| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/25/2006 04:15:09 PM · #26 |
Glad you have learned your lesson. :-)
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
DPC rules for shooting nudes:
Rule Number 1 : Always use proper safety gear.
Rule Number 2: Never equate your bum with cheese for any reason.
 |
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:21:47 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by talmy:
Glad you have learned your lesson. :-)
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
DPC rules for shooting nudes:
Rule Number 1 : Always use proper safety gear.
Rule Number 2: Never equate your bum with cheese for any reason.
|
|
I don't think the cheese photo did very well.
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:22:50 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Mephisto:
Originally posted by Nelzie:
My line is, "If it shows genitals or the act, then it's pornography." |
No, i'm not with you.look at anastasias site ! There are also pics showing genitals.but is it pornography???imo it's true art work!!! |
I saw the images you are referring to and I believe that they do cross the line.
The dude all posed, with his wang out, is something that one would expect to see in a pornographic magazine depicting naked men. The image that shows both male and female genitals (at least the female one) is something I would expect to see in a spread of pornographic images.
To me, the major difference between an artistic nude that nears the genital region and a pornographic depiction is that the latter leaves nothing to the imagination, while the former provides just a hint that the mind must fill in. |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:31:52 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by Palmetto_Pixels:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
No, i'm not with you.look at anastasias site! There are also pics showing gentals.but is it pornography.imo it's true art work!!! |
I completely agree... There are some outstanding shots in there. Wonderful work!!! |
The only problem I have with these nudes is the fact that I cringe from the thought of pain every time I look at them. Prince Albert should remain in the can. |
The ring looks kinda painful..OUCH! |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:32:19 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
Originally posted by Nelzie:
My line is, "If it shows genitals or the act, then it's pornography." |
No, i'm not with you.look at anastasias site ! There are also pics showing genitals.but is it pornography???imo it's true art work!!! |
I saw the images you are referring to and I believe that they do cross the line.
The dude all posed, with his wang out, is something that one would expect to see in a pornographic magazine depicting naked men. The image that shows both male and female genitals (at least the female one) is something I would expect to see in a spread of pornographic images.
To me, the major difference between an artistic nude that nears the genital region and a pornographic depiction is that the latter leaves nothing to the imagination, while the former provides just a hint that the mind must fill in. |
True, must thet the dude one is risky. (Doesn't show too much though - not much to show). The other one is diferent. I like it.
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:33:46 PM · #31 |
Beautiful shots! Especially the ones in the abandoned room with the yellow and green wall! Outstanding! |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:34:01 PM · #32 |
This is my contribution to the nudes;
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:41:22 PM · #33 |
|
|
|
01/26/2006 02:05:38 AM · #34 |
Thank you guys for your nice words about my photography.
I agree , a few photos appear to be a bit provacative, but I see a line between pornography and erotics, and showing genetals can be a problem sometimes, but depending on how you show them and in what light you put them in.
My Anatomy Project also shows photos of mens and womans hands next to each other, mans and womans faces...but sorry people, don't genetals belong to human anatomy? I am sorry if someone felt differently, so juts don't look another time at them ok?
Anastasia
//www.kapluggin.com
Message edited by author 2006-01-26 02:06:03.
|
|
|
|
01/26/2006 02:21:00 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Anastasia:
...but I see a line between pornography and erotics, and showing genetals can be a problem sometimes, but depending on how you show them and in what light you put them in.
...but sorry people, don't genetals belong to human anatomy? |
I agree with you 100%.
I recall seeing a photo not too long ago of a woman's labia... very abstractly presented. At first glance I assumed it was a flower, actually took me reading the photogs comments to figure out what it was.
I'd do that shot and try to ribbon with it, if ...
1) I could pull it off and do a good job at it.
2) I wouldn't get banned or suspended from the site for doing it.
Why not? If the voters think it's a flower, it's a flower, right?
Don't worry, I don't have the nerve to put something like that on DPC ;-) I'm not that good with abstracts anyway.
Message edited by author 2006-01-26 02:22:19.
|
|
|
|
01/26/2006 02:25:20 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by Nelzie:
My line is, "If it shows genitals or the act, then it's pornography." |
One must first consider the artist's' aim of creating the their work before she or he is labeled a pornographer.
The Encyclopedia of Ethics defines pornography as "the sexually explicit depiction of persons, in words or images, created with the primary, proximate aim, and reasonable hope, of eliciting significant sexual arousal on the part of the consumer of such materials.
This aim is furthest from the mind of fine art photographers photographing nudes showing genitals. Like Anastasia mentioned genitals belong to the human anatomy. If they are depicted in a non-distasteful way, then why be ashamed? Painters and sculptors have been depicting genitals in their work for centuries! |
|
|
|
01/26/2006 02:29:07 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Why not? If the voters think it's a flower, it's a flower, right?
Don't worry, I don't have the nerve to put something like that on DPC ;-) I'm not that good with abstracts anyway. |
thanks man....
I wouldn't have a nerve to do it here on DPC, may be here in Europe it would be ok but the policy of DPC says - no genitals, I think it also means no abstract ones :-P
Message edited by author 2006-01-26 02:29:22.
|
|
|
|
01/26/2006 08:37:04 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by Anastasia:
|
Anastasia, I love the picture "Air" on your web site. Along with others this is superb. |
|
|
|
01/26/2006 09:32:43 AM · #39 |
Heres one of my best "nude" shots.
