What is acceptable and what is not?

10/17/2007 03:44:40 PM · #26

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

The effect on younger brains can be possitive. If you sat and viewed these images with them and explained what is possitive and what is negative and why, I think they would be better off than just shielding them from it.

If its a staged image of something "bad" explain its make believe and explain the positives about lighting and special effects and how to position a model.

If its a real image explain what lead up to such a terrible event.

So, I think what I understand is that if I sit with any of younger children, say about 5 to 10, which now this will be very normal in the short future, and show them a porn, or couple having sex, is ok, because that's how we produce and they should learn ... I don't know... I think brain has it's time to learn things. Everything should be in order, and when time comes, child should learn whatever is next, instead of loading their brains with unnecessary information that could be harmful...

Having said all that, I wasn't even worry about kids watching these photos, rather "I" was the one who felt bad about them... and I am not even 9... maybe I should of exposed to all that horror stuff when I was 9 maybe I would be just fine today; smoking my whatever, drinking and don't care about a thing...

Naaahâ�¦ I rather rant. I know there are people reading this thinking the same thing I do, and maybe, just maybe, I also be their voice as well.

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/17/2007 03:55:54 PM · #27

I never said porn. That will come later for sure. I was talking about DPC photos, nighly news, photojournalism, etc..

An explanation by you the parent of a war photo could be very possitive. you would have the opportunity to explain how terrible war is and why we fight them and how we should never forget past wars etc..

I sometimes have a problem with the mentality that everything has its order. When is the proper time to teach a child about some of the not so nice aspects of our world? Is there a specific age?

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

10/17/2007 04:07:15 PM · #28

There should be specific age for everything.

It's unfortunate that people like myself, cannot hide from the thing that we don't like, it is us who will have to adjust... that's a shame. There is no other world.

I rant, because of the images I saw here, and I have done thins once before. for an abused child photo. I am just not understating a person who will model their kids that way... but there are all kinds of people out there.

For the other websites, I am pretty sure I can find one that actually inspects the photos before publish them, and I know there are sites there very restrict and also the things you don't want to see is hidden so deep, they are not popping front of you at all. and no, I am not talking about kitty sites either.

Anyway, I would like to close this argument. As I said, I feel better now since everything gone out of my chest... I had to tell it though. It bothered me for a long time (a few days)

:)

fotomann_forever

10/17/2007 04:07:36 PM · #29

Originally posted by dudephil:

Wow. That's awful. Have you tried this site?

Can I turn a large snake loose on that site? :-)

--------

Anyway, I remember a shot I saw in a few books as a child. It was a garter snake chasing a frog. I remember the shot vividly, as I loved that photo. I remember it was in a science book for class and in another book I owned.

It's just my opinion, that someone is a snake owner, or knows someone who is. The snakes has to eat and cares less if that is photographed. The shot definitely meets the challenge, and if I were going to take time to vote would have given it a ten. If the author choses to put it up as stock, I'm absolutely positive that it will end up in at least one science book.

I won't say "grow up" because I myself have been known to get bent out of shape about things that go on at DPC. But, just remember that that shot is to its creator, art, as I'm sure it is to others, including myself.

DPC is getting huge, so I'm sure more and more shots will come along that offend you, offend me and offend everyone else here. The octopussy shot still offends me.

Now, about this leaving thing.... you may, but if you leave, your voice will leave with you. Things you want changes will almost certainly stay the same. Give that some thought.

Take care.

Message edited by author 2007-10-17 16:10:43.

rossbilly

Nikon D200

10/17/2007 04:07:49 PM · #30

Seriously? you REALLY have a problem with seeing a picture of a snake eating a mouse, to the point of calling it 'animal cruelty'?

you should have swallowed the BLUE pill, Neo...

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/17/2007 04:10:17 PM · #31

Originally posted by rossbilly:

Seriously? you REALLY have a problem with seeing a picture of a snake eating a mouse, to the point of calling it 'animal cruelty'?

you should have swallowed the BLUE pill, Neo...

You are correct Morpheus ;)

--------

I do NOT like to "see" any animal or human dying. I know they do die, and I can imagine the way they die, there is no reason for me to see it... I like to watch "living" things not dying things. I don't like to watch people fighting running around bloody... no, I like to see people walking in the park, having good conversation, I already know what it like is to be running around bleeding, and fighting... I don't have to see it again and again. There is no reason and it does not excite me and makes me want to go out shoot things or have fun with what I see.

Sometimes, I am thinking some of us are in wrong place, or in wrong time... it comes to that red pill blue pill I think :P

Message edited by author 2007-10-17 16:16:52.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

10/17/2007 04:10:20 PM · #32

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

It's unfortunate that people like myself, cannot hide from the thing that we don't like, it is us who will have to adjust... that's a shame. There is no other world.

You just need more guns. Do a little reading and you can see that it is possible to only see the things you want to see. You just have to shoot/gas/expel everyone who keeps saying/doing/posting the stuff you don't want to see.

