nice e(v)a III

I have seen a lot of photos in PN that show the same.. and they get

grate comments and 6/6 or 7/7...!!!

 

If you do no like wahat you see here, only pass to the next one.

 

Regards.

I think the same Marko....but for me this photo sould be an 4/6.

 

Keep shoting.

 

Kaz

Non che le donne mi dispiacciano, ma le fotografie ginecologiche non le trovo ne sexi, ne di buon gusto.

A hairy cunt. Wow!!! 7/7!!!

I think you're missing the point here, Marko. True, many photographs displayed in Photo.net display intimate body parts, but that in and of itself does not constitute good photography, and does not automatically merit good ratings! Lots of photographs here "show" bugs, birds, barns and buds, but that doesn't make them art.

Try to see the aesthetic difference between snapshots and art. Look at the work of those who consistently receive good ratings and compare your work (and mine to, or anybody elses, for that matter). What makes the difference? What sets them apart??? It's not what you "show" - it's primarily about creativity, seasoned with technical skills

This image is better suited for crudes than nudes. The oozing is quite unatractive. The crop is too tight. The tones are ok and the hand is pretty. Other than that it is a amature snapshot of a crotch oozing some fluids.

Ilike the photo and understand what you are trying for. Could have been done with more grace but the photo has erotic qualities. Don't let the prudes scare you away from this work.

The photos that you perceive to be like this that get "grate" comments are usually very well done and have artistic merit. Your rendition is lacking in both of these advantages. This looks as if it was taken with no attention to detail and intended for publication in a gentleman's whacking magazine. Perhaps your talents would be best used by taking photos of trees.

I'm not going to rate this, only comment...

 

First, I dont believe I have ever seen an image that resembles this which was rated 6/6 or 7/7.

 

It is an acquired taste which I find un appealing.. but thats just my opinion.

 

I dont find the crop or angle to be artistic, there isnt anything that stands out as original or even attractive..

 

If this is a loved one.. then it holds sentimental value which is priceless..

 

but to the rest of the world (bold statement which i will stand behind) the 70's bush needs to go.

 

I dont shoot nude anymore, but when I did, I think it was key to provide an image that made people say "wow.. thats awesome"

this is like "wow.. thats something I could have gone the rest of my life without seeing and would be ok with that"

 

Forgive me for "trash talking" 1 out of every 1000 pics deserves it..

amature work is deserving of honest critique and ways of improvement..

but amature "wanna be porn" doesnt even deserve that.

She has a pretty hand.

I have to tell you, I would rather look at this than another insect, bird, flower, etc, etc. etc. Now that is not to say that there are not some good insect, bird, flower, etc. pics out there. It is just that too many of them are the same thing over and over. Now, arriving at this picture of yours, I will say that it has a certain element of originality in that it is different from about 99 percent of the pics posted under the category nudes. So, I think I would at least have to give you a four or five for originality. On the other hand, it is rather a picture that anyone with a willing model and a camera, and a middling ability with the camera could take.

 

That said, I think there is a certain eroticism to it. The delicate types are offended at the fluids. I think they are a nice touch. Reality says that fluids do sometimes emmanate from our sexual organs. I also find the hand to be beautiful and it's placement to be erotic. According to the definition of the aesthetic rating as I read it, part of what makes the aesthetic rating is how well a meaning or emotion or feeling is conveyed by a photo. I think you would have to be given credit for conveying a lot of meaning in the photo. Therefore, you should receive a higher than average score for aesthetics.

 

Bottome line (no pun intended), it is not an earth-shattering photo. It is of interest and it is technically acceptable. That's all I have to say.