DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Good Lord! Erotic Photos in 13th cent. Church
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 55 of 55, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/05/2009 01:13:09 AM · #51
Originally posted by BeeCee:

Hmmm... one of the shots I saw in a news article on this, either stating or implying that it was one of the current crop, was posted here in April of '07.


Really, which one?
08/05/2009 01:43:37 AM · #52
Originally posted by NathanW:

Originally posted by BeeCee:

Hmmm... one of the shots I saw in a news article on this, either stating or implying that it was one of the current crop, was posted here in April of '07.


Really, which one?


"Preaching to the Unconverted"
4th from the bottom, with the nude guy (NSFW, btw)
08/05/2009 05:52:07 AM · #53
Originally posted by ambaker:

Just thought it was a bit out there for you to call them child molesters, knowing nothing about them.

I was referring to churches in general, and their track record over thousands of years of horrid behavior.

Yet they're always the first to cry foul when things don't go their way.

It isn't out there when it's true.
08/05/2009 06:17:15 AM · #54
Originally posted by elsapo:

Taking erotic photos on top of a grave and taking a photo of just the grave are two different things for me (one lacks respect for the beliefs of others)......

I agree......but there are also times when what we do is disrespectful of other cutures.....unbeknownst to us. Simple things like shaking hands in greeting are taboo in some cultures. Our women are blasphemous and shameless according to Muslim tradition when we consider them fully dressed.....what is half naked anyway? Depends on where/who you are.
Originally posted by elsapo:

there might be some sacred ground of the indigenous people where I live but I'm not going to take two half naked chicks and have them in erotic poses......

Back to......where do you draw the line?

How timely is this?????



This is certainly not a stolen moment of this young lady mourning a loss......it's a cheap usage of the sacred ground of a cemetery for commercial purposes, right?

But no, it's okay, no money changed hands, she's not naked, and certainly a fine upstanding photog from DPC would not have done this without permission, right?

I'm just sayin'......
Originally posted by elsapo:

the photographer in Cornwall made a conscious decision to go in the church without permission and take those photos...

This fellow certainly didn't consider the consequences of his actions, or worse, didn't care.
Originally posted by elsapo:

I do agree with you that there are many viewpoints, I think the biggest issue here is not that the photos were taken, but that the photographer didn't seem to care about how it might affect those who consider the church a place of worship. I find it sad that churches have to place a "No Erotic Photography" sign in the entrance just to avoid unexpected photo sessions. I have no idea what is considered blasphemous now days, but it’s for sure disrespectful.

I agree that the sign shouldn't be necessary, but it's become a funny world......there was a time when this type of thing would not even have been considered......but then, women weren't allowed to vote either, and look what happened to that. Don't forget, there must be a certain amount of righteous indignation directed towards those heathen women, too. After all, they were a major contributing factor to the inappropriateness.....without them, there would have just been pictures of a church & graveyard.

It can just spiral off into the realm of the ridiculous at any instant.

I would like to know if the involved parties tried to work it out or if it went right to the sensational right out of the gate.
Originally posted by elsapo:

The other issue, as stated before) is where to draw the line- and I have no answer to that, it's pretty blurry now days :/

True that.......8>)
Originally posted by elsapo:

So to rephrase, I don't see myself ever taking photos like that anywhere (not my kind of thing, as you can probably tell from my portfolio :P) ..but really what do I know i'm only 21, I'm sure 10 years from now i'll have a completely different view on this.

Dude, you are already wise beyond your years......it scares me a little......8>)
08/05/2009 06:48:29 AM · #55
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by ambaker:

Just thought it was a bit out there for you to call them child molesters, knowing nothing about them.

I was referring to churches in general, and their track record over thousands of years of horrid behavior.

Yet they're always the first to cry foul when things don't go their way.

It isn't out there when it's true.


There are bad apples in every organization, the church says we aren't perfect, and proven so in the case of the priests...theres good and evil in any company. But don't crumble the blueprint if the workers are not qualified..the church was founded with principles, and fornication shouldn't mix with religious symbols, nothing wrong with that, but to call is a herecy or whatever is just drama.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 07:48:44 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 07:48:44 AM EDT.