Unless it's specifically a portrait or modeling headshot, I've always been of the opinion that a good photographer should get the *entire* subject in-frame. Sadly, there are photography references which actually say nobody cares about feet, so leave them out, crop them out, etc. Some keep them in-frame, such as in a front-angle view of 'The Pose' but *blur* them by opening the aperture of the lens, which should be a capital crime. I'm just as disturbed she's missing half her fingers, and elbow, and most of her legs. I'd pay *double* for an uncropped version of this image, if there is one.
"Twice nothing is still nothing." "I'm an aesthete, not a one-track fetishist." ~@Restraints
I had a coworker who was a *beautiful* woman. She went to one and came back just ruined. Had to go back a number of times to have fluid drained from a tummy tuck, had huge ugly scars down the back of both arms, and the botox lips looked like she'd gone ten rounds with George Foreman. Sad.
2014-08-16 18:48:56Gossipguy (user)
What's the origin of this picture? I did a search and the only result was wikiFeet.
saucy jack (user) - rated (beautiful feet)2014-09-15 20:55:55
It's from her twitter: https://twitter.com/reallycb/status/437655908005711872/photo/1