A condition of rest.

A good photo should elicit an emotional response. Like many others, my response is, "That sure looks cold and uncomfortable". After reading Scott's post, the only thing that makes sense is to change the title to "Dead Body Dumped by the Lake".

Nathan: "I am, for the record, becoming more and more convinced that imagery that makes one feel as if they need something, or are missing something in their life, or makes one feel that their life isn't as whole as it should be, is destructive. I think it is part of the process whereby we learn to judge ourselves by comparing ourselves to what we perceive as others view's of us, or our perception of other's state of happiness or richness of life and then come to the conclusion that we need something to fulfill us. Perhaps this is what turns us into consumers, of clothes, cars, food, sex and so much else. "

I was hoping you'd get to that last point, for therein lies the essence of what you are thinking about.

You are looking at images as a consumer, so I suggest that if you consider all images to be advertising (something that instills desire for that which you do not have), that you look to yourself for the cure for this malaise.

All advertising is designed to make us feel like our lives are incomplete because we don't have the featured product.

Good art is not advertising.

You need to look at something other than Igor's advertisements for sexual encounters with surrogate archetypes... t

Yes that's true, I actually like the "upturned peach" (as it has been described) as it seriously addresses our squeemishness about sexuality. It would need a similarly motivated and constructed body of work to legitimize my interpretation and to distinquish it from the overly simple and overt reference that some ascribe to it. Some other of the figurative works are certainly well done, but suffer from association with the monotonous portfolio. Many of his landscapes are quite beautiful.

This image (POW) actually is different from his other work, but it still uses a woman's form as an end in itself, a visual element in someone else's vision. I thought a good name for it might be "Angle of Repose, Imminent Submersion" as she seems to have been arranged by gravity, pitch and inertia and is on the verge of slipping into the lake.

I've asked him if his lights were nailed in place, as a cute smarty pants way of intimating that his work is formulaic. He said yes, which is what I probably would have said had I been asked such a flip question. Formulaic in this way: Sexual performances by extremely flexible, large breasted, well tanned women in an unchanging set with variety provided by props that are one metaphor deep. I'm sure these women are fine, multi-faceted humans (but that's supposition on my part... how would I know? His topic is so narrow in scope.) and Igor's probably a great guy to hang with, who really knows his way around the photographic arts (and he seems to have lots of good looking friends).

As one critic said to him, it seems as if he made all these images many years ago in a period of intense artistic exploration, and now he has died and someone is bringing out one image per week from an archive in a vault somewhere. There is no possibility of change because that's all that was done. I have these periods too, in which I explore a path and eventually begin to imitate myself. I imagine everyone does. I just don't want to be 70 years old and still performing that big hit I had back in 1969 to an audience of blue hairs.

I can imagine "Igor addicts", lurking around his page, waiting for the next installment in the catalog 20 years from now, ready to type "Excellent. Excellent. Excellent." I completely understand the satisfaction this might bring, but I wish for some urge on his part to surprise us, and I don't think the image posted above (POW) is the surprise we all hope for... t

I admire some of Igor's work, specifically his body studies of the female athlete. The rest of his work terrifies me and while this image has been discribed as " his most gentle nude" I think its actaully one that is just as diminishing.

 

When critiquing female nudes the first thing I look for is some physical sign that the subject aknowledges the camera/ male gaze. sometimes its eye contact, or neck position or a smile. Here the subject is Faceless, Emotionless, Ambigious.

If she was laying on her back my reaction would be very different. She would have an Identity. Positioned away from the gaze, she is COMPLETELY objectified, and the LANDSCAPE of the mountains--how cliche, continues to further drive this objectification home.

 

The second thing I thought of when i saw this image was its applied narrative. Why is this women 'washed up' naked on a rock considered EROTIC/beautiful? Because her face is not visible and she isn't expressing any emotion, one can only assume she could be dead.

This is a fine image, ignoring issues of objectification of women, feminism, etc.. (Although the tones don't do much for me and it looks brownish)

 

 

This image would do a lot more for me if she was clothed, admiring the landscape. Or if she was hugging her significant other.

To Tom Meyer, can you tell us what an original nude is? Can you put a link of a original photo.net nude here? Or just explain what you an original nude must be with words? What are you expecting from a nude photo?

This is a naked woman in the open air which means freedom, she is laying near water as after having a bath with means to most of us relaxing and feeling rested. She is not only in the open air but in nature without any human presence which means the beginning times, before civilisation when everything was easier, the black and white says the same thing. Her curves echoing in the hills refers to the mother earth myth. Last but not least we do not see her face so everyone can give her the face (s)he knows, (s)he is expecting so relating more closer with the subject. It also means trust or confidence.

Moderator comment:

Ladies and Gentlemen -- this POW is for critique of the image and certainly to discuss nudity as it relates to the image and to answer to the elves question (A nude with some elegance?).

