Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40′s Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

London based photographer Jaroslav Wieczorkiewicz is known for taking high speed photography to the extreme. (And for poking at a $12K Profoto setup with a $500 Einstein).

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Jaroslav’s latest endeavor involves nostalgia, naked girls and some incredibly well executed high speed photographs of milk.

The project aims at creating a pin up calendar inspired by the popular pinup calendars of the 40′s and 50′s. Only instead of clothing, the models are wearing milk. Milk frozen with high speed strobes.

As an inspiration, Jaroslav looks at illustrations done for pinup calendars by Gil Elvgren, Alberto Vargas, Greg Hildebrandt and more which were featured on Brown & Bigelow calendars.

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

While none of the milk is illustrated, it is created from layering splashes from hundreds of individual photographs. Each taken with (real) milk splashed across (real) bodies.

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

The lighting setup is made with an Einstein E640 bounced of a silver parabolic umbrella for key and another E640 shooting through a strip-light for kick.

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Here is a look at 9 out of the 12 months, with 3 yet to be published photographs.

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

Milky Pin-Ups Are Traditional-40S Pinup Photos Made With High-Speed Milk [NSFW]

If you are in Lucerne, Switzerland this weekend you can join in on taking the last photo in a workshop. Or you can order the calendar starting November.

[Milky Pin-Ups | Jaroslav Wieczorkiewicz]

Comments

  1. Nathan says

    For once I’m wowed by something new. Did the models have to hold/recreate the same pose each time? Lots and lots of hard work here, but worth it for the truly unique results.

      • Zack stan says

        Probably photoshop the best pose and face expression but bring in different the different milk textures that he liked out of 100 photos but deffinately did take the model keeping a really similar pose

        • MH_0426 says

          I’m sure professional photographers don’t use Photoshop. They more than likely have their own photo editing methods and stuff like that.

        • Sean Sopata says

          Photoshop is specifically designed for editing photos (it’s in the name) and is still the most widely used (pssh, whatever, MSPaint 4 Life!), and although it is used for building artwork from the ground up, it’s original design is for working on photos. Most artists I know use Photoshop for working with camera-originated photos, and with something like CorelPainter for original work.

  2. Marius says

    nice.. but im sure you can do it faster with a 3d program and something like glue3d or realflow. in the end.. it looks a bit CGish anyway, even when it´s not.

    • Tom says

      I think your missing the point -_- Yeah your totally right it could have been done 100% faster with computers and 3D programs. But he did this with a camera, some naked women, and a lot of milk and skill and patience. The end result is something far more substantial than just “another 3D image.”

      • Dimitri Loginowski says

        no actually its not “more substantial”. in fact CG can look exactly like this and you wouldnt be able to tell this apart. of course you would photo naked women first. that is a given. just because you can dig with a spoon, that doesnt mean that the hole is any more “substantial” than one done with a shovel…

        • lindsayanng says

          You missed one of the BIGGEST points is that doing things IN CAMERA has a different skill set than doing them inside a computer. He used a technical skillset to create an amazing rendering that we have never seen before.

          You are hugely missing the point. He’s showing that what LOOKS like 3D can actually be achieved inside of a camera.

          • Jeff says

            Except that in the end it’s all done in a computer anyway since he’s layering and blending hundreds of splash images for each final photo…

    • K S B says

      That’s really silly. With your logic, why do anything without a computer these days? The answer is simple: you get more personal satisfaction for accomplishing great things with minimal automated help.

    • Justin Evans says

      typical programmer. Wouldn’t want to actually be around naked ladies but at home in his basement with only his computer;)

  3. MJJPrincess says

    OMG I SO FUCKING LOVE THIS WOULD LOOOOVE TO SIT IN ON A SHOOT LIKE THIS as I am a photographer in hopes to get this good.. so freaking cool….

