| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/12/2002 05:26:22 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Dangerous_blues:
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]but david was 'hot' ; )
Oh now I get it! To be a good idea the subject must be attractive to the users of DP challenge?
Hmmm...
I bet Rueben is turning over in his grave!
[/i]
I have nothing against nudes of any shape, form, or fashion. I just think that it should be done in good taste. The shaving photo may be okay in Playgirl. I would have thought the same thing about a 20 year old adonis in the same setting.
Oh and Magnetic and I were joking. I thought it was pretty clear from the way our exchanges were going.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2002 05:33:16 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Dangerous_blues:
Oh now I get it! To be a good idea the subject must be attractive to the users of DP challenge?
[/i]
I can't speak for everyone, but these are my personal feelings. This is not Hot or Not. I don't necessarily think the subject has to be attractive, but the end result should be a well-composed and compelling photograph.
I think that the same conditions I posted for blur earlier apply here.... if you're going to use a nude subject, you should know why you're doing it, and convey that reason to the viewer. I can't see how a nude subject adds anything to this shot that would not have been there if he were wearing boxers, for example. In any case, shaving in the nude seems contrived to me, so the whole thing seemed kind of pointlessly staged and artifical. That's why I scored it low.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
06/12/2002 06:03:23 PM · #53 |
Let me say that I am well aware of the difference between Michelanglelo and Rueben.
Reuben was a painter, famous for his picture of women who would probably be considered fat and unattractive in this day and age. This was a different thought process completely.
I hate to continue to beat a dead horse, but even though it was NOT a good photograph as I said in an earlier post, I would hate for sexism to become how we rate our pictures at this site.
And to answer the last comment about photography being a different medium. Of course it is. However, a few basic rules still pertain dont you think?
I promise to now put this subject to rest.
Have a great night everyone!
|
|
|
|
06/12/2002 06:05:05 PM · #54 |
There is nothing wrong with the human body. Anyones body!
Did you see the picture?
Photo Jim Bio out-take
Through our picture taking we even met a photographer that lives in Japan. His wife saw some pictures of me online and we chatted and she said that her and her husband publish a few magazines in Japan, one which features nude bearded men. Last summer when they came out to Florida on business, I got to meet with them and got my first paid nude modeling assignment. It was embarassing at first disrobing in front of them, but then I relaxed. It was fun session and we all had dinner together after the photo-shoot. If there are any other photographers coming to Florida that would like to use me on any photo shoots (clothed or nude) drop me an e-mail. I am 6 feet one inches tall and a slightly husky 229 pounds. Take care
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/12/2002 6:11:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2002 06:08:34 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Dangerous_blues:
Originally posted by Reuben:
[i]Originally posted by Dangerous_blues:
[i]Nothing sexest in that remark is there?
Although it would probably have been better received if the subject was a woman, I rather doubt it would have made a very significant difference. Imagine a woman in that picture, maybe shaving her legs to make it fit the same attitude as the original, and it isn't reminiscent of most nude photos I've seen. The so called 'tasteful' nudes don't typically include the crotch, be they male or be they female.
There is nothing wrong with the human body. Anyones body!
There was quite a bit wrong with the photo, though. I think if you're going to make a photo that you think will be controversial--and naked men will be controversial--you should at least put some effort into it, and do *something* right with the photo. You should make the photo interesting, or at least technically well executed.
[/i]
I disagree, many great works of art include full frontal nudity. Ever hear of a statue called David?
[/i]
Good point! :)
|
|
|
|
06/12/2002 06:15:28 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Dangerous_blues:
Let me say that I am well aware of the difference between Michelanglelo and Rueben.
Reuben was a painter, famous for his picture of women who would probably be considered fat and unattractive in this day and age. This was a different thought process completely.
The painter's name is Rubens (1577-1640), hence the confusion... |
|
|
|
06/12/2002 07:13:54 PM · #57 |
fwiw, i support poeple like sunny jim posting whatever image they wish to, as long as they accept that in doing so, they open themselves to the slings and arrows of public opinion, just like anyone else here :).
the real issue is that if you post a traditionally controversial and taboo subject on a site that has a pretty wide constituency, you might be pretty naive if you don't expect there to be a backlash :). after all, even hollywood is sparing in its use of nude frontal males, so you'd have to be pretty out of touch to not think that people in general have a negative reaction to this topic.
the example that was raised, 'david', did not really pertain in this situation. in point of fact, that model was absolutely chosen for its perfection of proportion and form. it was a figure study - a platonic ideal - not a slice of life : ).
bringing up rubens is also an irrelevant allusion : ). Regardless of how modern 'tastes' in beauty run, there has never been dispute that rubens rendered his subject masterfully.
as for myself, i don't care about or mind nudity, either male or female, per se. i, for one, don't think any subject matter should be verboten, although I think the majority of people disagree with me, and I am able to respect that.
thanks for the stimulating discussion : ) |
|
|
|
06/14/2002 01:38:30 AM · #58 |
| I love this discussion of the shaving photo :). Early in the week my friend Annida and I were talking about the photos online. She said "wow, there's a penis in one!". I rushed to see it. We both thought that was so funny and refreshing. I hate to stereotype anyone, but in general Americans are very prudish, censorious, and intolerant. There is far more nudity on TV in Australia, on free to air networks, in prime time than you guys would ever put up with. For those of us who don't get so upset about the human body, life is so much easier. There's a lot more to do in life than be offended every time you see a pube. |
|
|
|
06/14/2002 08:12:52 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by lisae:
I love this discussion of the shaving photo :). Early in the week my friend Annida and I were talking about the photos online. She said "wow, there's a penis in one!". I rushed to see it. We both thought that was so funny and refreshing. I hate to stereotype anyone, but in general Americans are very prudish, censorious, and intolerant. There is far more nudity on TV in Australia, on free to air networks, in prime time than you guys would ever put up with. For those of us who don't get so upset about the human body, life is so much easier. There's a lot more to do in life than be offended every time you see a pube.
