I find there is more nuance in the camera, framing, and perspective view. Some focus on male gratification, possession, and penetration. I find that uninteresting. There are far fewer that focus on the nuances of female sexual experiences. Then there are far fewer still that understand and capture the art of human form. Like I roll my eyes any time I see a woman with her legs up and back. Even most skinny rectangle body type women have wide hips that are unflattering in the position. Sure some people don’t mind or are even into that, but in strictly speaking art terms, like drawing and painting proportions, that is unflattering and not artful at all. I most appreciate when someone frames shots that speak to the subtle psychology of the human form. There is a very real and secret magic hidden in the human form and viewer’s mind. Certain perspectives conjure emotions and behaviors outside of one’s awareness. What is it exactly that seeing is motivating? Why those shapes? What is it about that mixture of the symmetrical and asymmetrical parts that conjures a primal response. What triggers imagination and wanton lust? What did they intend to focus attention upon, why, would you? What other aspects of self awareness are present? What are their motivations? Where are they? Who is paying for this shoot, why? Is a camera here to avoid issues with some rich prick trafficking? Is this a thinly veiled cuck to the world from the rich? Am I watching nothing more than the bottom of some dude’s junk? Who let hamburger meat hair legs in front of a lens? Has she ever seen herself in a mirror like this? How smart is she likely to be based on traits of self awareness and implied complexity?
That is some of what I am thinking about. I’m just curious in lots of spaces. Recently I have been modeling mesh forms in CAD. So I’m in that artist’s mindset. Mostly thinking about shapes and places that motivate touch on a level outside of typical human awareness.
When I had my auto body shop, I got access to some estimating software for a short bit. I quickly spotted a pattern where if I looked at a job and honestly estimated, back of the napkin style, how long the job would take for each step, the software estimated 3 times that amount, but it took the long way around to arrive at the same baseline. The supplies were always doubled. This is how I look at every task now. Give it your best estimates and triple that time. assuming you understand the scope of the work, you’ll encompass around 90% of work tasks with the rest going over or under.