  4. june says

    actually, as a body painter by profession…i can tell you that all those women and are actually painted white…if you look closely at the edges, even an untrained eye can see….yes he did layer splash milk photographs over it…but originally the bodies are first painted in white….
    candyfacepainting.com

    • Kauffy says

      “While none of the milk is illustrated, it is created from layering
      splashes from hundreds of individual photographs. Each taken with (real)
      milk splashed across (real) bodies.”

    • Kevin Anderson says

      Except you’re wrong, and he documented the whole process.

      So as a body painter by profession, why don’t you stop trying to apply critical thinking to anything, since you’re vastly underqualified.

      For god’s sake man, there’s video of his process and an explanation.

      All I can say to you sir, is DERP.

  5. Reinhard Nell says

    I’ve seen a milk shoot before that was damn awesome concept and results but this project OMS! It is amazing! Very well done!

  6. 3rdStoneMan says

    Absolutely fantastic. One of the most impressive photo shoots I have seen in a while! Love the concept and the results are incredible. Wish I were in Switzerland this weekend. Keep up the great work.

    • Jake says

      Pretend to ‘care’ somewhere else. Such a shame we have so much water that we piss in it. If you use a toilet then shut up.

      • Guest says

        Congratulations for being a Troll jake. The art is great, no question, but when people were discussing whether or not to do this with CG/3D techniques, or alike, I can comment on the waste of the food. Way to post anonymously too, coward.

        • Kevin Anderson says

          We can’t save everyone in the world, and we’ve already compromised our entire human civilisation by focusing on short term problems instead of long term problems.

          If we spent all our time worrying about the areas and cultures of this world that are failing and trying to bring up them to our level, we’ll end up diverting resources that could be put to better use.

          • colin says

            the entire human race consists of the entire human race. just saying if there failing its our better to bring them up. then theres the thought that maybe they are just succeeding in a way were are failing. OH OH Got Milk…

          • Tynam says

            Ummm… there _is_ no better possible use for resources.

            It’s OK to mean “I live in a rich country and can afford it and I like it that way”; most of us do. But don’t pretend that not helping the rest of the world is some kind of moral achievement.

          • Kevin Anderson says

            That’s not true.

            Not every human has an intrinsic value, and people will realise it the day we eventually have to leave most of us behind to die.

            Someday this planet will be doomed, and humanity will leave.

            Do you really think we’ll have the logistical capability to take 12 billion or more people off the planet?

            Billions of people who aren’t of any real worth will be left behind to die.

            Morals are subjective. What do your morals say about saving the person versus saving the civilisation?

          • Tynam says

            My morals say that the person who thinks other human beings don’t have value should _definitely_ be the first one we leave to die. Out of common sense.

            Oh, you meant that _other_ human beings have no intrinsic value, but _you_ are special and worthy? Like fuck. Disregard for others makes you a liability no matter what else you do or have.

            A thousand of you will never equal one Malala Yousafzai – so while we’re “focusing on long-term problems”, why not take all your resources and give them to her? She’ll definitely do something more useful and long-term than you would.

            (Answer: because thankfully the rest of us don’t think like you.)

            Bonus points for implying that the heat-death of the earth in 600 million years is somehow the real reason you should be self-centred now. Because screwing the rest of humanity and helping yourself will _totally_ improve how we deal with that.

          • Kevin Anderson says

            That’s not a moral, that’s an opinion.

            I never listed myself in any category. Again you are taking an emotional stance to a question posed legitimately.

            Several times you mention myself as self centered, but I never made any claim that this concept was based around me.

            The simple truth of the matter is that Earth has limited funds and resources, and some of those resources need to be directed towards long term goals like space exploration, genetic research and technological development.

            If we bent the full force of the Earth’s potential towards things like starvation and poverty, yes, we could probably raise the low bar in areas of the world, but at the cost of also limiting the high bar of achievement.

            I also would point out to you that the heat death of the Earth is not the only way in which this planet may come to an end, and it is foolish to dedicate all our resources to problems with intractable issues and ultimately no benefit to solving.

            NASA pays more respect to sky watching for asteroids or radiative risks than our politicians do, and I happen to think they are a fairly intelligent organisation.