I am all for your plan. Hopefully we agree on every nuance though, otherwise it's Siberia for you in the end.

bdenny

Sony DSC-H5

10/17/2007 04:14:10 PM · #33

Originally posted by rossbilly:

Seriously? you REALLY have a problem with seeing a picture of a snake eating a mouse

I was kinda disturbed by it myself. Enough to keep it on my screen and make myself look away in disgust. Only to peek again and think of how gross (yet completely natural) it was. Then I voted and moved on...

Rino63

Canon EOS-50D

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Canon

10/17/2007 04:35:53 PM · #34

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

Originally posted by rossbilly:
Seriously? you REALLY have a problem with seeing a picture of a snake eating a mouse, to the point of calling it 'animal cruelty'?

you should have swallowed the BLUE pill, Neo...

You are correct Morpheus ;)

I agree!

I think that on dpc there are too much photos with sugar and honey. in every contest we have always a lot of flowers, cats, always the same still life in 2 thousand different ways, landscapes and few good ideas.
photos with an emotive content are fews.

--------

I do NOT like to "see" any animal or human dying. I know they do die, and I can imagine the way they die, there is no reason for me to see it... I like to watch "living" things not dying things. I don't like to watch people fighting running around bloody... no, I like to see people walking in the park, having good conversation, I already know what it like is to be running around bleeding, and fighting... I don't have to see it again and again. There is no reason and it does not excite me and makes me want to go out shoot things or have fun with what I see.

Sometimes, I am thinking some of us are in wrong place, or in wrong time... it comes to that red pill blue pill I think :P

JulieG

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/17/2007 08:15:08 PM · #35

I have to say that I am in agreement with the OP. There have been a few pictures on DPC that have shocked me, not of a sexual nature but well suited for a horror film, eg "Feeling Rotten". Sorry to SImms but that is the picture that comes to mind. Why do censorship for sex, but not for horror. To be honest, a picture of naked folk on bicycles (which was dq'd) shocks me far less than pictures of a disturbing, horrific nature.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

10/17/2007 08:23:53 PM · #36

Originally posted by JulieG:

To be honest, a picture of naked folk on bicycles (which was dq'd) shocks me far less than pictures of a disturbing, horrific nature.

There are legal reasons to "censor" photographs that show genitalia, in particular, and other things related to sexual activity. That is why it is in the TOS. It's not so much peoples' sensitivities, though that may well be a factor, as it is protecting the site from legal action.

R.

rossbilly

Nikon D200

10/17/2007 08:26:24 PM · #37

I do understand that there are images some may not want to see. However, I was referring to calling that image 'animal cruelty'. Just looks like one animal eating its lunch, much like any of us eating (insert favorite meat here). Pretty sure its not the snake's fault it is without appendages. LOL

Good point Mr. Bear. ;)

Message edited by author 2007-10-17 20:27:24.

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

10/17/2007 08:42:51 PM · #38

Originally posted by rossbilly:

Just looks like one animal eating its lunch, much like any of us eating (insert favorite meat here).

Favourite meat... mousemeat!... no... mouseburger! Or perhaps... McMouse Happy Meal!

fotomann_forever

10/17/2007 08:52:48 PM · #39

Originally posted by jhonan:

McMouse Happy Meal!

Would you put it past Micky Ds to try that, if it were profitable? We are talking about the same company that was feeding us Rooburgers :-)

Beetle

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/17/2007 09:03:04 PM · #40

Leo, I thank you for your courage to speak out about this, although you probably knew that the "tough guys" around here would pounce on you, laugh and call you a sissy.

I am relieved to know that there are still a few people in the world who can be shocked and can be turned off by certain images.

I don't necessarily share your ALL your concerns and dislikes, but I totally understand where you're coming from.

Tough boys - I know you think YOU are right and he is wrong, YOU are cool and he is a sissy, etc..... but please try to at least hear him out and think about it.

Just because snakes eat mice, do we really really really need to show it off in graphic detail?
If I don't want to see it happening live, I can stay away from the snake that is about to be fed, or turn the other way if I should see one chase after a mouse. However, here on DPC I don't get that choice - one moment I am looking at something pleasant, next thing I know I am staring at pain, misery and death.... no warning at all.
We all know what happens when we use a toilet, but do we take photos of the end result just because we could and just because it is natural? No.... most sane people would sensor themselves even without rules to that regard.

We do NOT have to embrace everything indiscriminately, just because it exists.

JulieG

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/17/2007 09:28:08 PM · #41

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by JulieG:
To be honest, a picture of naked folk on bicycles (which was dq'd) shocks me far less than pictures of a disturbing, horrific nature.

There are legal reasons to "censor" photographs that show genitalia, in particular, and other things related to sexual activity. That is why it is in the TOS. It's not so much peoples' sensitivities, though that may well be a factor, as it is protecting the site from legal action.

R.

Well then, that begs the question, is the site doing the minimum that is necessary to keep it above board, or is the site being proacitve in making itself a well-respected safe, fun site on the net.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

10/17/2007 09:48:05 PM · #42

Originally posted by JulieG:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by JulieG:
To be honest, a picture of naked folk on bicycles (which was dq'd) shocks me far less than pictures of a disturbing, horrific nature.

