I would also vote to keep the head in the pictures. Headless models don't seem to be a good idea imo. I hope that helps. :)
Mark
Printable View
I would also vote to keep the head in the pictures. Headless models don't seem to be a good idea imo. I hope that helps. :)
Mark
I honestly think that headless models might be fine for muscle fetish. If their is one niche where the head is unimportant, it's muscle. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by IntenseCash.com
Having said that, I prefer the head and shoulder shots too. How about using horizontally aligned shots i.e. the model reclining or lying on a bed?
Hey bass, are you using these pics to promote the site, or just include in standard photo sets?
If it's promote, then you definitely NEED the head. If you are asking whether to nix the headless shots from a set of 50-60 photos that already have plenty of head and face, I say definitely keep them. It's like zooming in for detail on the chest and biceps.
One thing though, Joey's shot looks MUCH better because the image stops at his shoulders and looks like a good zoom shot. Craig's looks creepy because you see his neck and adam's apple and then **slice** no head. That one makes it look like he wanted the head gone for privacy reasons (common in amateur pics).
Good luck!
I prepare the small one.... head included!! Face should be shown to make it more attractive!! :gaydays: