MatureModelMM wrote:
I intentionally show mine, they are just as valid as any other body part and nothing to be ashamed of or embarrassed by.

I choose not to shave mine. If that bothers anyone to see what a natural woman looks like, that's unfortunate because it is a part of being me.

I agree. Any single component of a shot can overwhelm and change the intended feel.  But pits are as natural as earlobes, yes? To hide them just because or without artistic intent doesn’t seem valid.

David A Reichel wrote:
I'm not a fan of pits, especially if the skin tone is a lot darker than the surrounding skin; I think its distracting.  I don't exclude / reject images during culling because of pits.

Thanks for that balance. David.

Bob Helm Photography wrote:
There are no absolutes in art.

My mantra

Bob Helm Photography wrote:
There are no absolutes in art.

My mantra

Mark Salo wrote:
What??

Hey Mark! So, I recently shot a beautiful yogi, in an amazing pose with her arms over her head.  She was shaved and the difference in underarm tone was similar if not less than her knee caps. A single knee jerk remark from a viewer made me check to see if there is a consensus among pro shooters and models.
What are you thoughts on armpits?

rGlenndonShoots wrote:
... A single knee jerk remark from a viewer made me check to see if there is a consensus among pro shooters and models.
What are you thoughts on armpits?

Shoot what you want, or alternatively, what the client wants. I’m curious: why are you soliciting and weighing the opinions of people who aren’t paying you? If you like “x”, why does it matter if 12 (or 1200!) random internet people whom you don’t know tell you that they don’t like “x”?

rGlenndonShoots wrote:
Any single component of a shot can overwhelm and change the intended feel.. . .   
. . .  To hide them just because or without artistic intent doesn’t seem valid.

You apparently seem content to also live with the contradictions in your statements.

Not me. I will sometimes include shaved armpits in a photo where it can be readily ameliorated in post-production and doesn't interfere with the beauty of the image, and sometimes I have included hairy pits when they don't overwhelm the basic portrait, but that would be rare. However, if I think it's ugly within the frame, or very distracting, I generally don't want it in my photos, just as I wouldn't want to focus on a "completely natural" bruise. Nor would I want a flat hand or a protruding elbow to be the de-facto focus of an image.

None of this has anything to do with a lack of respect for the natural female form, or for the person of the model. I simply see it as very distracting in most cases, and since beauty is a fragile thing in creating a beautiful photo, I choose to avoid the problem. That's my right as an artist, and no one should pronounce it invalid.

AgX wrote:
]
Shoot what you want, or alternatively, what the client wants. I’m curious: why are you soliciting and weighing the opinions of people who aren’t paying you? If you like “x”, why does it matter if 12 (or 1200!) random internet people whom you don’t know tell you that they don’t like “x”?

I’m curious: what in post leads you to think I don’t ‘shoot what I like’? Wait, I’m more curious about why you’re questioning my question without offering a response?. Actually, I’m really not that interested in either.

What does interest me is perspectives other than my own. When alternate opinions are freely discussed everyone benefits.

Modelphilia wrote:

You apparently seem content to also live with the contradictions in your statements.
'.

Oddly enough we may well be saying the same thing. Often verbose with detail, I chose to be a bit more brief this time, relying on readers here to understand.
Thanks for your voice.

Modelphilia wrote:

You apparently seem content to also live with the contradictions in your statements.
'.

Oddly enough we may well be saying the same thing. Often verbose with detail, I chose to be a bit more brief this time, relying on readers here to understand.
Thanks for your voice.

rGlenndonShoots wrote:
Actually, I’m really not that interested in either.

lol. Of course.
Carry on.

Al_Vee Photography wrote:
Human beings have armpits. They're fine. Human beings also have tattoos, scars and moles. All these things are fine as well.

Perfect explanation.  It should not be any issue.