A set of classic pin up paintings paired with the reference photos that were used to create them has been making the rounds today, usually billed as The Original Photoshop or some such. However, as astute Redditor Barnago points out, there’s a difference between a pin up and a photoshoot:
These are not portraits, or figure studies. The illustrator’s intention is not to faithfully represent the girls and touch them up a bit. His job is to create a fictional, visually appealing, sexy character set within a little vignette. To that end, these photographs are merely tools to help inform the technical process and lend it credulity in the places where the artist’s ability to construct convincingly from imagination are not sufficient.
The point is, it is sort of backwards to say that these are the result of an artist heavily modifying the model, in order to arrive at the idealized pinup. The idealized pinup is actually the starting point.
That said, it’s still interesting to note not only the changes between our modern equivalent of the pin up (there’s a debate to be had there, but we’re going to say… advertising) and the classic pin up; but also the changes between the women in the original photos and the women in the paintings.
I mean, obviously we’re almost always looking at a lot less skin and quite a bit more garter belts.
Styleite points out that feet seem to get smaller quite often:
And The Hairpin notes that there’s nary a duckface to be seen…
Ladies and gentlemen, always wear long pants under your chaps. There’s a reason why they’re called chaps. Man, I miss horseback riding.
We found this gallery initially on Reddit, but Buzzfeed seems to have the most complete collection.
