"normal" body proportions (Page 4): Am I reading this correctly? Is the size of the grid immaterial as long as it's consistent in size, and the important result is not a physical...

RogStrix Loc: UK

Am I reading this correctly? Is the size of the grid immaterial as long as it's consistent in size, and the important result is not a physical measurement but a ratio/percentage of the overall height? Let's face it human bodies vary enormously, there are many people I know who are taller than me but have shorter legs, etc...

riderxlx Loc: DFW area Texas

JohnFrim wrote:

Plain background, model standing in outstretched symmetrical poses of font/back and left/right aspects, no shadows, and a thin lined black grid might help you achieve your objective. Of course, multiple models would be required to demonstrate variability of the human form. You might even consider having the grid behind them, models at a fixed distance in front of the grid, and camera always in the same location.

Well John, you are one if not the main nit-picker critics on this topic section. Well, why don't you show us some of your expert work ?
I am not in bed with the OP but I have been wanting to tell you this
Uh yea, I know the answer because I saw your link and it is ??? well, yea.
I am not in bed with the OP but the nit-pick stuff on the there posts in the past, for the most part I do not even see nor do I care about.
So if you are so much an expert, then let us see some examples of your work.
Kick it back dude.
bruce

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

riderxlx wrote:

Well John, you are one if not the main nit-picker ... (show quote)

Bruce, I was hardly nit-picking in my last post. I was offering suggestions for the OP to provide useful graphic materials for others, as I believe was his intent. I personally have no interest in the topic, but non-standard poses in dull images largely obscured by broad white lines are not particularly helpful.

toxdoc42

Yes, the subject was about proportions, not absolute measurements.

riderxlx Loc: DFW area Texas

JohnFrim wrote:

Bruce, I was hardly nit-picking in my last post. I was offering suggestions for the OP to provide useful graphic materials for others, as I believe was his intent. I personally have no interest in the topic, but non-standard poses in dull images largely obscured by broad white lines are not particularly helpful.

I cannot say I had any interest in the topic either but the comments are just ?? to be expected. If you recall my post last year of my selfies, I stirred up the place but got some positive comments and few if any, you may have, but I did mine to add some humor, a change, and just to mix it up some.
So I admire his post for just posting and he should be acknowledged for that.
thanks for the reply.
Bruce.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

riderxlx wrote:

I cannot say I had any interest in the topic either but the comments are just ?? to be expected. If you recall my post last year of my selfies, I stirred up the place but got some positive comments and few if any, you may have, but I did mine to add some humor, a change, and just to mix it up some.
So I admire his post for just posting and he should be acknowledged for that.
thanks for the reply.
Bruce.

I am not going to go back and see what I may have posted regarding your photos, but I do recall the photos and will say that in my view (today) they accomplished what you intended. I am sure I chuckled when I saw them.

riderxlx Loc: DFW area Texas

JohnFrim wrote:

I am not going to go back and see what I may have posted regarding your photos, but I do recall the photos and will say that in my view (today) they accomplished what you intended. I am sure I chuckled when I saw them.

Hell no I was not even suggesting that because I sure am not but I do recall you got a hoot out of it and told me how many views it got which I did not know or keep up with. Either way it was fun.
bruce

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

This blog has quite a variety of people. Some say they are "professionals" and others are amateurs. Some say they are purebreds, while others are "artists" When someone posts an artistic technological question such as this, the vast array of posts shows how far and wide the readership is. I saw this the first day it was published, and I regalled at the post because I have done years of figure drawing, and it is always an elusive artistic endeavor because the pose makes you throw out all the "technical" jargon, and rely on your artistic abilities. I have not posted on this thread till now, because I watched the lunitics among us ruin the post. Sure this is a photographic blog, but some people understand that art is a part of photography, while others just don't get it! Anyway, this thread has turned to garbage and I am only posting this comment out of sheer frustration over the disappointment that this is not an intelligent point of conversation, and perhaps this blog will never be.

RogStrix Loc: UK

azted wrote:

This blog has quite a variety of people. Some say ... (show quote)

I guess that's the positive and negative of free speech.