| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/28/2006 07:03:15 AM · #26 |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:07:07 AM · #27 |
| Did I spell it wrong? Checking M-W.com... |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:07:57 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by silverscreen:
Being a European I have to say that I don't get this discussion at all... |
Absolutely! neither do I get it on this side of the ocean! maybe thinking a little more "out of the... cloth" over there?
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
What I really find interesting is that no one screams foul if the images are showing violence or drug useage, but yet are offended by the human body. |
Again!! I find those far more disgusting...
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:15:28 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by skylercall:
Did I spell it wrong? Checking M-W.com... |
I was only messing with you! :-) - I think the word you're looking for is 'ditto' - I thought it was funny, because Dido is a singer. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:47:50 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
I don't know how many others this applies to, but I could get fired on-the-spot if a single nude image appeared on my machine at work. And it won't necessarily have to be seen by anyone, they could check my internet cache for it as well. Therefore, I simply cannot vote (during downtime of course!) at work, because I cannot risk it.
I also prefer that my kids don't view any nudity. They're big enough to understand. It's just a preference. Nobody will get fired over it.
But in either case, simply honoring the "Do not display nude photos" preference would solve the problem for each of us. It wouldn't be hard to code, and I don't believe it will skew my voting pattern.
So my vote would be to honor the flag no matter where the image is found. |
I've never really understood this issue until starting an office job and not having internet connection at home - all my DPC-ing has to be done 'at work' ie in my lunch break, after work, or for example when an analysis is running on my desktop and I can't get anything else done. I've obviously clicked the "Hide Adult Content" button, but its meant that all of my voting has ground to a halt because you never know what pictures coming up next. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:50:30 AM · #31 |
It appears that i am the first Aussie to comment on this subject, but here goes. I have no problems with nudity but as photography goes there must be some "art" thrown in there. What i mean by that is some pics look just like a nude pic that you may do with your partner for fun sake, some have an artistic flare and some are just down right fantastic, but then how do we better ourselves if we can not get critisism from our peers.
If the critics keep their comments to positive and constructive ones, people will learn.
If there is a way for the managers of this site to simplify the way in which Parents can police this " problem ", that would be great as well.
As a parent myself, even though my kids are now adults, but when they were young i did every thing in my power to teach as well as protect them...
Hope this makes sense |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 07:50:42 AM · #32 |
My parents never really taught me that nudity or sex is 'good' or 'bad' for as long as I remember...I knew the anatomical differences, and after a certain age (maybe 7-9) I started exploring the matter on my own when I started to sense that the rest of society seems to think something bigger of it. Everything I saw seemed to scream at me that it was bad or shameful, however, I still sought out nude or pornographic material online or on television or from my mom's stack of Cosmo magazines, etc. It was pure and simple curiosity about what something everyone else in the world seemed to be making a huge deal out of, and I never understood why.
To put things in perspective, I never saw another nude body (with the exception of one public bath outside of the continent) nor engaged in anything physical until after high school anyway. And I am not the person who sleeps in a different bed every night, either.
This is why I find it extremely strange for me to be at a site with mostly adults who are parents, or are of the age to be sensitive about these things, and hear them constantly scream about protecting the children, why you can't show a 13 year old a picture of a sexy lady, why you can't talk to a 15 year old and make sexual jokes. The first time I was exposed to sexual talk online, I was probably about 11 years old, and it was in a chat room where nobody knew my age and someone was trying to cyber with me. But because I had already seen plenty of sexual content by that point, I recognized it immediately as inappropriate and backed out of it. Experience is the best teacher; you can tell your children up and down how sex is bad and certain words mean bad things, but until they see it in action themselves they will not understand why.
I don't mean to direct this at anybody in specific, but if you think your 15 year old daughter does not come into contact with avalanches of words and images about sex and nudity, you are very likely wrong. I don't know if it's this generation, or if it's the technology, or just how easy it is to access things, but they will see it, whether or not they try to.
People will tell me that I won't feel this way when I have my own kids, but I'm at least 90% sure that I'm not going to shelter them as much as I see them being sheltered now. I congradulate and respect everyone who takes such a proactive stance on parenting and truly desires to be responsible for how their children are raised, but children are not made of sugar, therefore they will not melt if you let the outside in the rain.
It boggles my mind how ridiculously prude and backwards this country is sometime.
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 08:20:24 AM · #33 |
I do want to clarify one thing. A good number of posts here are understandably missing the point. I understand that nudity in itself isn't really a bad thing and there are many here arguing that nudity is not a big deal. I'm more talking about sexual inuendo or adult content where a sexual theme is suggested. Is nudity perhaps ok so long as it doesn't suggest "sex"?
As far as glad2bdad's comments about when was the last time someone complained about their 11 year old seeing something vulgar I submit to you that it was only two days ago in a thread called "Hide Adult Content - AA Battery" or something like that. The thread starter was a person complaining about their 11 year old seeing a vulgar picture and how they thought they shouldn't have seen it because they had hide adult content checked on their profile. Because the discussion turned to talking about a shot in a particular challenge the thread was locked so you may have problems finding it now.