There are legal reasons to "censor" photographs that show genitalia, in particular, and other things related to sexual activity. That is why it is in the TOS. It's not so much peoples' sensitivities, though that may well be a factor, as it is protecting the site from legal action.

R.

Well then, that begs the question, is the site doing the minimum that is necessary to keep it above board, or is the site being proacitve in making itself a well-respected safe, fun site on the net.

Legally, they've done what they have to do. There are laws regarding pornography and minors, for example, and the TOS takes that into account. There are no laws, as far as I know, regarding depictions of violence, so that does not have to be covered legally in the TOS. The TOS does have language in it regarding depictions of drug use, so that's more proactive than they legally have to be.

Violence is a whole 'nother issue. The site has to tread a tightrope between offending its members-at-large with graphic imagery and offending its members-at-large with blatant censorship. Granted, there are some here who would prefer never to have to look at images they consider offensive, but you can't rationally attempt to censor everything somebody might find offensive. You just can't do that and remain a site that's open to artistic exploration and growth.

The case of the snake eating the mouse, IMO, isn't even CLOSE to being debatable as far as potential censorship is concerned. It's an animal doing what animals do, how can you say it's "too graphic" and censor it? I can see at least an argument for limiting depictions of human depravity (though I don't buy the argument myself), but not for giving the dining snake the heave-ho, no matter that a few people find it disgusting. Hell, *I* found it disgusting. I think that's what the photographer intended...

R.

fotomann_forever

10/17/2007 10:07:36 PM · #43

Any site that allows depictions of sex or genitals has to be in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 2257. Most importantly, they would have to keep records maintaining that all models are over the age of 18.

For a user submit site, that would be rather difficult.

As Bear stated, there are no laws about violence or graphic materials. Is it hypocritical? Yes, but that's US Law.

Could DPC be more proactive on other subject matter? Sure, at the risk of censoring artistic license.

Phil

Canon EOS-7D

10/17/2007 10:26:27 PM · #44

Originally posted by Beetle:

Just because snakes eat mice, do we really really really need to show it off in graphic detail?
If I don't want to see it happening live, I can stay away from the snake that is about to be fed, or turn the other way if I should see one chase after a mouse. However, here on DPC I don't get that choice - one moment I am looking at something pleasant, next thing I know I am staring at pain, misery and death.... no warning at all.
We all know what happens when we use a toilet, but do we take photos of the end result just because we could and just because it is natural? No.... most sane people would sensor themselves even without rules to that regard.

We do NOT have to embrace everything indiscriminately, just because it exists.

For the record beetle, I can't stand feet. Something about feet just makes me cringe. I don't know what it is but it's always done that to me. Just because a foot is part of the human body does that mean we really, really , really need to show them in such a graphic detail?

Something was also mentioned about horror images being hidden or disallowed. I think this shot would fall in that category as well. Do you think you shouldn't be able to enter this shot in an expert editing challenge just because it bothers me?

10/17/2007 10:33:27 PM · #45

All we need is a little better taste on our photos. Laws, restrictions aside, the community what matters I think. Letâ��s be reasonable, and letâ��s take creative better pictures, instead of "we know" would be disgusting pictures in any levels.

I am serious when I say it sticks in my mind, those photos, and that's why I don't watch TV because stupid news sometimes passes something very horrible, like an accident taken from a copters , I don't want to see people or animals getting hurt in real life, in real time. It's not we all about... anyway; I am wishing weâ��d be a little bit more reasonable on the photos. If that's too much, well... I move on, and no one gets hurt :P

10/17/2007 10:43:23 PM · #46

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

I appreciate what you're saying. You'd love it if we all, collectively, decided to not enter in challenges, or even post up at all, graphic, violent, disturbing images that others might be troubled by. On the surface of it it's a reasonable enough wish, but it's not going to happen and I'm not sure we'd collectively be better off it did, although admittedly you and some others would sleep better at night.

But looking at it from the other perspective, you're asking the site itself to crack down on "disturbing" images, and pleading with DPCers to exercise some restraint by whitewashing their view of the world to match the more muted tones you prefer. I don't think this is right.

R.

10/17/2007 10:52:24 PM · #47

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

...you're asking the site itself to crack down on "disturbing" images, and pleading with DPCers to exercise some restraint by whitewashing their view of the world to match the more muted tones you prefer. I don't think this is right...

When it comes to "rights" everyone has all the rights all the time.. This is a free world. That's why I choose not to watch TV, or violent movies, or keep myself away from any trouble that causes pain, not on me, but on someone else.

I do know that I came here (DPC) after things already running, I can't change anything, I don't want to change anything with any force, unless if there is a law for it. This thread is a rant, I wanted to tell people, and wanted them to know what and why I don't like. It's up to you as DPC community to agree or disagree. I donâ��t care honestly, I can go find some other place to learn and experience my photos. But I am trying to avoid it, as much as I can.

Again, my intention is not to change things, but I wish things would be better for people like myself. Who knows, maybe others will come to their senses, and change better way. I don't know, I'd never know without my voice. or any voice that matter.