| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/16/2004 05:04:27 PM · #76 |
Won't bother, cos it will be close up of a flower!
Or of shop dummies...and man, there are plenty of shop dummies about! |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:08:55 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by drgsoell:
Originally posted by Gurilla:
My wife has just become a member as a gift for her birthday! Can't wait to see her face when she finds out its NUDE! lol |
Can't wait to see YOUR face when she asks you to be the model.
drg |
Your prediction has become reality. As I had asked her first I had to agree :( bummer.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:33:28 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Gurilla:
Your prediction has become reality. As I had asked her first I had to agree :( bummer. |
he he. 'bummer'. please don't discuss the contents of your photo before the voting begins :) |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:35:19 PM · #79 |
Havent read all of the replies but please...
SOMEBODY CALL DR. JONES!!!
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:35:42 PM · #80 |
| w00t. someone just entered a photo for the nude challenge. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:38:46 PM · #81 |
| Well, it's not that difficult to capture nude, is it? |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:40:00 PM · #82 |
| question? Can we use the healing tool in PS to remove blemishes? |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 05:58:29 PM · #83 |
| maybe a naked blowup doll is a safe bet, but i dont think it will get u many points..lmao!! |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 06:14:23 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by midnightride2:
question? Can we use the healing tool in PS to remove blemishes? |
Yep :)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 06:15:20 PM · #85 |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 06:22:26 PM · #86 |
This reminds me of ad from a few years ago when I was in an Ad Agency, Fair play to the Creative Director who managed to convince THIRTY SIX of her own staff to pose nude for and ad for their own company!
I wonder just how much free drinks were imbibed before the shoot.
It did make a brilliant double page spread though...
Grey Direct Pose Nude
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 08:13:59 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by Tranquil:
Havent read all of the replies but please...
SOMEBODY CALL DR. JONES!!! |
We might as well give him the blue ribbon right now...LOL
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 08:50:45 PM · #88 |
*******************************************************************
I really think that what this challenge meant was not nudity, but implied nudity.
*******************************************************************
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 08:55:50 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
*******************************************************************
I really think that what this challenge meant was not nudity, but implied nudity.
******************************************************************* |
Where's skief when we need him?
|
|
|
|
08/17/2004 06:19:24 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by hsteg:
im 14. cant do this one. and if i could, whose gonna pose nude for a 14 year old? |
Father, mother, older sister or brother ?
|
|
|
|
08/17/2004 06:21:00 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by willem:
Originally posted by hsteg:
im 14. cant do this one. and if i could, whose gonna pose nude for a 14 year old? |
Father, mother, older sister or brother ? |
i think the first two would be kind of odd, and the last two i dont have, as my brother is younger.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2004 06:21:17 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by willem:
Originally posted by hsteg:
im 14. cant do this one. and if i could, whose gonna pose nude for a 14 year old? |
Father, mother, older sister or brother ? |
Emphasis my own...but seriously now...
|
|
|
|
08/17/2004 06:24:20 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by hsteg:
Originally posted by willem:
Originally posted by hsteg:
im 14. cant do this one. and if i could, whose gonna pose nude for a 14 year old? |
Father, mother, older sister or brother ? |
i think the first two would be kind of odd, and the last two i dont have, as my brother is younger. |
Self portrait. I'll do it if you do it :P
|
|
|
|
08/17/2004 06:28:15 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by Konador:
There's nothing wrong with a bit of hair I shouldnt think. If anything, it could cover up the squidgy parts, hehe :) |
Mmmmmmm.... squidgy bits...
OK back to reality, I think it's a shame that a shot including a non-erect penis would still be unacceptable/ pornographic. Very prudish.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2004 12:39:57 AM · #95 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
OK back to reality, I think it's a shame that a shot including a non-erect penis would still be unacceptable/ pornographic. Very prudish. |
I don't consider myself a prude, and I'm all for artistic nudes of both genders, but the problem with male 'squidgy parts' is the often simply look silly IMHO.
Maybe it's a blokes perspective on the thing (sic) and I've seen a lot of male nude shots that are really good, but many that include the dangly bits don't look right. Possibly because even the most taught and toned fella has, well, spare skin in that area?
Dunno, my 2c worth... |
|
|
|
08/18/2004 02:28:29 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by Konador:
There's nothing wrong with a bit of hair I shouldnt think. If anything, it could cover up the squidgy parts, hehe :) |
Mmmmmmm.... squidgy bits...
OK back to reality, I think it's a shame that a shot including a non-erect penis would still be unacceptable/ pornographic. Very prudish. |
As far as I am concerned showing or not is just fine. I have had my body, and been married, long enough to be well past the cringe or drool stages the society has tried to instill in me.
---
But it does make me wonder why the restriction is there in the first place. Sure there would be the ocasional tasteless photo, but that could be dealt with quickly enough to not be an issue. It could also be an attempt to reduce the porn-surfer traffic, but the porn-surfers would soon grow tired of the lack of anything that could be considered porn (or nearly anything, anyway). There is always the possibility of legal issues, but if that was the case wouldn't a lawyer have included it in the TOS? The 'site' is already covered by the inclusion of 'You understand that by using the Website, you may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable.' in the TOS.
Does anyone know why the squidgy bits are explicitly excluded? I have wondered in the past, but this challenge has brought home again just how little sense it makes to me. Am I just missing something?
David
|
|
|
|
08/18/2004 02:37:56 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
Does anyone know why the squidgy bits are explicitly excluded? I have wondered in the past, but this challenge has brought home again just how little sense it makes to me. Am I just missing something?
David |
Because the site was started and owned by GUYS!! (C:
My last "nude" (was in the coinciding challenge with nude last time-Unanswered Questions) is sneaky.
Message edited by author 2004-08-18 02:40:56.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2004 03:33:43 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by ohmark:
Originally posted by Kavey:
OK back to reality, I think it's a shame that a shot including a non-erect penis would still be unacceptable/ pornographic. Very prudish. |
I don't consider myself a prude, and I'm all for artistic nudes of both genders, but the problem with male 'squidgy parts' is the often simply look silly IMHO.
Maybe it's a blokes perspective on the thing (sic) and I've seen a lot of male nude shots that are really good, but many that include the dangly bits don't look right. Possibly because even the most taught and toned fella has, well, spare skin in that area?
Dunno, my 2c worth... |
Male perspective on the thing...probably more like Vanishing Point!! |
|
|
|
08/18/2004 03:57:08 PM · #99 |
Aw, people, don't be scared, just do a self portrait. It elements the awkwardness of asking someone else and maybe you'll get some online props for your hot bod :D:D:D
|
|
|
|
08/18/2004 03:57:09 PM · #100 |
I can understand the reasons for excluding depictions of a penis or vagina, but it is still somewhat unfortunate. As many have noted, the vast majority of the first nude challenge (and of nude photography in general) features female models. Some people have complained about that, and I think it'd be great to see more equal representation between the sexes.
However, with the rules as they are, shooting a male nude without including prohibited body parts is immensely more difficult than shooting a female nude. Of those male nudes that are shot, they are restricted to fewer available poses and angles as well.
In other words, regardless of historical or social expectations or the gender make-up of this site, the site rules alone assure an extremely lopsided collection of entries into the nude challenge.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 09:42:59 AM EDT.