HÃ¥kon
Message edited by author 2006-01-26 09:33:47. |
|
|
|
02/20/2006 01:16:29 AM · #40 |
I think the shoot I did last week had some of my best in it:
//www.modelmayhem.com/pics.php?id=91377
|
|
|
|
02/20/2006 01:59:35 AM · #41 |
| As an Aside I just read that Beverly Goodway has just retired he was for 33 years photographer of the Sun's page 3 girls. Nice work if you can get it !!!!! |
|
|
|
02/20/2006 02:02:15 AM · #42 |
i only have 1 :(
i found anuther
Message edited by author 2006-02-20 02:11:09. |
|
|
|
02/20/2006 11:40:54 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by marcellieb:
As mentioned on another thread - nude pics on this site are extremely tasteful and very exotic. The best photographer (according to me) is donica22
Don't know if these shots are of herself, but very tastefully done. Personally - my wife will kill me if I get a model and take nude pics;wife will never pose - therefor I will stay at photographing boats,animals,flowers etc. |
The pics of danica22 are NOT of her. She has a beautiful model though that has afforded her some great shots. |
|
|
|
02/21/2006 12:40:19 AM · #44 |
Here's a couple of mine! Tis hard to come across models willing to do it but luckily had a friend here who helped out! They were really just out-takes from my Off Centred Subject II entry!
 
Message edited by author 2006-02-21 00:41:03. |
|
|
|
02/21/2006 02:14:40 PM · #45 |
I agree with you 100% kiwiness.
The cultures I've seen have different views of nudity. In the US I see the media has been bombarding the public with the message NUDITY=SEX for quite some time, which I think is sad and incorrect. This has built a generation (or more) of people who cannot mentally unlink nudity and sex, and therefore, nomatter the photographers intentions consider all nude bodies to be sexual/pornographic.
I personally believe nudity is the natural state of the human body, and sex is just sex. They are seperate entities.
Photographic study of the human form (in fine art, not pornography) is one of the most challenging subjects I've ever encountered in photography. That challenge makes success with this subject even more rewarding.
I must join the choir of voices in saying congratulations to Anastasia on your wonderful work. Your work is inspirational to me in trying to learn to photograph this difficult yet rewarding subject.
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Nelzie:
My line is, "If it shows genitals or the act, then it's pornography." |
One must first consider the artist's' aim of creating the their work before she or he is labeled a pornographer.
The Encyclopedia of Ethics defines pornography as "the sexually explicit depiction of persons, in words or images, created with the primary, proximate aim, and reasonable hope, of eliciting significant sexual arousal on the part of the consumer of such materials.
This aim is furthest from the mind of fine art photographers photographing nudes showing genitals. Like Anastasia mentioned genitals belong to the human anatomy. If they are depicted in a non-distasteful way, then why be ashamed? Painters and sculptors have been depicting genitals in their work for centuries! |
|
|
|
|
02/21/2006 02:29:42 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by alien2thisworld:
I personally believe nudity is the natural state of the human body, and sex is just sex. They are seperate entities. |
The strange thing is that people who try to shield their children the most from such natural views are the ones who's kids wind up in those Girls Gone Wild...Spring Break videos.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2006 03:06:20 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Anastasia:
Thank you guys for your nice words about my photography.
I agree , a few photos appear to be a bit provacative, but I see a line between pornography and erotics, and showing genetals can be a problem sometimes, but depending on how you show them and in what light you put them in.
My Anatomy Project also shows photos of mens and womans hands next to each other, mans and womans faces...but sorry people, don't genetals belong to human anatomy? I am sorry if someone felt differently, so juts don't look another time at them ok?
Anastasia
//www.kapluggin.com |
I agree 100%.. it all depends on how it is done. The images that I saw on your pbase site are not pornographic, but very tastefully done, albeit the one image I just cringed at. Not because it was the guy's penis, but because all I could think of was... ouch!
Pawdrix though brought something up that I've said for awhile. Although I don't think it's what he was meaning. It just got me to thinking. ;)
I'll use you Anastasia as example (grins)... your images are art to me. However, the images that we see on the infomercials for Girls Gone Wild are not, even with the little X covering the nipples. And please.. come on, we ALL know what it under the X.. it's a nipple people. Get over it!
The American Heritage Dictionary (republished 1976) - yes, my dictionary is old ;):
Pornography: n. Written, graphic, or other forms of communication intended to excite lascivious feelings.
Anastasia's images I don't think were intended for that. Girls Gone Wild, is. ;)
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
02/22/2006 03:21:23 PM · #48 |
Less is more?? I like shots that allow the imagination to fill in the parts that you don't see.
 |
|
|
|
04/21/2007 09:17:28 PM · #49 |
The difference between art and pornography is whether the people involved were used and or demoralised. In front of or behind the camera, pencil, pen, brush, etc...
Art is not always positive to be sure. I don't "like" Picasso. I find his work disturbing, though it elicits emotion in me, from me, so I have to deem it art.
Pornography could arguably also elicit emotion, but I think this would be wrong. Porn' elicits a more primeval response and that in turn provokes emotion.
The images I have seen linked in these forums are in no way pornographic, IMO.
I find the idea that genitalia simply as genitalia to be considered pornographic, as a blanket statement to be absurd. Where does the negative come from ? These are just parts of the body. That they are part of our waste disposal, and reproductive system at the same instance, only proves God has a weird sense of humor.
I have always found the female parts to be beautiful, and like someone else mentioned, akin in someway to the form of a flower. Beautiful. Celebratory of women ! Something to be admired.
Message edited by author 2007-04-21 21:18:50. |
|
|
|
04/22/2007 06:27:18 AM · #50 |
|
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: 09/01/2025 05:58:11 AM EDT.
