single photos 1-DSC_0047.JPG

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 fantastic lens, and half the price of Nikons

overpriced glass, Uncle Mike P. is not going to like reading that.

Suggestive, but, isn't she too young as to be exposed in this manner? 

yes she is young, and her mom was standing right next to me as I was photographing her, please note that she is wearing shorts.
So, yes she is young for your intentions of what you might be thinking, but not everyone is thinking that. Thank you for your comment.

Why are you angry?  when you post a photo you are inviting to comments, and comments not always must be flattering, or comfortable.

I am no more angry than your comment as to this being a suggestive photo. I would not want to give anyone the notion that I am exploiting children as the likes of Sally Mann did.

I do understand any feedback is better than no feedback, but I just want to make others aware of intention of photo, it was not of your thinking of suggestive.

I was not trying to offend you, If I did it then I beg your pardon. My "suggestive" word in my original message can be taken in the wrong direction then it is inappropriate from my side, in this sense you are right about it.

But as adults our responsibility with children is to protect them from unnecessary public exposures that can lead to misunderstood and disgusting situations , like this one, for example.

I would suggest a tighter crop (above the knee) OR a shot that includes her feet and elbow. I would opt for the tighter crop myself. Good black and white work.

" the likes of Sally Mann "  WOW! just WOW!

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Photography is funny. You can have the best of intentions with a child and still create what can easily be perceived as a provocative and inappropriate photo. You and the mom may not consider it thus, but viewers don't have the benefit of your presence or good cheer. (By the way, not all mom's have the best judgment in determining roles or models for the children to follow, whether or not that's the case here.) Viewers simply see the photo you present and this presentation of a young child can certainly be seen as over the top. . . no matter how you intended it. If you and the mother say you don't see anything nefarious here, that's fine. Photographers are often somewhat insulated by what they know of a scene and so don't see what others may see. Many a photographer has claimed to make a sad photo because they knew the circumstances of a scene, but viewers don't see it as sad, because the picture isn't adequately telling the story. I would hesitate to suggest that the provocation is only in the mind of a viewer predisposed to seeing this that way. That could come across as defensive. I'd sooner take the comment as one truth and, if it bothers you enough, realize that your pic is giving off a certain vibe. If it doesn't bother you, then accept it as given, an honest response. No talk of intentions will change what the photo looks like.

I agree with David and Fred, just my 2¢.

2 more cents here. I presume you are not a 'brother' in a religious sense!