"You've left your lights on"

Stop, collaborate and listen,

Peter Spirax is back with a brand new invention.

 

Someone obviously got their panties in a knot and had my last photo

removed. Well, I'm back. For all those that missed my last effort...

here we go again... It seems that all you have to do these days to

get rated well on this site is to wack a set of tits up here and

you're almost guaranteed of 5/7+. There's too much amateur porn

trying to pass itself off as "Fine Art". Making a photo black and

white does not make it fine art.

 

Guys, let's stop rating stuff with our penises and start basing the

ratings on artistic merit.

Dude, that's funny.

Agree everything you talked about is so true. It would be nice if everyone on this sight started rating photos of all types....I think this photo gets your point across.

It's a witty way to make the point. Speaking as someone who photographs nudes and tries to do it in an artistic way I'm very aware of the problem. The body can be beautiful, and it can be sexy. There are some pictures which are only about sex, but if they don't turn anyone on they're pretty poor as porn. I don't see a great deal wrong with porn that doesn't pretend to be anything else. "Just another pair of tits" pictures - you know the ones with no imagination or flair - annoy me, the assumption that as a hetrosexual male I should enjoy those pictures winds me up. I love those curves, how they change shape as the body moves, the way that a breast joins the body: to see them done the same way time and again reduces them from something beautiful to something banal, it doesn't make them sexy. The pictures can look reasonably nice but they don't even rate 2/7 for originality.

This isn't great to look at - aside from the humour, but its got to be most origninal breast pic of the week.

 

Was the Pair tree yours Peter ? I still think "Peter Spirax" is a pseudonym.

 

 

Clever concept, even if the attitude isn't. Seems to me there's a superabundance of pink posies dripping with dew, craggy trees and misty mountains, all getting their fair share of the ratings around here... there's plenty of amateur scenery trying to pass itself off as 'Fine Art". Postcard art more like, (yawn)and if the ratings are really that important to you then you're taking pictures for the wrong reasons anyway. There's plenty of bad nudes on photo.net just like there's plenty of bad 'everything else'. It all follows Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crap). Personally I think taking pictures of people, clothed or unclothed and doing it well is more challenging (and to me, more interesting) than pictures of flowers, trees, birdies, caged animals and misty mountaintops. I also think that the people who go around describing simple nudity as 'porn' are really just flaunting their own pinched, repressed view of sexuality and complaining because other people aren't as unhealthy as they are. Obscenity is in the mind of the beholder.

 

So now that you've put two pair of tits on your VW, do you think you should get double ratings? Oh and your comment about 'making a photo black & white does not make it Fine Art"... I couldn't agree more.

With your original identity your campaign would be more successful.

 

Like this, you're only making yourself ridiculous. There's no PN gestapo that will look for you and make you a hero(by killing you).

 

I think your former post was removed due to the personal attack to two photographers. And i think you know this, since you made it more general this time.

 

Good intentions, bad approach. Wish you luck with it, anyway.

Pant, pant.... I see tits... give it a eight!