Again, I don't mind a voter saying they find a picture offensive or don't like it. What I get bothered by are those who tell the photographer that the picture doesn't belong on DPC because it is a family site or because children are present. My point is simply that if it is a family site then we should change the rules to forbid all sexual content in the rules and just make it official. Otherwise, I'd hope voters would not remind photographers that children view the site.
Also, it would be nice (though I know it will never happen) if voters would score a photo MORE on its photographic qualities and a little less on the subject matter. Do NOT get me wrong. The subject matter does play a part in the overall score but when someone gives a photo a 1 or 2 with a comment that they find the picture disgusting and then leaves no comment about the photograph tecnicals (lighting, sharpness, composition, etc) then it seems the vote is being heavily weighted purely on their distaste of the subject matter. Isn't a photo more than just the subject matter? Personally I don't like a million shots of flowers but I have given flowers high scores because it was a great photo. I also get tired of splash shots all the time but again, I'll give one a high score if it's really good. I think voters who find sexual content offensive are auto hitting 1 or 2 to send a point. They want the photographers score to get hammered so bad that he or she won't be inclinded to "make that mistake again." That doesn't seem in the spirit of a site focusing on PHOTOGRAPHY if you get my point.
Message edited by author 2006-12-28 08:46:50.
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 08:43:48 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by sodoff:
I find this post rather hypocritical when the poster has entered a photo for The Year You Were Born, with a bare male butt! taken to illustrate Gay March.
Or am I missing the whole point? I didn't find that picture offensive nor do I find nudity offensive. My 4 children were raised quite successfully despite all the nudity surrounding them on TV, films, newspapers and magazines. This was because we believed in being open minded, nudity and sex were never a taboo in our family.
Maybe it's time chill out and loosen those corsets. |
I suspect you're getting some user IDs confused.
Edit:
Ooopps, it was I who confused the ID's! hehehehehehehhe
Message edited by author 2006-12-28 08:50:16.
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 08:45:56 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by lkn4truth:
I do want to clarify one thing. A good number of posts here are understandably missing the point. I understand that nudity in itself isn't really a bad thing and there are many here arguing that nudity is not a big deal. I'm more talking about sexual inuendo or adult content where a sexual theme is suggested. Is nudity perhaps ok so long as it doesn't suggest "sex"?
As far as glad2bdad's comments about when was the last time someone complained about their 11 year old seeing something vulgar I submit to you that it was only two days ago in a thread called "Hide Adult Content - AA Battery" or something like that. The thread starter was a person complaining about their 11 year old seeing a vulgar picture and how they thought they shouldn't have seen it because they had hide adult content checked on their profile. Because the discussion turned to talking about a shot in a particular challenge the thread was locked so you may have problems finding it now.
Again, I don't mind a voter saying they find a picture offensive or don't like it. What I get bothered by are those who tell the photographer that the picture doesn't belong on DPC because it is a family site or because children are present. My point is simply that if it is a family site then we should change the rules to forbid all sexual content in the rules and just make it official. Otherwise, I'd hope voters would not remind photographers that children view the site. |
Ok - I think I understand where you're going with this now. I did miss the forum thread you mention - sorry.
Sounds like two things at issue: 1) Nudity in challenges, 2) Comments on nude photos (not sure if in challenge or not).
Addressing item 1 - I think the site has done a good job of controlling content for those that need the controls (work safe, and children) with photos outside challenge voting. As for nudity in the challenges, that's not an issue as far as I'm concerned. Voters need to understand that the possibility of seeing a nude (or even adult themed photo) is very high while voting. So don't vote at work, or with kids around if it's a concern. I don't think it's fair to the DPC community in general to try and place restrictions on images during the voting period (outside of the site content parameters - genitals, etc...). The workaround for me is to do a quick scan of thumbnails at home for challenges that I'm going to vote on. If there is a nude or something that could get me in trouble at work, I'll vote on it at home. This puts that image in my voted on area of the challenge and it won't come up again at work.
Addressing item 2 - Attempts to try and restrict comments is silly and way outside the area of common sense control (exceptions of vulgar, harrassing, etc...). Any comment can be "reported" if needed and if found to be of the exception type removed if needed by site admins.
JMO of course. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 08:47:22 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Who's Dido? |
Lover of Aeneas. Killed herself when he went off to found Rome on orders of the gods. Refused to look at him when he went visiting her in Hades. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 08:55:09 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by lkn4truth:
Is nudity perhaps ok so long as it doesn't suggest "sex"?
|
That depends on your definition of "is".
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:02:57 AM · #38 |
I'm assuming this thread was spawned by a single "AA battery" entry. <---just a guess.
People are, and will remain fascinated with the human body, it is one of the most truly magnificent art forms, perhaps the most fascinating artform.
Banning is ridiculous, but the ice we tread on is thin, from smut to art. For some, including me it is a lesson to be learned, and I pride myself in learning the difference.
My point is this....This is a photography site you can't banned the awesome power of nude photography, that would be like a carpenter without a nail.
As for the children part, guys with all do respect, children are just as fascinated with nudity as we are, what we teach them of it is on us individually.
