People covered in honey

photoguy99 · Feb 20, 2015

Back to the camera means that the kid's face is not covered which makes for a lot less sadness.

As for the issue of eating the honey? I'd guess that the kid is a year old, sure. Could be, anyways.

Could be corn syrup, too. Honey is expensive.

It also could be honey and an eight month old baby and a parent rolling the dice. Infant botulism is one of those things we get told about and worry about, but if we really want to protect our children from risk: drive less.

The honey thing is seen as a very tiny risk that is easily managed, whereas driving is a much much larger risk which is seen as impossible to manage.

Forkie · Feb 20, 2015

limr said:
I think it's a cool project and some of the pictures were quite amazing.

However, I have to agree with Designer. Not fair to do that to pets and babies, and especially because it can cause health problems. You can't just let the dog lick himself clean. A little bit of honey won't hurt, but that much could make him sick. For babies, it's much much worse because it can be fatal to children less than 1 year old: When can my baby eat honey BabyCenter

The baby was 18 months old and the reason it was a photo from behind was clearly because they didn't cover its face with the honey. And they wouldn't have just let the dog lick itself clean - they would have bathed it afterwards.

JoeW · Feb 20, 2015

First, thanks for sharing.

Second, this is good work. I say from experience. It's VERY hard to shoot this concept without it looking like some kind of porn outtake, especially if the fluid is clear (i.e.: not chocolate fudge or red or blue). FWIW, there are also some amazing examples out there of "milk dresses".

Forkie · Feb 20, 2015

JoeW said:
First, thanks for sharing.

Second, this is good work. I say from experience. It's VERY hard to shoot this concept without it looking like some kind of porn outtake, especially if the fluid is clear (i.e.: not chocolate fudge or red or blue). FWIW, there are also some amazing examples out there of "milk dresses".

Yes, the milk dresses by Jaroslav Wieczorkiewicz are amazing, but made in a very different way. The dresses in those were shot separately and composited together with the shots of the models whereas, in this series, Blake Little actually poured the honey over his models.

I just love the sheen and highlights it gives and the way it looks like the models are, as the website and video explain, like they have been frozen in amber. I find it a really unique and fascinating effect.

Inga the Rottie · Feb 20, 2015

I agree that I do not like the dog or baby used in this way but the adults are amazing. From the very large to the super fit they all look awesome. That is a LOT of honey. Honey is easy to clean up if they can just take a big hose the place, it will just wash down the drain. I wouldn't do it in my house though. ha ha Very Very Cool idea

runnah · Feb 20, 2015

I had a similar idea but with Tobasco sauce.

Did not end as well...

Overread · Feb 20, 2015

Forkie said:
And they wouldn't have just let the dog lick itself clean - they would have bathed it afterwards.

I thought that was the cruelty! Putting a dog through a bath!

Though honestly we do all kinds of things to our pets without permissions and so long as you do things sensibly no one comes to harm. Must admit the dog one did surprise me at first; it has a tiny shock value because you don't expect it; but once you think about it is being covered in honey that much different to mud, dead things, that horrible thing that had maggots in it and that actually I don't even want to THINK what that last thing the dog rolled in could have once been!

It's very interesting and very good lighting on the shots. It adds a new dimension to many of the "characters" that you see in the people and animal shown. I've seen them do similar things in fantasy (The 300 second film had one guy emerging from gold and goopy slim has been used in the past in films). Neat idea for a project and honestly something one could do a lot of work with as a creative tool. Though yes you might want to look for some kind of honey substitute since pure honey would be expensive to use in this manner.

vintagesnaps · Feb 20, 2015

The photos are kind of cool but seems a little gimmicky to me, just not my type thing I guess.

You don't do that to a young child. It's one thing If you're playing in something messy having fun and take some pictures, but subjecting a young child to this??

If it's something that in the type work I've done with young children and famiies would have me thinking that it's heading in the direction of - would I need to intervene if I was there? then it seems questionable.

Don't think it's such a great idea with a pet ether.

Designer · Feb 20, 2015

Besides being a great waste of honey.

Forkie · Feb 20, 2015

vintagesnaps said:
The photos are kind of cool but seems a little gimmicky to me, just not my type thing I guess.

You don't do that to a young child. It's one thing If you're playing in something messy having fun and take some pictures, but subjecting a young child to this??

If it's something that in the type work I've done with young children and famiies would have me thinking that it's heading in the direction of - would I need to intervene if I was there? then it seems questionable.

Don't think it's such a great idea with a pet ether.

I would imagine that as far as the baby was concerned it was having fun playing in something messy and having some pictures taken...