Using an extremely wide lense, is certainly a less than flattering way to depict a woman. I think I will pass. :(

Teaching people about the beauty of a thing by *distorting* it and making it grotesque is neither artistic nor intelligent. It's an exercise in getting the politically correct to agree that the king does indeed have clothes.

Wow, what horribly unflattering pictures.

More like distortion rather than perpective..

Beautiful work. Yes the angle is extremely difficult in terms of flattering the human form, but thats not really a bad thing. Love the work and its reactions. I also have drawn and studied the human form for years now so i guess i simply do not get uncomfortable.

I see all these negative comments but I actually found these really cool! I'm a woman and when I looked at these it felt like I was looking at some stylized artwork... it was interesting and beautiful in it's own weird way. The fact that made it so many people uncomfortable makes you wonder why it did that for those individuals. But that's the point of art sometimes, I guess. It's all in the eye of the beholder and how they interpret based on their own experiences and views.

If this is art nowadays, thanks but no thanks... Unflattering photos, afwul idea.

I feel like a first world anarchist when I browsing these galeries at my workplace.

I like it. I am bored with the same sexual poses. This is organic, different.

It's hard to believe that these same girls could look so sexy in a regular photo session, and yet they are humans after all.

Hm. I did like some of the pics (dress, bathing suit) and I like the effects with legs and hands. But since (almost) all models were very skinny and it was AGAIN just bodies without faces, the shoot seems just as degrading and limited as any other photoshoot or art project with faceless, young, skinny, female bodies.

What's with all the little yellow dots?

A full high resolution 3D body scan can achieve unusual distorted human body.

One can even say it's an interesting photographic exercise, but honestly I dont like it at all. It also makes the most beautiful parts of a woman as quail of clumsy, deformed. I do not see how he think he have shown the beauty of women, making them ridiculous, awkward, deformed and unnatural. No, I think it's a useless work.

Different perspectives are always interesting, maybe things aren't always what they seem.

Anorexic models photographed semi nude by a guy with leg fetishes and perhaps extreme case of astigmatism

Any well else feel like this should be a sculpture? I really feel like being able to walk around from this angle would have made a better point.

I find this very poetic and emotional. I see most viewers do not understand the references to the paleolithical "venus" statues (symbols of fertility) or the paintings by Matisse.

I dont like this

So a man who's tired of looking at traditional pictures of nude, skinny, conventionally attractive, completely hairless women makes a photoshoot of nude, skinny, conventionally attractive, completely hairless women but from ~unconventional~ angles. And because the angle makes them look not conventionally attractive, the worst thing that could befall a member of the female species, it's art. Oh no, wait, it's the fact that we can still find the conventionally attractive women 'beautiful'. Riiight. Such horrible distortion. So grotesque. The horror. Artists sure are getting uncreative lately.

My main issue was the lack of variety in size. Most of the women would not be what one would consider "plus size" does that mean that the fuller figured woman is not attractive because that's pretty much what it's screams at me

horrible