| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/19/2009 12:54:48 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
My apologies to any straight men who like to be glamorous |
If your notion of glamor photography is limited to the subset of glamor, known around here as boudoir photography, that involves lingerie and very soft light, then I would agree, very few men go in for that. But some guys are just glamorous. and straight.
 
Good glamor photography can make a fully clad person look very sexy, porn on the other hand seems to suck all the glamor out of being naked.
edited to make Rudoplfo not seem to stare at George undercutting the straight comment.
Message edited by author 2009-05-19 12:58:11. |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 01:04:13 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
My apologies to any straight men who like to be glamorous, I was just thinking of the wonderful gay friends I have that get dressed up very glamorously. My ex used to like to be glamorous too, I had momentarily forgotten. We used to have arguments about who would get to wear the most glamorous clothes on stage, lol. |
Trish
I think you misunderstood my point. I was not very clear. I don't understand when people use unnecessary adjectives when describing people. What a persons sexual preference is, is irrelevent when you are describing them. Just like one should not say "she's gorgeous for a black person" can't it be that "she's just gorgeous!" or "He is a very good gay lawyer." "He's a very good lawyer"
People never say "wow she or he is a great straight piano player" instead they say "wow she or he is a great piano player" See not a mention of sexual preference.
Its funny how those adjectives come out when they are "different" than the "expected" or "different" than oneself, which is wrong IMO.
This is not a personal attack, just an observation that annoys me.
|
|
|
|
05/19/2009 01:12:23 PM · #28 |
I like the description / definition as worded by Dennis Brownfield.
Bold emphasis added by me.
Glamour photography creates a more elegant, sophisticated, glamorous look. Glamour images ,a specialty category, are taken with unique light and shadow techniques, camera angles, lens filters, cosmetics, and airbrush techniques that give the subject a finished dramatic look. The outcome of these applied techniques, along with the creative artistic touch of the photographer, is an alluring, glowing, romantic image. It is important to remember that the artistic skills, and talents of the photographer are a key factor in the quality and drama of the glamour shot.In addition to glamour lighting, the photographer may choose to use additional special effect options such as gel lighting to enhance the impact of the glamour image.
|
|
|
|
05/19/2009 06:53:25 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
My apologies to any straight men who like to be glamorous, I was just thinking of the wonderful gay friends I have that get dressed up very glamorously. My ex used to like to be glamorous too, I had momentarily forgotten. We used to have arguments about who would get to wear the most glamorous clothes on stage, lol. |
Trish
I think you misunderstood my point. I was not very clear. I don't understand when people use unnecessary adjectives when describing people. What a persons sexual preference is, is irrelevent when you are describing them. Just like one should not say "she's gorgeous for a black person" can't it be that "she's just gorgeous!" or "He is a very good gay lawyer." "He's a very good lawyer"
People never say "wow she or he is a great straight piano player" instead they say "wow she or he is a great piano player" See not a mention of sexual preference.
Its funny how those adjectives come out when they are "different" than the "expected" or "different" than oneself, which is wrong IMO.
This is not a personal attack, just an observation that annoys me. |
Thanks for elaborating on your thoughts Leo. And I agree, its wrong and ridiculous to class someone by their sexuality. But here in Australia much of the 'gay' culture is very vocal about its existence and image, the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras in Sydney is practically government funded and attracts many thousands of people from all over the country. Sydney shuts down for the night and they celebrate their sexuality, so by referring to a glamorous gay guy I am following their own lead and complimenting them based on the way they dress, the reason that they dress this way, plus their desire to openly publicise the fact. To me, what someone does in their beds is their own business, personally I'm happy not to know, and was certainly not referring to 'gay' men simply because they are gay. I was talking about the people such as the guys who dress in drag or highly coloured/decorative/sparkly clothes on purpose in order to advertise their sexuality and desire for glamour. Just as I would not be afraid to say 'I would like to shoot a Sudanese woman because they have incredible elegance and stature'. No offence intended whatsoever, I am a very open minded person and not at all racist or sexist, however in some conversations I don't believe that attempting to be overly politically correct can lead you into more trouble than not. We need some kind of descriptive words for people and types, its impossible not to, and I only used a term that a certain section of the community wish us to use.
