lumiere
Posts: 816
Asheville, North Carolina, US
The real question is, what are wild camels doing on the set ?
Photographer
Christian B Aragon
Posts: 261
Sparks, Nevada, US
Camel toe in the bikini bottoms is far better than a testicle hanging out of the bikini bottoms. Unless of course you're into that sort of thing, in which case, as you were.
Photographer
PTPhotoUT
Posts: 1961
Salt Lake City, Utah, US
V Laroche wrote:
The labia in that photo don't bother me nearly as much as those disgusting nails. 1+
Model
D A N I
Posts: 4627
Little Rock, Arkansas, US
udor wrote:
udor wrote:
NOOOOOOoooooooooooooo...!!!
Don't mess with the toe... it's a beautiful marvel of nature!!! I am a vagitarian, and a toe is like juicy advertising on a menue!
... and you tell me not to get hungry?
Not fair!!!!!!
Photographer
imcFOTO
Posts: 581
Bothell, Washington, US
It's good to hear models just keeping it simple and asking the photographer just to tell them so they can adjust. A photographer should be watching for those details - like the stray pubes that escape or the unexpected nip slip etc. Heck I've had to ask a model to 'adjust' themselves on a nude shoot (where one lip was in and one was out - I'm a stickler for symmetry!). Personally, I agree that an extreme camel toe is a bit tacky.
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 2687
Apache Junction, Arizona, US
I'm ok with it. Don't care for the name though.
I have large full lips and I think it looks good in photos depending on the project.
If a photographer doesn't like them showing then he can easily edit them out. But I like them.
Now duck lips forget it! LOL
Photographer
Rays Fine Art
Posts: 7504
New York, New York, US
Funny, I'm not overly turned on by a bare vulva, even though I do think they are nice things for girls to have. They tend to fit the body and, well, belong there. But a camel-toe? Seems to me that its overstating the case, kind like screaming "Hey! Look! I'm a girl!" If I haven't figured that out by the time I see the camel-toe, I don't need the camel-toe to help me, I need an undertaker.  All IMHO as always.
Model
Michelle Genevieve
Posts: 1140
Gaithersburg, Maryland, US
Laura UnBound wrote:
Its not really so much about "ugliness" as it is about drawing attention to something that wasnt meant to be the main focus of the image. This. I don't think it's offensive, but it's a distraction. And when I am the photographer I am obsessed with details, and this is one detail I wouldn't want in my images.
K I C K H A M wrote:
What do I want you to do about it? ANYTHING. Tell me about it. Photoshop it. Hell, crop it. Just pretty please don't leave it in the picture. Right! If you can tell me about my posture or pose you ought to be able to tell me about this.
But it's not likely a photographer will ever have to bring it up with me. I got my start as a photographer long before the advent of Photoshop, and back in the day we had to take care of most of the details in the camera. I have ways of dealing with this.
Innovative Imagery wrote:
This thread is for how MODELS feel about this, beginners or advanced. NOT for how Photographers deal with it. Come on, you know better than that! That's just an open invitation for photographers to weigh in.
Photographer
Drayton-Kennedy
Posts: 16
Detroit, Michigan, US
Thanks to the OP for this thread. I'm surprised--but glad to know--so many models see this as similar to unintentional nudity. I never thought of it that way. I'm about to do a fitness shoot and for part of it I want to ramp up the sexiness, so for my concept to work I really want the wardrobe to create camel toe. I'll make sure I discuss this beforehand with the model. p.s. Sorry to OP for barging in
Clothing Designer
GRMACK
Posts: 5436
Bakersfield, California, US
Caitin Bre wrote:
I'm ok with it. Don't care for the name though.
I have large full lips and I think it looks good in photos depending on the project.
If a photographer doesn't like them showing then he can easily edit them out. But I like them.
Now duck lips forget it! LOL Interesting comment as I've heard that from others who think they have "pretty ones." Some do too.
However, and imho only, some ain't all that pretty when they resemble two-month old Romaine lettuce trying to make a hasty exit. (I don't know if that is "Duck lips?").
Some even get into modeling Cameltini's too. That had to be a very weird casting call for that gig - if they were agency models - and I would have loved to heard the office scuttlebutt when that casting call came in for the following:
http://www.the-bikini.com/galleries-peekaboo/ Some are more like +40 haha! 
Photographer
JohnEnger
Posts: 868
Jessheim, Akershus, Norway
If it is unwanted and it seems that is the "problem", I use ductape. No, don't tape the female bits, just have them use a small piece to cover the problem area on the inside of the "garment", and bam! No more toes, and problem gone. The problem is bringing it up! Cheers! J.
Artist/Painter
MainePaintah
Posts: 1892
Saco, Maine, US
I think that "camel toe" is as bad as a fat man wearing a speedo with the back of it up and in his ass cheeks! No! Just No! (luckily I do not have any photos to show what I mean)
Model
Amelia Vane
Posts: 93
Somerville, Massachusetts, US
K I C K H A M wrote:
I personally hate it.
Sometimes the clothes don't allow for anything else.
What do I want you to do about it? ANYTHING. Tell me about it. Photoshop it. Hell, crop it. Just pretty please don't leave it in the picture. ^^ This. Let me know if there's a "toe"! I won't be mad or embarrassed if you tell me about it while we are shooting. I WILL be mad or embarrassed if I get bunch of photos back with a visible toe! This is the same with belly rolls, hand claw or foot appearing to be coming out of my butt.
|
