is Paolo Roversi as good as Helmut Newton?
Smut not on focus
apples and oranges
>>4012594paolo roversi more like paolo reversi amirite
anyone have this book?
>>4012566it depends on what?
>>4012594I love trimmed pubes so much
>>4012563beyond the fact that nude people with vaginas and breasts are just nice to look at, what made either of them good?
>>4016725how the image itself looks and how original it is (or was at the time)
>>4016760>NEW GOODAbsolute garbage. Imagine taking snapshits of nude people and thinking they're good just because no one else did it since everyone thought it was fucking stupid.
>>4015449got the internet. way more noods
>>4016992Originality takes creativity. Copying doesn't take much creativity.
>>4012563Helmut Newton wasn't good, first off.Roversi is pretty good and he managed to pass from analog to digital quite gracefully, integrating it with his style rather than fighting with it like most boomer photographers do
>>4014175[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>>4017003how much originality is involved in it conceptually, really, though?taking a photograph of a naked femme after the advent of photography is only original in so much as the photo hadn't been taken before. people have been depicting nude femmes probably since the first masc achieved puberty. on one level (totally new photo subject!) it's novel; one all other levels it's not. said another way; is it really impressive that, considering photography had been created, a heterosexual man invented pornography? I think no. That seems pretty intrinsic to heterosexual men interacting with depictive media.
>>4015449yeah its fucking boring as shit, he somehow made nude woman unsexy
>>4017891NOT AS BORING AS ONLYFANS CRAP or as shitty as the hacks on IG.BTW are you sure you aren't queer?
>>4015449>anyoneyup, everyone evenhttps://archive.org/details/paolo.-roversi.-nudi.-1999.-photobook/page/n9/mode/2up
>>4017953>onlyfansholy shit do you actually pay instathots for D-grade selfie porn? how pathetic are you? fuck
>>4018753I TRY AND COLLECT THEM ALL
here are my "Terry" shots....any good?
>>4019337this new Pringles logo is fucking awful.
>>4018752wow thank you so much,excellent book!
>>4017027>Helmut Newton wasn't good, first off.please explain how Newton wasn't a master?
>>4022939what makes a master?
>>4019336>>4019337Terrys talent was getting his models into their most expressive poses. Your model looks lifeless and bored. Your photos are technically what you were trying to do but it lacks any emotion from the subject.
>>4023290Newton was a g at framing.
>>4024415>put the subject(s) in the center of the frame, or along one or more of the lines of thirds>masterso masters abide strictly to elementary rules, then?
>>4024423Did I say>Newton was a g at rule of thirds?Framing is much more than just placing a subject in an image, it is about constructing and positioning the environment around the subject to tell a story.Compare pic rel to the picture OP posted.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasaPhotographerPicasaImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2012:11:13 22:36:45Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1074Image Height1080Unique Image ID91846138bbd356d63f7ad73cbc3e26e1
>>4024414Harsh but fair.
>>4024430solid shot this 1 is
>>4025506let me be harsher
>>4017027>Helmut Newton wasn't good, first off.what proof you have?
>>4024430This is one of my favorite pictures ever. That's Newton's wife on the right. There is so much going on here besides>muh n00dsLook in the background at the building and how perfectly spaced the windows are in the door frame and the fact they are exposed just as well as the interior of that room, he had to wait for overcast light outside to get that shot. read that again, dude waited for the light outside for a small portion of the photo to get to a point where he could expose for both indoor and outdoor light. that is some next level camera autism.Newton was a G just period. He's one of my influences most definitely on my work.
>>4031051>This is one of my favorite pictures ever. That's Newton's wife on the right. There is so much going on here besidesvery true indeed.
>>4017027too much edit
IM COOMINGGGGGGGGGCATCH MY COOM!!
>>4012632but how so if i may ask?
>>4031051>Newton was a G just period. He's one of my influences most definitely on my work.couldn't have said it better myself
>>4024430newton can do no wrong!
>>4044708>jewish>Roversiback to plebbit you go
>>4035363OF or IG??
>>4024414tbf i don't think it's his fault so muchjust, the model appears to come from a land where people don't have souls
>>4046180>just, the model appears to come from a land where people don't have soulscouldn't agree more
>>4018752thanks!couldn't find much info on it and was looking at paying the stupid price people are asking for it. It's actually rather disappointing compared to his other work.wouldn't happen to have his "Studio" book would you?
>>4031051meh, imagine going full autist for a bit of light outside the window, and meanwhile not even noticing your wife is ugly and your middle has terrible titsdefinition of missing the forest for the trees
>>4024430hey i know, i'll take a picture of a girl with pepperoni nipples on flabby outward-facing tits, with me in the shot visible in the mirror, and my awful frumpy feminist librarian wife sitting next to the mirror watching it all. LETS CALL THIS ART!!!cringe.