Can I crash at your place until I find a place to live in Australia????? pleaaaaaase???? :) |
|
|
|
06/14/2002 09:42:52 AM · #60 |
I don't think it's the penis thing so much as a semi out of focus, washed out, poorly composed mostly chunky alluded to penis that is the issue ;-)
If that photo had shown a woman doing the same thing but shaving her legs and nothing else about the quality of the shot or the composition changes you would get the same reaction.
As a matter of fact, there is a much harder core of shots (full exposure female nude) on photoisg that gets totally gutted even thought the picture itself is very, very well taken.
There is a gentleness to the female form that lends itself to more positive reaction in general though. Especially on the web as the web is still dominated by men and most men have more trouble looking at semi nude photos of other men more than women have of looking at semi nudes of other women.
I don't give a crap as long as the photo is good but many nudes rely on the nude factor to make up for the the lack of photo skill factor.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2002 11:14:09 AM · #61 |
This is the comment I left for that photo:
"This could have been a pretty good shot if it weren't so grainy (soft focus, I don't know, maybe that's the look you were going for?) and if you'd gotten a better angle and closer up.you also have this shower curtain rod coming out of your ear and the towel is distracting. And I have to admit... I like partially nude (or fully nude) men as much as the next red blooded american gal...but dang it, get it in focus please ;)"
so....what hokie says about the nude factor making up for the lack of skill....it totally true. I agree. :) |
|
|
|
06/14/2002 11:45:26 AM · #62 |
It's not just a 'nude' factor... I think the same applies to any photo that has some intrinsic 'shock' value..
|
|
|
|
06/14/2002 11:58:41 AM · #63 |
this is how i felt when i saw that picture:
|
|
06/14/2002 11:58:42 AM · #64 |
Yes, having nudity on TV is pretty enlightened. Perhaps you have not seen our great artistic shows like "The Man" show, and "Blind Date".
And Australians are so tolerant, that they would never stereo type a great and diverse nation like the US.
Originally posted by lisae:
I love this discussion of the shaving photo :). Early in the week my friend Annida and I were talking about the photos online. She said "wow, there's a penis in one!". I rushed to see it. We both thought that was so funny and refreshing. I hate to stereotype anyone, but in general Americans are very prudish, censorious, and intolerant. There is far more nudity on TV in Australia, on free to air networks, in prime time than you guys would ever put up with. For those of us who don't get so upset about the human body, life is so much easier. There's a lot more to do in life than be offended every time you see a pube.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2002 01:02:37 PM · #65 |
| I found the road challenge to be more of a challenge than I thought. I just entered a photo just to enter. Which one is it? |
|
|
|
06/14/2002 09:56:48 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by Zeissman:
Yes, having nudity on TV is pretty enlightened. Perhaps you have not seen our great artistic shows like "The Man" show, and "Blind Date".
And Australians are so tolerant, that they would never stereo type a great and diverse nation like the US.
Zeissman! Do you ever laugh? :P
I really have way too many American friends and family (my grandmother, my grandmother's family, two aunts by marriage, cousins who have grown up there) to seriously stereotype you guys. It's more just a fact that the lowest common denominator in your country is determined, culturally, by people who are a bit repressed. That doesn't stop there being probably more enlightened, weird and interesting people there than the entire population of my country (only 20 million people).
Australians pretend to hate Americans while we're eating McDonalds, drinking Coke and watching the Simpsons. It's the way it goes :)
|
|
|
|
06/14/2002 10:52:49 PM · #67 |
I just get sick of hearing that anyone with standards is intolerant, or repressed, or unenlightened.
I personally have shot nudes, but some of the stuff on photoSIG disgusts me. "Relief" and "Killer Pussy" are too good examples. You may as well spray paint "FU#K" on a wall and call that art. Some subjects are distasteful.
And if someone does not want to see nudity on their TV, why is that the lowest common denominator? To me, the ones that watch Jerry Springer and Gordon Elliot (you remember him?) are the lowest common denominator. And I am sure they would love have naked round girls on the WWF.
I am not sure how using nudity to entertain makes people superior.
And I laugh quite often, especially when I watch my 19 months old daughter run around and play. And when I was writting a lot of the comments I left in this weeks challenge.
I actually had an idea for a nude for "Shadows" but since my wife is recovering from the delivery of Hannah, and Kimby is not returning my emails, I guess it will have to wait. Of course I could call up Photo Jim.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/15/2002 1:08:47 AM.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 03:20:53 PM  |
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: 08/18/2025 03:20:53 PM EDT.
|
