adamcoombs Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Ok, so I am very new to all this, and very new to this site, but the more I look the more I am not buying this nude photography as art business. If you look at the most interesting people list, the top 5 are all mainly doing nude shots, and every single woman in there is slim and attractive..so my questions are. Is this site just full of men who like to check out naked fit woman? Why are there no "ordinary" every day girls in these shots? why are they all toned, lovely looking models? don't get the wrong idea! I love a good looking woman as much as the next guy, but there are other places on the net for this are there not! I think there is a lot to be said for leaving these things up to the imagination and not shoving girly bits in peoples faces and calling it "art"! I am sure if people read this it will cause many different view, its probably been discussed thousands of times before already, but I find its taking the shine of what is otherwise an amazing way of sharing photos and learning from other people.. Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark pav Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 <i>"I am sure if people read this it will cause many different view, its probably been discussed thousands of times before already, but I find its taking the shine of what is otherwise an amazing way of sharing photos and learning from other people..</i><br><br> Yes. Yeah. Yep. Unfortunately, it seems like the nude pics are only increasing. You're not gonna convince photo.net to stop allowing them or even keep them separate from the rest of the latest images. Heck, you can come across nudes in the landscape category when people get their categories messed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_hundsnurscher Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 It's not like I'm forcing my work on anyone. I can't help it if <i>that</i> many people find me interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art_haykin Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Demand motivates supply. If all drama were Masterpiece Theater or Leave it to Beaver, all comedy were the Three Stooges or Robin Willams, all movies wereGone With the Wind or Gidget Gets a Hickey, all music were either classical or Lawrence Welk, all art were Dogs Playing Poker or the Renassiance Masters, and nudes were just regular looking women and men, how high do you think ratings would be? Why don't you start up your own forum and stop telling people what is and isn't right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbing Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I haven't noticed them in particular. My work has strict rules against accessing pages that feature nudity. But, I have found photo.net to be quite discrete about that sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_dunn2 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 <p>I mostly stick in a few of the fora, and don't usually visit portfolios. So I don't see a lot of nudes here. Don't get me wrong, I like nekkid women at least as much as the next guy, but that's not why I'm here, and even when I'm at home, with no Web monitoring software on the firewall and nobody else able to see whatever's on my screen, I don't seek out nude photos on this site. So if you don't like 'em, it shouldn't be hard for you to avoid 'em.</p> <p>That said, I don't see what's wrong if photographers (or painters, for that matter) prefer to use appealing people as subjects for their nudes. I don't think that's a new thing, either; haven't photographers and painters used mainly (though certainly not exclusively) appealingly-shaped bodies as subjects for their nudes for centuries? I like <a href="http://www.stevedunn.ca/photos/friends_and_family/0908Dee.jpg" target="_blank">my girlfriend</a>, and I like seeing her naked, but I think if I were painting or photographing nudes, I'd probably pick someone with a fitter, more toned body as a model.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 <I>Why are there no "ordinary" every day girls in these shots? why are they all toned, lovely looking models?</I><P>Maybe because the latter are the ones more interested in showing off their bodies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben conover Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Simple, it's an image thing, a fashion. Women worldwide spend ridiculous amounts of time preening and plucking themsleves all for the benefit of someone else, apparently. I think women should spend less time shaving and more time using cameras. I also think that beautiful women are lucky, they look great, I like them. However, I know women who have suffered great pains to look thin etc, when they have no hope of being that way naturally. I feel that men and women can offer support by acknowledging beauty in all it's forms. It is good that the human form be appreciated for what it is. Photography can make that reality interesting by distorting, enhancing, manipulating, or simplifying the human form. I think that's why the top 5 most interesting photographers on this site do nudes. They are probably also quite proficient at doing other stuff too, but yes they are lucky. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael R Freeman Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Adam - If as you say, you don't buy into the concept of nude photography as art, then is nude painting also not art? Same logic would have to apply. It's just a different medium of expression. I personally don't think anyone is "shoving girly bits in peoples faces" here. There are currently no nude photos on the photo.net home page or forums, which means if you want to see nudes you have to go looking for them, or stumble across them while rating photos in the Rate Recent queue or when browsing the TRP. If you don't want to view nudes, then don't go looking for them, or simply pass them by when you come to one in the rate recent or TRP pages. As already noted, they aren't that difficult to avoid for those that find them objectionable. I'm not particularly fond of most street photography, but that doesn't take the shine off my enjoyment of the rest of the site. I'm sure that there are many nudes of "ordinary" everyday girls here if you want to search them out (and guys too I expect - the nude male is also considered art by many). They may not be in the "Top Photos", but I'm sure you can find them if you look. You can also find beautiful nudes and semi-nudes here that "leave things up to the