            If you asked engineers at NASA, do you think they would say they need more funding for deep space exploration, or that the funding should be shoveled into funding anti starvation programs in Africa?

            Malala is a nice girl and brave for a kid. She got shot and she left the country. Her impact on the region is yet to be determined, but an objective view of it, not skewed by your emotional state, has to conclude that as of yet she has not really moved the bar in Pakistan, especially in the Swat Valley.

          • Tynam says

            “If we bent the full force of the Earth’s potential towards things like starvation and poverty, yes, we could probably raise the low bar in areas of the world, but at the cost of also limiting the high bar of achievement.”

            Ah, _now_ I understand your misconception. And it is – your statement is flat out wrong. It’s a false choice. Not merely false, but the opposite of correct. The _only_ way to raise the high bar is to raise the low.

            The biggest thing preventing smart long-term goals – better science, orbital work, leaving the planet – is that the vast majority of our great scientists never get to see a physics textbook; the vast majority
            of our genius engineers live in starvation and poverty and never touch a rocket. Only a fraction of the world’s population get to contribute to the problem at all. And that’s a killer.

            Science is a cumulative effort, Kevin – more scientists means more progress.

            (I took your challenge and asked a rocket engineer – I happen to know one. Not NASA, since I live in the UK, but close enough. She thought it was patently ridiculous to suggest that feeding African children somehow _prevented_ deep space exploration.)

            The resource cost to solve the world’s starvation / poverty problem is _tiny_. It’s massively less than the amount we currently waste on guard labour because the problem hasn’t been solved. The wealth we already possess is _far_ more than enough to do the job.

            It’s not a fraction of 1% of what the smart long-term infrastructure projects will cost.

            (And of course Malala’s impact is yet to be determined – but it’s not zero, or nobody would be shooting at her. It’s certainly more than that of any fool who sits elsewhere going “oh no, we can’t help anyone, improving the world economy would stop us mining the asteroids”.)

          • malala makes a good target says

            Malala’s impact has nothing to do with her getting shot. They shoot anyone over there, regardless of impact. The fact that she disagreed with them was basis enough.

          • Tynam says

            The fact that they _noticed_ her disagreeing with them was basis enough.

            It’s a subtle point, but an important one. Her work was having an effect already; that’s why they were angry.

          • Kevin Anderson says

            I didn’t speak only of the starvation problem, but of the second and third order consequences.

            What happens when you solve a starvation problem without solving cultural problems including over population? You simply create another strain on the system.

            And yes, the effort involved in raising things like wages and education and poverty in the areas of the world that are stricken with these things are quite expensive.

            None of your claims are backed by anything. You claim that to solve the world problems with starvation costs a fraction of 1% of what? Of all high technology projects in the pipeline at the moment?

            That’s a fairly serious statement to make.

            It’s also fairly inaccurate.

            If there is so much money in the world right now, why is it that things like space exploration gets funded at such a deplorable rate? Surely there is money for it?

            Are you aware that space exploration, something that justifiably should be the most important expenditure to mankind, is 0.05% of world GDP?

            Per capita, we spend about 50 dollars per person in the US on space. It’s about 8 dollars in Europe, and goes down from there.

            This is something that a solid percent of our world production should be geared towards.

            Having anything less than 10% of total world production geared towards space exploration is criminal.

          • Tynam says

            “What happens when you solve a starvation problem without solving cultural problems including over population?”

            Well, historically, what happens is that those problems solve themselves, _very_ quickly. Because overpopulation isn’t a “cultural” problem, it’s a poverty problem. (How was the overpopulation problem “solved” in the US? It didn’t need to be; rich people self-regulate the number of children they have, very effectively. It’s only poor people who don’t have a choice.)

            Yes, raising education and food supply is very expensive. But armies are much more so, and we pay for those without blinking. The estimated total cost of the Iraq/Afghanistan War (including interest on loans taken to pay for it, etc.) is over $3.2 _trillion_. Even if you only count the direct spending – money actually spent directly on the army by the DoD – the figure is over $750 billion.

