Cheryl With Rose Petals

[alangubbay]

Any merit in this?

[John R Smith]

Alan

If you want an honest opinion -

This is technically very well done, but a piece of appalling kitsch which harks back to the 1960s (perhaps intentionally?).

Not my cup of tea.

John

[RSL]

+1

[popnfresh]

I like it for what it is. I don't find it appalling. But her blotchy, purple feet kind of stand out on an otherwise pristine nude. I would have changed her pose so that the soles of her feet were turned away from the camera. Or I would have covered them up.

[RSL]

Oooooh... Yes. Those soles are gross!!! Come on, Pop, John's right. This is kitch at its worst. Technically well done, but so what?

[popnfresh]

Oooooh... Yes. Those soles are gross!!! Come on, Pop, John's right. This is kitch at its worst. Technically well done, but so what?

No no no, this time you are flat out wrong.

This, my friend, is kitsch at its worst.

[kikashi]

I like it for what it is. I don't find it appalling. But her blotchy, purple feet kind of stand out on an otherwise pristine nude. I would have changed her pose so that the soles of her feet were turned away from the camera. Or I would have covered them up.

That was the first thing that struck me as well. Pretty, skinny girl. Ugly feet.

Jeremy

[alangubbay]

Thanks a lot guys.  The soles of her feet were originally quite black, having been walking around on the floor.  I lightened them but clearly did not pay enough attention to the colour.  I will now have to attend to this as it has caused such a strong reaction.