imagination". Of course, just as there is "bad art" of many different subjects, you will also find "bad" nudes here as well (and bad landscapes, bad portraits, bad bird photos ...). For every subject, there are both truly awful and truly good (and artistic) photographers. As for the question "there are other places on the net for this are there not?", I would suggest that what you find here is very, very tame compared to those "other places", many of which are very happy to shove it in your face if you should be so careless as to make your email address publicly accessible to harvest bots. Enjoy what you like, ignore what you don't. Everyone has different likes, dislikes and "values". Photo.net should *never* assume the role of censoring artistic expression to dictate what we, as a free and democratic society, should or should not be able to view or share here. As long as that "art" falls within the bounds of what is deemed acceptable and legal within our society (photo.net does prohibit, as it should, some material - see the Terms of Use), those that create it should be free to share it. That doesn't mean you have to agree with what is defined as "acceptable", but neither should anyone here impose on others their view of what should be permitted. Don't sweat the small stuff. Life is too short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I have no idea if the photography you're talking about is art or not, and I don't really care. But the fact that the women are good-looking doesn't prove they aren't. If it did, most of the art produced from the ancient Greeks until now would not be art. Does Michelangelo's David need to have a pot belly? Should the Venus de Milo have saggy breasts and cellulite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Sorry..."doesn't prove it isn't (art)." Once again, proofread then post, proofread then post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona_chrome Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 One of the bains of photography, almost from its inception, has been men taking opportunistic photos of women. In some ways, the worst are actually the voyeuristic photos of unsuspecting women clothed or not. But so many have used the camera to entice a woman to undress in the name of art and used the opportunity to create anything but art. On the other hand, there are many men and women making incredible, artistic nude photographs-of beautiful and not so beautiful people. There is obviously a great following for the photographers who photograph female nudes here and I can't fault the photographer for this. In many cases, I don't think the work is necessarily art or even that good, but they are of pretty girls and most serve the needs of the photographer and those who follow the work. For myself, I think it is best to speak out when I find a photo, nude or otherwise, that I find objectionable. I have seen people pull their work as a result of such comments. That is what this site is about, I hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katherinea Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 I have seen nude photos when looking through the 'top photos' page. I feel uncomfortable seeing most of these photos, and I would prefer not to see them at all. I would like it if there was something like a 'g' or 'pg' rating option on that page and other gallery pages on this site, so that you could click on that button and then find that all the photos categorized as 'nude' would be blocked from being seen. I hope this idea becomes a reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byronlawrence Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 yea imagine trying to carve the sagging breasts and cellulite... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knicki____ Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 dejavu. why do we never debate on whether a flower shot is art? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjords Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 You can always take a figure drawing class at a private institution ( tuition $30,000) and for that money you are Guarantied pot bellies and sagging cellulite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will king Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 It's not so much nude photography that bothers me. I don't think there's anything wrong with displaying the nude human form. What bothers me is when I browse through the recently posted photos or the TRP, and I happen to see a women bound by rope or a women masturbating. There's a place for that kind of stuff but in my opinion, photo.net is not it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayme Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Adam- I had similar thoughts as I looked at the TRP yesterday. Me thinks someone has figured out how to manipulate the rating system again. I note today, the images are gone from the front page of the TRP. As for nude photography, it has been debated many times as Knicki mentions. As a woman, I am not offended by a tastefully, well done image of a naked woman. However, as Will mentioned, there are some that really make me want to puke. As an older woman (51 & proud to be 51 wouldn't want the pressures of the younger crowd today) I am disturbed by the ultra thin, breast implanted figures that advertise just about everything today. A lot of confused younger woman & men define their own self image by how "thin" they are, thus Anorexia/Bulimia has become a rampant problem. Is this the fault of the photographer? I think not, more the advertisers who desire this look to push their products & the confused consumer who buys into it. I know that PN has made an effort to pull what they think is objectionable in the nude area. David McCracken ( I know he won't mind me mentioning his name) had many images removed from his portfolio in the recent past. I do not see any way PN could police this subject on a 24 hour basis. This is not a "G" rated site. I personally like that. I personally find the "bondage" type images the most disturbing. I would guess this is because I am such an independent woman that the thought of being tied up, lock up or restrained in any way, very repulsive. But.... as evidenced by the PN's "most interesting photographers" list, others do not feel the same. I can live with this. What I don't want to live with is this: A few months back I had the audacity to rate a nude image I felt was offensive with a 3/3 (not anonymously) and I was harassed by this person & their "mates" for a few months. I commented as to