It may be abit over the top in terms of appropriateness for the site, but I don't disagree with the need to challenge ourselves and those limits. That said, I dont particularly find the photo very good, either technically or artistically.
are you joking? this is horrible shot technically and aesthetically!
1) overexposed, hair and leg and arm are blown out.
2) there could be more DOF to make her reaching arm more detailed.
3) model should be appealing and arousing feelings. this isn't.
it's not shocking and etc. it's just not art.
I like it. Its in no way shocking or disturbing to me. I visit this site for striking photography and the appreciation of art. I enjoyed your portfolio as well.
4.2 You will not use the DPChallenge.com Service to post content or to design, manufacture, market or sell a Product that (i) infringes the rights of a third party, including, without limitation, copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, rights of privacy and publicity, (ii) is libelous, defamatory or slanderous, (iii) condones, promotes, contains or links to warez, cracks, hacks or similar utilities or programs, (iv) contains explicitly sexual content, (v) does or may denigrate or offend any ethnic, racial, gender, religious or other protected group, through use of language, images, stereotypical depiction or otherwise, (vi) is designed to or does harass, threaten, defame or abuse others, (vii) exploits images or the likeness of minors, (viii) encourages the use of drugs or the under-age use of alcohol or cigarettes or (ix) is generally offensive or in bad taste.
Nothing personal, but I feel this image falls under both bold-text areas above, or in the case of the explicit part, it is strongly implied and suggestive of a sexual act in general.
Edit to add:
I echo Judy's statement above and am in no way a prude either.
This image, in my opinion does cross the line. Crop the bottom so
her fingers aren't actually being shown in her panties and all should be fine.
Are you kidding me? There's MUCH, MUCH worse on this site. This is tame and a matter of opinion but if you're going to complain about something as mild as this stop being choosy and start complaining about all the others. I won't mention names but I'm sure you can figure out the other questionable pics. So how about we talk about the quality of the pic, not the content. Personally, I find half the shitty vacation photos, OOF, and pet photos more insulting and offensive than this photo!! If you don't like it, DON'T LOOK AT IT!!
Since I feel this has been turned into a rant about sexual content, let's leave some critiques on the image.
Overall, the image is well exposed, excepts that the higlights in the hair are quite blown. You porbably would do well to decrease the dynamic range of the shot by using reflectors or fill flash.
DoF may be a little shallow. I'm thinking that if the grave stones were a little more in focus, the imapct of the overall image would be strengthened.
Color balance and focus look good.
Compositionally, I think the image also needs a bit more context than what is currently presented. If, as you say, you want a voyeuristic look, a normal perspective from say a 50mm lens would probably give a better result.
and in my opinion, this image is just outside of DPC's "safe for minors" guildlines.
The end result would have been the same though - not what DPC is trying portray to the public, with minors having access.
Uh Brad, isn't THAT what the adult content filters are for? Comparatively, DPC is a very safe place for minors, unlike the rest of the net, but IMO no child should be allowed to surf alone.
I can appreciate your art and your willingness to push boundaries. I have no problems with it at all, just thought it was just over the limit for this site, as it does suggest the act of, or soon will be the act of self-gratification.
It's life. It can be found anywhere.
The rest of your portfolio represents tastefully and artistically done images, but for this site, and in my opinion, this image is just outside of DPC's "safe for minors" guildlines.
Yes, I believe the imact of this image would have been very different in black & white in regards to it's emotional impact, as black & white normally does. The brain no longer has to be distracted by the colors and is free to allow the image to speak at a different emotional level.
The end result would have been the same though - not what DPC is trying portray to the public, with minors having access.
Nothing personal, but I feel this image falls under both bold-text areas above, or in the case of the explicit part, it is strongly implied and suggestive of a sexual act in general.
Edit to add:
I echo Judy's statement above and am in no way a prude either.
This image, in my opinion does cross the line. Crop the bottom so
her fingers aren't actually being shown in her panties and all should be fine.
There's traditionally a line between what people consider offensive and what becomes fine art. If this was in B&W would it have been less offensive or would it have seemed less like traditional pornography?
What pushes boundaries today will be deemed tame in 10 years time, one only has to look at film ratings to see wider tolerance to violence and profanity compared to a few years back or look at the history of painted art and photography.
A loose defintion of 'fine art' I read while researching stated that in 'fine art' there is usually no eye contact. In porn there is always eye contact, the model is inviting you to join her if you will. Angel is not inviting you to join her, I am a voyeur capturing a private moment.
Sure I could crop the photo but I'm not going to. It stands as it is... I never crop off camera, what you see is what I took. Besides, by cropping the photo I appeal to the masses and become safe. I'll leave safe to the people who want to be safe and I'll continue to push boundaries.
Thank you very much for your comment though... It was much appreciated.
Pornish, maybe. Offesnive or in bad taste? Well, that's in the eye of the viewer, I suppose.
It seems a few liked this shot even though it violates the TOS of the site.
As far as Angel in the Cemetary goes, it definitely has shock value in context of DPC. Maybe a bit tighter crop, so as not show the outline of the goodies would get a better reception here.
4.2 You will not use the DPChallenge.com Service to post content or to design, manufacture, market or sell a Product that (i) infringes the rights of a third party, including, without limitation, copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, rights of privacy and publicity, (ii) is libelous, defamatory or slanderous, (iii) condones, promotes, contains or links to warez, cracks, hacks or similar utilities or programs, (iv) contains explicitly sexual content, (v) does or may denigrate or offend any ethnic, racial, gender, religious or other protected group, through use of language, images, stereotypical depiction or otherwise, (vi) is designed to or does harass, threaten, defame or abuse others, (vii) exploits images or the likeness of minors, (viii) encourages the use of drugs or the under-age use of alcohol or cigarettes or (ix) is generally offensive or in bad taste.
Nothing personal, but I feel this image falls under both bold-text areas above, or in the case of the explicit part, it is strongly implied and suggestive of a sexual act in general.
Edit to add:
I echo Judy's statement above and am in no way a prude either.
This image, in my opinion does cross the line. Crop the bottom so
her fingers aren't actually being shown in her panties and all should be fine.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.