I also admit to using this site to teach my son about nude art, and with no regrets. And no I didn't use Dr.Jones. LOL. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:06:19 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Who's Dido? |
Lover of Aeneas. Killed herself when he went off to found Rome on orders of the gods. Refused to look at him when he went visiting her in Hades. |
Ahhh... thanks. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:08:30 AM · #40 |
Euh, the beer made me do it.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
It's easier to pass off an excuse than coming out and saying you are the spawn of satan. |
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:09:34 AM · #41 |
I should probably let this go but I had a thought and couldn't resist. Saying that a photographer shows bad judgement for posting a photo with adult content because children might see it seems to me a lot like saying any movie producer who has any morals whatsoever will never film an R rated film because it is too easy for children to sneak into a theatre and see it. If I were a movie producer for a living and made an R rated film I might rightly chose not to show it to my 5 year old but does that mean I'm morally reprehensible for making the film at all because some child somewhere might sneak into a theatre and see it?
I'll be honest with you, I've taken shots for DPC that I would never hand to a child because that would bother my concience. But it doesn't bother me to post it here because I don't think this is a family site. That's my whole point. If this IS a family site then yes, I'm smart enough to understand that some images are not appropriate for children. But it's NOT a family site so while I know some parents will let their children view the site, that's their decision just like some parents allow their 11 year old to watch R rated movies with them.
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:09:41 AM · #42 |
Incidently - I hope voters are scoring that particular 'AA Battery' shot a '1' for DNMC.
We all know they take D Cell batteries, not AA batteries. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:11:15 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Incidently - I hope voters are scoring that particular 'AA Battery' shot a '1' for DNMC.
We all know they take D Cell batteries, not AA batteries. |
Wrong they are AA
Well so I have been told
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:16:20 AM · #44 |
| They are all different I'm sure guys. Some of them probably run off a car battery. LMAO |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:16:33 AM · #45 |
the thing that bothers me is that this discussion has been started over and over again.
if you don't want to see nudity, you might as well throw your tv out of the window, including the newspaper with pics of drama on the frontpage, magazines with ads (like Leroy's ;-) ), and you might as well throw your pc out too.
Nudity is the human body without clothes. You got a body your own. Your kids got one their own too.
If you don't want to see nudity, close your eyes. Because it's everywhere. And ain't it beautiful?
PS: I'm not talking about pornographic images or something like that.
Message edited by author 2006-12-28 09:17:20. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:25:12 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by lkn4truth:
Is DPC a "Family Site"? |
No. We are an artist community with an educational focus. That sometimes means allowing or even inviting content that would allow us to classify ourselves as a "family site."
To my knowledge, DPChallenge has never claimed to be, or attempted to pass itself off as, a family site. That some users think it is or claim that it is does not make it so.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 09:28:13 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by lkn4truth:
I'll be honest with you, I've taken shots for DPC that I would never hand to a child because that would bother my concience. But it doesn't bother me to post it here because I don't think this is a family site. |
And to fork yet once again, this assumption depends entirely on your definition of a "family". I, for one, would have no problem with any of my children seeing any of the nude material I've seen here. There is absolutely nothing untoward about any of it. The only issue I would have, and which I think is far more impacting, are kids viewing the snuff-style pictures, far more disturbing in nature, more graphic, and in my view, way more indicative of the life-negating forces at work in the world. Aside from a few one-line comments on the images themselves, nobody really raises this as any kind of "issue", which is fine, I suppose, and in itself kind of telling. I've mentioned this several times in other similar threads. |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 10:14:31 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Incidently - I hope voters are scoring that particular 'AA Battery' shot a '1' for DNMC.
We all know they take D Cell batteries, not AA batteries. |
LOL ... how right you are! Some take "C" cell batteries also ...
I have an issue with anyone voting a nude shot extremely low based on content ... there is no rule that says you HAVE to vote on every picture that comes across your screen ... just 20% to make your votes count ... if it's a technically good photo, but the subject offends you ... then just click the next button and move on ... no need to zing the photographer with a low score because you don't like the subject ... |
|
|
|
12/28/2006 10:26:11 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by pamelasue:
... no need to zing the photographer with a low score because you don't like the subject ... |
Subject matter is important and needs to be considered when submitting to a challenge. While many would like to think that all photos are judged on their technical merits, it's simply not true and one would be foolish to enter without considering this (if you want to score well).
I'm going to vote on images as I see fit. If something moves me in a positive manner and is technically ok, it gets at least a middle score. If it's very well done technically it goes substantially higher. On the other hand if I find the image unappealing based on subject it's probably going to get a lower vote, even if technically well done it won't rise past a middle score.
Everyone has personal opinions and you voice your opinion with your score. I'm not going to skip an image because I don't like the subject. That defeats the purpose of voting.
JMO of course. :D
|
|
|
|
12/28/2006 10:29:14 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by pamelasue:
no need to zing the photographer with a low score because you don't like the subject ... |
My religious themed images get zinged right along with the nudes. Subject matter is a huge part of how people vote. I understand and expect the lowball votes on anything reliogious that I submit just like I am sure that those who enter nudes do.
|
|
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: 06/02/2025 09:24:47 AM EDT.