It is not a forum for discussion of the nude images on Photo.net.

It is not about whether or not this is porn.

It is not about the exploitation of women.

Please take these discussions to another appropriate forum.

Please refer to the link below for guidelines for posting on the POW forum.

guidelines for posting comments on Photograph of the Week.

A most spectacular landscape nude. I've found LNs some of the hardest to pull off. I think Igor succeeds very well here with the "nude as extension of earth" composition. Beautiful tonality, too.

Moderator Note: After a few edits and deletions, just a reminder that discussions about POW policy or PN policy belong

in the Help and Feedback Forum. Again, please read the guidelines.. ;-) Thanks.

Scott Eaton's comment (way) above was interesting in it's pondering whether a police line was just out of camera. I think that was a spot-on observation. This is a photograph of a female body near a lake. There is no indication that the body is meant to be alive. In fact, when you think about it, what's a nude female body doing resting on a cold, lifeless rock near a chilly-looking lake with brooding clouds? That's gotta be an unusual place for a girl to go for a lie down. And an unusual time for her to do it.

OK, looking at the title of the portfolio this came from ("Nude and Erotic") it may be that Igor's thoughts were more towards the sensual than the criminal. Many of the other 124 (!) pictures of nudeoids in it seem to add support that idea, but on the other hand it's well-established that there's a fine line between the naked female form and forensically engaged sociopathy. In support of this theory, can I point out that Igor provides several shots of naked women strung up, bound, gagged, chained and one or two carrying whips. The locations consist (in a significant number of images) of generally lonely, abandoned-looking derelict warehouse-type situations. In fairness, there might be an innocent explanation: if you're trying to get a gal to get her gear off for the camera, a lonely place is a good choice. This photo - viewed in the context of the prolificly populated portfolio it comes from - seems to me to have an undercurrent of danger and voyeurism to it... almost like the trophy of an evil deed.

We can wax on about how the curves of the hips match the hills in the background - that's geometry, camera club stuff - but the underlying theme here is misery. We may match the shape of the landscape, but we will all, one day, become part of it again. Cold and lifeless.

For your information, Tom Meyer started a

discussion called can you tell us what an original nude is? in the

Philosophy of Photography forum. Please contribute to that thread if the subject interests you.

For me the hilly echo of the woman's curve is not particularly noteworthy. They are a little far apart in the image and only similarly shaped in a very general sense. I even suspect that the hills are only in the picture as a consequence of Igor wanting to fit the entire horizontal form of the woman into the frame. If they were intended as a more significant element of the composition then surely he would have stopped the lens down a little more.

Far more compositionally interesting to me are the lines of the leg, back and arm all parallel to the rocks edge in the lower right. I would have framed more of the rock and possibly cut the hills out completely.

For most of the (aesthetically very well taken) nudes by Igor, we remain, I think, in the realm of fairly standard form studies - where body oil becomes a bit of a boring ritual to me after a while. I still like such pictures for their aesthetical values, but I'm not "taken" by anything else. And sometimes Igor also uploaded quite "empty" S&M-oriented stuff. As for this POW, it is indeed more "gentle", and I find it very silent, and subtle, and simply pleasant - with some, but not much, ambiguity.

Here is now a list of more provocative, interesting and original nudes by Igor...:

1) Humorous:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2599153

or even better imo, because it's more subtle usage of humor:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2525730

2) Suggestive, complex, and dark or even scary, somehow related to death:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2177043

or http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2124862

or http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1789399

or http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1426712

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1122093

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1093639

I'm taken by such images because they grab my brains beyond the impeccable aesthetics.

I'm sorry, but this just doesn't do alot for me. I find it somewhat underexposed and I think you could plop down a basset hound in place of the woman and the interest for me would be about the same.

I would agree withe "elves" that this is one of Igors "more gentle nudes." I'd also

argue that, although I do not find it one of the strongest POWs I've seen, it is

noteworthy. Congratulations Igor.

 

I do not, as a number have commented, see this as an example of a "dead body" or

representative of a crime scene. As a lab assistant in the gross anatomy lab I spend

one semester each year surrounded by 40 odd bodies in various stages of

"deconstruction." I do, as Kim S has suggested, see this as a woman in peaceful

repose, not at all suggestive of a corpse.

 

I am particularly taken back by the contributors who denegrate the entire theme of

"nude in the landscape" or anonymous nude as somehow unworthy. I've lived in a

sufficient number of remote areas where I would argue "naked in the woods" is not all

that uncommon! I would challenge anyone to look at Eric Boutilier-Brown's

environmental nudes and not see them as natural as well as stunning. I seldom show

a model's face in my work with the nude. I want the viewer to react to whether we

have captured light and form in some interesting way. Showing a model's face often

brings a stronger element of sensuality/sexuality into play. If the goal the model and

I had was to show a strong powerful woman who wishes to celebrate her body then

we would definitely elect to show her face. However if our goal was to evoke a

reaction to light, shadow and form we will not.