            If a school building in Iraq cost $10million, and each school needed 50 staff (it doesn’t) paid $100,000 a year (obviously, real wages are nothing like this high), that $750 billion would have been enough money for 12,500 schools during the same period.

            Do you think we might _possibly_ have had better results in the area by funding 12,000 schools than by bombing large parts of it flat? ‘Cause I do.

            By comparison to your fraction of a percent on space exploration, 25% of the US labour economy is in “guard labour” – than is, either unemployment or work which produces nothing, gains no knowledge, and keeps poor people busy protecting the property of the rich. (Yes, that’s hyperbole… but the amount isn’t; look it up.)

            As for solving starvation: there is _already_ enough food. The starvation problem has nothing to do with agricultural capacity and everything to do with corruption, violence and a few parasitic corporations.

            (And why do we spend nothing on space? You _know_ the answer to that, Kevin – it’s because politicians don’t care about anything that doesn’t pay off before the next election, and the population are too busy being distracted by artificial crises to make them.)

          • Kevin Anderson says

            Your last paragraph is the only thing worth reading, and supports my comment.

            Politicians and the people that support them are only able to look at short sighted goals, short term problems that should be ignored in favor of long term goals.

          • Tynam says

            This is true. Your proposed solution appears to be “ignore that problem, hope it goes away, and despise humans generally in the mean time”. I suggest that this will not, in fact, lead to asteroid mining.

            If you want humans to work on the long term, you need to (a) educate them, and (b) not have them be too busy trying to stay alive this week. Hence, the urgent need to help other people instead of sitting around feeling superior.

          • Kevin Anderson says

            My solution is don’t trainwreck the entire planet fixing a problem that isn’t a problem.

            The world isn’t going to crumble if we don’t solve starvation in Africa.

            Whether or not a country in the interior of Africa is completely depopulated of people or not has very little to do with the continued technological advancement of the human race.

            Is it awful? Absolutely. It’s emotionally heartbreaking.

            But we can’t expend all our energy trying to save everyone, or we won’t save anyone.

          • Tynam says

            Fixing global education and starvation problems is the cheapest, easiest, most reliable way to improve our technical advancement. It is cheaper and more productive than ANYTHING else we can do. You are flat out, completely, wrong.

            It’s only the arrogance of privilege that lets you look at that mass of engineers, mathematicians and scientists – none of whom will ever contribute anything to our advancement – and say “isn’t a problem”.

            All our advancement to date was achieved by the less than 5% of the species in a position to do so. Give the other 95% a chance to engineer… and we make 20 times as much progress.

            The vast majority of the technical capability of the human species is wasted because the people who have it are too busy starving.

          • Guest says

            There you go again, assuming we need “all the resources” where you forget that food grows. From trees, I might add.

          • Davis Bigelow says

            In my youth, the world was going to end due to starvation – induced
            by overpopulation – and that most certainly would all take place by the
            year 2000. (I didn’t believe it then either, but lots of people did.)
            And while I’m ranting, I should also mention that in the old history
            books, the earth was claimed to be much younger and the dinosaurs lived
            not nearly so long ago as the books now claim. It amazes me how carbon
            dating done today can yield such a different result in yesteryear – the
            process is done the same way as before ( so the “better technology now
            days” card can’t be played here). And what is the definition of
            insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different
            result? Perhaps not. Perhaps real insanity is doing the same test over
            and over and getting a drastically different result that then gets
            believed by millions of us. My point is, experts have a poor track
            record in the truth telling department, so don’t swallow everything you
            hear, because the experts are sometimes not even as accurate as 1960′s
            weathermen. The fact is, and it is a fact, the entire current population
            of the earth could be fed sufficiently if the entire Canadian province
            of Saskatchewan was put under cultivation. The real problem is the same
            problem as there has nearly always been – greed leading to corruption.
            And the result of corruption, mingled with greed, is that the poor and
            powerless suffer and die. And until everyone gets that and then behaves
            themselves, no amount of food will save us. Greed and corruption only
            lead one place – and if you look back at history, I won’t have to tell
            you what that unhappy place is.