why I thought the image was offensive, it was not just a "rate & run". I thought the harassment would never end. NO, I did not write Jeremy @ abuse. I'm a big girl & I decided he was just an angry goofball, I ignored the attacks. Now I just skip on by this person's, mostly disgusting, poorly exposed & composed images. Lesson learned. If he did this to me, I imagine he is doing it to others. Any one else had a similar situation? Or am I alone in this experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will king Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Jayme, I can't say that I have had the same experience. I don't think I have ever rated a nude. I have however left comments stating my opinion on the lack of "art" on some nude photos of a woman in a hot tub with her rump sticking up in the air and a very poor photo of a woman masturbating. (same photographer, BTW) and I think you know who I am speaking of. So far, she has ignored my comments as well as others' comments. Art is subjective and so is morality. What may be art to one person may be trash to another. What may be immoral to one person may be the norm for another, but we should all take into consideration that we are posting photos for ALL to see, including children. To be honest, it's not obvious teenage boy doing what teenage boys do (look at nude woman) that bothers me. It's the young girls who truly are into photography that checks out this site and stumbles into a photo of a slender women with ballon breasts, tied up with rope. That's not sending a great message. Are we Americans prudes, or does anybody else agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_bryant Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 I think the issue can be summed up by reflecting on these comments. If I reproduced a photo from an adult magazine, did some cropping and converted it to B&W and posted it, how would it rate? If I posted photos of naked men, how would they rate? In other words, do the ratings reflect art or something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona_chrome Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 It is interesting different peoples tolerances for what is an acceptable nude, and i am no exception I am sure. I am really not interested in Bondage, but have seen some incredible images where bondage type shackles and such were used and the photos transcended any sense of abuse of the nude woman--in some ways became empowering. There was a shot that appeared of a fully clothed, young girl whose hands were tied, set in a "basement" setting and she had a pensive, defenseless look on her face--that just seems wrong on so many levels. I also saw one photographers work here where he posted a photo of a model and she was more rubenesque, had obvious scars, maybe from implants, although not obviously altered, and may have been one of the most powerful, and honest, portraits in this person's portfolio. Of course, it was removed after he received several comments from disgusted males about the scars. I find a voyeuristic telephoto shot of a woman's butt, in a bathing suit, much more offensive than a frontal pubic area shot done in a studio setting. That all said, I think there are lines, rules, set on this site and I think that is right for a private concern to do. I don't like censorship, but I am not fond of those many who pander to the prurient, including themselves and yet will never cross such lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasma181 Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Check out www.usefilm.com . I don't think there is any nudity there at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamcoombs Posted February 4, 2006 Author Share Posted February 4, 2006 Hello all... Interesting stuff. I would just like to respond to a few comments made... Art says "why donメt I start my own forum and stop telling people what is and isn't rightヤ. Itメs a forum, a place to discuss opinions! I am not telling people anything, I am asking questions and giving opinions.. I think other peoples views that its easy to avoid is probably right, its just that I was having a good look round because I have only just registered and it was very noticeable that the most interesting people listed here all do nudes...I am sure there are people who are just as talented or even better photographers that donメt take pictures of naked ladies who are probably not getting the accolade they deserve because the nude shots are dominating... People who have mentioned all the classic paintings and sculptures of nudes...can't argue, but some of the stuff on this site cannot be compared...close ups of woman with their legs spread, masturbation, bondage etc...itメs a totally different subject..and thatメs the sort of stuff that I am objecting too..a point that I didn't really make clear in my original post... I think Jayme Hall and Will King probably sum up what I am trying to say perfectly... having said all this, I got my Canon EOS 350d delivered the other day and went out today for the first time with it to my local park and came back with a set of SHOCKING photos! So who am I to comment! Thanks for everyone who took the time to respond..its interesting to read what other people feel about this... I do think this is a great site and its sure going to help me improve as a photographer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louis1 Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 The main point about this type of image is that irrespective of artistic and technical expertise it will be viewed and rated. There is an insatiable demand for it from those who come to browse and have no intention of joining or posting. The site gets revenue from clicks/views. This is to the sites financial advantage to have all these visitors. Money over morals is not even up for discussion here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janet cull Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 >>>it shouldn't be hard for you to avoid 'em<<< That's not entirely true. I have a 12 yr old son and I'm cautious about opening the critique page when he's in the room because, all too often, it's unrolled some wide-open-to-the- world "babe" shot that looks like something other than art to me. Most of the nudes I've seen are very offensive to me. They just look like "girly shots", in my opinion. And they make me think less of the man (usually) who made them. (ooo...I know that's a socially incorrect judgement, but I'm so glad to finally say it here.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now