 

An "unnatural location or pose?" Your own viewpoint folks. None of us were there to

test the temperature or rock or air. We might take some cues from the tonality of the

water and sky but again this is easily manipulated by a technician as accomplished as

Igor. Criticisms at this level are, for me at least, an example of looking for something

to criticize. This is perhaps my major issue with many reviews at photo.net...looking

for something to criticize rather than accepting the image as the artists vision or

providing constructive criticism.

 

Igor, my only issue here is that the left arm appears to end at the shoulder...adjusting

to the pose so that her hand is visible at some point would help with closure. Fine

work, my congratulations.

I do not doubt William Croninger's expert qualifications for saying that this body on a rock does not look in any like a real murder victim. I am glad the experience was his and not mine.

 

My point was that this pic looks like a glamorized, Hollywood version of a murder victim on a rock, combining sexuality and death. Sensational, tittilating our minds with curiosity without requiring us to see the inevitable putrefaction. Nowadays, we are all experts at this visual language. Or think we are.

 

The rest of Igor's images - of which this is the least confronting - also wander along the same fine dividing line. They can be broken down into three categories: the fun, followed by the crime, followed by the grave.

 

Dial 9-1-1.

My initial reaction to this POW was along the lines of what Tony calls geometry - camera club stuff. I wanted to see what it would look like with less space between the model and the landscape, knowing full well that it would have been a simple matter for Igor to lower the camera to accomplish this. So it's certainly intentional rather than sloppiness on his part.

 

I'm less convinced that the position of the arms and hands were as carefully considered. The right arm looks comfortable enough and removes any suspicion that this is meant to represent a corpse. On the other hand (ha ha), the left arm got lost in the shuffle, as William mentioned above, and I might like to have seen it extended above the head in some way so it doesn't look like a stump.

If I may just express another opinion about this arms issue... I think having one "missing arm" here has the effect of purifying the shape of the shoulder. With the second arm extended, the shoulder would lose a lot of its impact in terms of shape. And to me, graphically speaking, this picture is about the top outline of this body. Extending an arm to help her may be ok, but extending her second arm would ruin this outline, and therefore this photo as a whole. Conclusion: leave it as it is !

Showing multiple shots in the session would be useful right about now. I have no idea how many exposures Igor took, or if a different arm position was even considered, but as much as I can imagine the extension of the arm improving the line (this being more important than the shape if association with the line in the landscape is important), there's no substitue for actually seeing it.

The fact that I didn't see the human form makes this an inspirational work. It tells me more about composition and tonal balance than words ever could. Very nice Igor.

Since I have enjoyed the experience in late summer of lying on a rock warmed by the sun and while the sun sets I also meditated on the seasons change and the contrast of the last heat and the turning to come; I must say don't critisize the sensual aspect of nature and the pleasure it gives. And by that I am speaking to those that not seeing the constrasts of warm stone and cool water, soft skin and rock, feminem shape masculine formation,and those similar qualities too between what is - and of nature.

there's no sun on these rocks. I see no evidence of a setting sun, or any sun. It doesn't look warm. It looks like sweater weather.

There is nothing outstanding there to see, unless you are fond of grey dull light, flat water, distant and indistinct hills and an unpromising sky that hints of pending rain... or a nude young woman of very certain proportions.

Perhaps some fans of this work are content to look at the woman's body and use the grey landscape, dull light and the image's generic fine art components as a legitimizing motive for that gaze.

Were I standing there, with my camera and this napping model, I might be inspired to say, "Wake up, darlin', it looks like rain. Maybe we'll try again in the morning"... t

I couldn't agree more with Scott and others who have taken the

time to shed some common sense over the generic praise of

this image. First of all, the image is a cliche. It's not just a "new

take on something old"; it's a cliche. Second, the technical

comments are spot-on: the model's posture is unnatural and

clearly uncomfortable or tense; the soft focus is not a winning

touch; etc.

I'm stunned that my comments regarding the aesthetics of this

image were edited out. At the very least, the moderator could

have the decency to make a note to that effect.

 

My point was that this image is, in fact, degrading of women and

pornographic. That is my opinion and, frankly, it is an opinion

worth discussing, given the nature of his portfolio. Why is

anything other than praise banned?

It's not banned, it's just elsewhere. The issue of pornography and degradation isn't appropriate to this discussion because this particular image isn't degrading or pornographic. Somnabulent, maybe...

If you want to discuss those aspects of photography that were dredged up here, see the tangential discussion on the Philosophy of Photography Forum that was inspired by this POW thread... t