            Just a thought or two while you all argue among yourselves from such shaky positions of supposed strength. Be careful who’s wagon you hitch yourself to.
            Davis

          • Guest says

            So you’re generalizing a group of people for having intellectual limitations where you have none to defend your own inaction, and yet even still you persist as being part of the problem rather, by causing insult and injury, to satisfy your own deficit in emotional neediness. Fascinating. May I write a study on your psychological reasoning.

        • Ben says

          If you practice what you preach, make sure you don’t ever consume a single resource when you are shooting. Wanna be humanitarian? Go somewhere else.

    • Justin Evans says

      I don’t think it was wasted but if you’re worried about it, I’ll lick up as much as I can from the ladies:)

    • baker_tony says

      Why on EARTH are you typing on a forum when you could rush out and feed/clothe/shelter some hungry children? You hypercritical MONSTER!!!

    • David Elliott says

      Hey guys, just cool it a little. You all seem to be shredding each other to pieces with your words on here like your lives/reputation are depending on it.

      Disagreement is fine, but please don’t turn it into a mud slinging contest and devalue each other. Actions are worth a thousand words, and none of you have the ability to judge a whole person’s character or hypocrisy or lack of it based on a few words shared on this thread.

    • Ben Jenkins says

      Pretty sure milk is overproduced right now and there is more supply than there is demand. But go ahead, hell why are we eating 3 meals a day when 1 could go to the hungry and homeless?

    • fourthletter says

      Is Milk a resource in short supply? And do the models not have the right to choose how they use their own bodies?

    • James says

      @Iybram; You’re missing the point. Objectifying women has nothing to do with this series. At the end of the day you do need to come up with an image that anyone can identify with and just like without getting into the clever creative stuff. I like these photos, they’re nice to look at but that doesn’t make the girls an object. The Photog has an interest in high speed work and from that took the idea of using fluids to dress the models. The Models would have either volunteered to take part or have been paid and it was entirely their decision, no one is being used.
      Wasting milk? Perhaps, but it’s just the medium he chose to work with. Maybe daVinci was wasting his oils?

    • fourthletter says

      He bought the milk he didn’t take it from anyone, Milk is not in short supply had he not bought it for the photo shoot it would not have magically appeared with starving children or poor families.

    • Rick says

      Don’t know much about the dairy industry do you. Tens of thousands of gallons of milk are disposed of every day worldwide either for lack of a market or due to production quota limits set by price supports.

  7. MetaLibra says

    Really interesting concepts and the photos are very intriguing… But I just find the thought, that it’s a person being covered in a liquid that’s designed for calves’ nourishment and growth, a little strange.

  8. marcie says

    what about the real concept of pin up girls, I mean REAL WOMEN? These are models, perfect bodies, no fleash and bone girls. Revise the concepts, dudes

    • TheTruthHurts129 says

      Uh, models are real women too. Women are women…

      I get it, you don’t want women to be judged so harshly on their physical appearance and you think models put up an unrealistic standard. But here you are, judging the models harshly by their physical appearance. Dont be a hypocrite

      • marcie says

        Nobody is judging. I want to see the old concept of pin up girls, thats all. If I wanted to see models, I would look at a runaway parade.

        • lindsayanng says

          You CLEARLY insunuated that the girls in the pictures are not “real”.. but i bet if you ask their mommas who pushed them out they would disagree.

          Your comment is nothing but an angry person who doesn’t seem to like to see body types outside of their own.

          • marcie says

            they are not real looking, come on!
            be honest! not all the women in the world look that way!!!
            you know what?
            Whatever! ;) peace

          • lindsayanng says

            Who are you to say what WOMAN is REAL LOOKING!! Can you not wrap your head around the fact that ALL women are REAL WOMEN! You decreeing that these women are somehow not real women is just as bad as me saying that fat women aren’t real women, they’re just beasts.

            ALL body types exist among women. ALL ARE FUCKING REAL you hippocrate

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>