As a blonde, I am often described as such - I do not take offence and automatically think they are referring to the long held ideal that blondes are stupid. I don't practice my breathing techniques to counteract the label. I just accept it, happily, provided it isn't used as an insult. And of course I would not say 'he's glamorous for a gay guy' any more than I would say 'she's beautiful for a black woman' - they're both very derogatory and unacceptable descriptions.
Possibly it just depends on how you wish to read it, what the culture is in your country regarding gay/lesbian self status, and whether your intent is to be derogatory or complimentary. In my case it was complimentary, using the accepted local self status. :-)
I look forward to seeing all the differing variations on the term 'glamour' when it goes up, it should be very interesting.
|
|
|
|
05/19/2009 07:02:26 PM · #30 |
*standing up and applauding  jettyimages*
You so rock. I had many drag queen friends in Vancouver when I lived there, I miss them sorely and sadly have lost some of them to HIV/AIDS. But I could show you pix of queens whom you'd swear were women, they were that gorgeous in drag. |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 07:37:39 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
*standing up and applauding jettyimages*
You so rock. I had many drag queen friends in Vancouver when I lived there, I miss them sorely and sadly have lost some of them to HIV/AIDS. But I could show you pix of queens whom you'd swear were women, they were that gorgeous in drag. |
Gee thanks Snaffles :-)
I know what you mean, I used to be in the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, and when AIDS hit in the late 80's early 90's we lost 2 cellists, a bassoonist, several presenters and admin staff, and our chief conductor - all within about 2 years. It was really tragic, and we were all good friends - the conductor was young and incredibly talented, had just conducted the Chicago Phil and was being primed for a massive career. Some of the concerts that he conducted were heartbreaking, you could see the pain on his face and he was often carried away at the end of the concert in an ambulance. Really really tragic and sad for us all. I guess thats why I don't have any issues with what I said about glamourous gay guys - half the Opera House is gay and proud of it, and I've been close friends with many of them so know that if I called any of the dressy guys glamorous they'd be chuffed :-)
|
|
|
|
05/19/2009 07:37:42 PM · #32 |
I'm IN the challenge!
And, for what it's worth, I have recently had "glamour" described to me as having an element of fantasy to it, so that certain kinds of retouching are more common and acceptable in glamour shots than in straight fashion or portraiture.
And, probably, the prude police will go thru and vote half the entries a "1" just because of insufficient clothing, rather than just not voting the challenge at all. Some others will offset those by voting a 10 to any nudity they see, so it will even out. So don't get wrapped around the axle over it either way. |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 07:45:18 PM · #33 |
| Well, let's see what happens... |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 09:46:36 PM · #34 |
| Ok, I'm in but only because I couldn't find any good grunge idea around here. Not much glamour eiter for that matter, so it's rather....well I don't know, I'll probably get my bum kicked. I predict a 3.5/4. Oh well, never won a ribbon, so maybe I'll hit the brown this time. I just like to poke around a bit. |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 10:02:47 PM · #35 |
Believe me, I am the first one to roll my eyes at political correctness. I am far from one of those people. I just don't like how some people use those descriptive words in the wrong context. I obviously didn't read or interpret your usage correctly.
Back to being a straight photog:) |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 10:13:22 PM · #36 |
This is all very illuminating. I assumed that everyone had similar ideas as to glamor. I always thought it was the elegant, sophisticated look. Never would have occurred to me that Playboy was glamor.
(ok, now that I pulled up the link on glamor photography, my husband is really looking forward to voting on the glamor challenge! :)
Message edited by author 2009-05-19 22:26:43. |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 10:26:39 PM · #37 |
| I'm in for my weekly beating-up! |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 11:17:38 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
Believe me, I am the first one to roll my eyes at political correctness. I am far from one of those people. I just don't like how some people use those descriptive words in the wrong context. I obviously didn't read or interpret your usage correctly.
Back to being a straight photog:) |
Now Leo, I said I didn't want to know what you do in bed, lol :-) |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 11:17:40 PM · #39 |
See you guys in the scores thread. ;)
|
|
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: 08/13/2025 10:53:19 PM EDT.
