portrait Thoughtful

Marcus, I looked at your other photos, the one of the girl dressed in the woods (i even think its the same girl) portrays the same emotion and the same ideas. Why did you have to take it to the unnecessary step of having pose in a studio nude? You already achieved your goal. This one was to far.

 

ITs like in law, when you cross exam a witness -- you can ask the witness, so you were mad at the victim, you went and you bought a gun, you loaded the gun, you hid the gun in your pocket, you staked out the victim by waiting under her window, and you broke into her house when she came home, and you shot her four times in the chest. After asking all of that, do you need to ask the question, so you meant to kill her? what if the guy says no, I didnt mean to kill her, I was trying to empty the gun! Well there goes your murder case. You asked one to many questions. The jury already had it. You took one to many pictures. I had that image you were trying to portray with the picture of the girl in the woods. She is in almost the identical pose, just clothed. You didnt need to shoot the nude of her to portray that image.

There is no need to define or defend this image as art. It simply is an image. Without context the label art has no meaning. Of course if you really want to know what I consider to be the artistic merits of this image, well, I stand by what I wrote before: A beautiful imageI love the subtle tones, the unusual crop and positioning (of the subject) in the frame.

 

But I dont think art is the real issue here. The real problem according to you is this:

 

the choice of subject makes it wrong

 

 

So lets have a discussion about what really matters to you and not worry about a silly label.

 

The bottom line is that you have an issue with this type of image because your social and cultural beliefs only allow you to view this image in one way. Which is fine, you have the right to define what youre comfortable with as narrowly or as broadly as you choose. But what I object to, and what causes me to dismiss your comments, is when you equate anyone who disagrees with you as a child abuser.

 

Any parent that consented on behalf of their child in my opinion commited(sic) child abuse.

 

These are your words. Did I misinterpret them? Because as read them I see no appreciation or even the slightest recognition of the fact that many cultures hold different views about what is and what isnt appropriate dress and age.

 

For me, the subject matter doesnt make me uncomfortable and more importantly I feel no need to defend that position to a person who dismisses all other views out of hand. Take a minute and re-read all the comments. Not surprisingly, given the multicultural nature of this group, youll see that the majority of people commenting here are complimentary towards the image and subject matter. You dont have to like this image, you can even say how you dont understand how other people can. But you dont get to accuse anyone who does like it of condoning child abuse, at least not if you expect to be taken seriously by people on a forum intended to foster discussion on photography. So ask yourself this are you here to share and learn or are you only here to spout off closed-minded opinions and disparage others who dare to disagree? Figure that out then re-join the discussion.

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

 

Art hmmmmmmmm. I find art is like a mirror and what and how you think about a piece of art will tell us a lot about ones self. This is just an image of a very young child (7 years old), thats it. What we see in our minds of this photo is who we have become. It is obvious that as an adult we no longer see as children and that is sad to some extent.

The erotic nature in this picture is all in the minds of the people who view this. This is a girl who has nothing to cover up, she is way to young. This is not a nude, it is a child without a shirt. Again where does your mind lead you.

 

A saying comes to mind for these people who see this as an inappropriate picture and or a nude/porno pic.

"Me thinkest thou protesteth too much"

You did misinterpret my quote. You interpreted the quote to mean that I have "accuse[ed] anyone who does like it of condoning child abuse." No, that is not what I said. You go back and re-read it. What I DID said is that the parents who consented to this picture being taken and posted have, in my opinion, committed child abuse. Nothing more was said about those who like the picture. I disagree with those who like it, but that is their right to like something, and I can't tell someone to like, or dislike it. What I have been against all along is those that have defended the choice of subject matter.

 

There can be no defense to someone who takes a nude picture of a preteen girl and posts it on the internet. There is no justification for such a posting. The subject matter of this picture is inappropriate. I never said the picture is obscene or pornographic, I have always claimed the picture is WRONG! You do not show a girl this age topless.

 

I have lived in England and I am familiar with their moral views. I am quite sure that under English maral views, this picture would be wrong too. I have never been to Sweeden, but if you tell me that Swedish morals would permit this subject matter, then that is a clash of cultures. However, you do not post a Swedish picture on an American website, and think that the picture won't be subject to American cultural bias.

 

Moreover, the scariest part of this image is when you click the copyright info tab on the top of the picture you get this statement: "Does this photo have the model release form if needed? No" Now that is a scary thought that there was no model release for this picture.

 

Children can not consent to anything for a reason. They lack the understanding and experience to make informed decisions. I highly doubt that this child was able to make the informed decision for herself of whether she should pose nude and whether the subsequent picture should apear on the internet. Now, put yourself in her shoes. Lets say she didn't want this done, and her parents told her to do it, is it not child abuse? Lets say she wanted the picture taken/posted, should that matter? She is what 10, 11, ok 12? Can a 10 or even a 12 year old child understand and apprecite the decision to take a naked picture and have it posted on the internet? I don't think so, and therefore, to allow the picture to be taken/posted still constitutes child abuse. To like the picture constitutes bad taste. To defend the choice of subject matter constitutes bad judgment.

 

Lastly, I don't dismiss all other views out of hand. I have given credit to valid points, and have pointed out weeknesses in other peoples arguments. Unlike some people who have posted, I have not dismissed anyone's ideas or views. I have not judged anyones opinions based on the body of their work, or the length of time that they have been members of this forum (as was done to both me and Gregg Schrib.) What I do dismiss is so called blind loyalty. Defending this picture and its "artistic merit" simply because how dare someone deny that a picture has artistic merit. Such broad openmindness is worse than closemindedness.

 

I have posted this image at a Swedish site, but that site is very small (20.000 members) and there are people there aswell that don't like this image. I don't know if the cultural differences between USA and Sweden are that very big in this matter.

 

You said something about the copyright and the reason that I havn't written any is because I don't know what to write there. You can call me what ever you like, but I'm not a professionell photographer but only an amateur. But I will see on other postings and make a copyright statement on the images I have. Thanks for remainding.

 

The reason that I posted it on photo.net is not because it's an American site, but this is the site that must have the most viewers all over the world. And I really don't care where the servers are placed, because I know that people all over the world will see my work.

 

I know that you are "angry" with the folks that let her photo be taken with the top off, but I think it's very sad that one can not take a photo of a young girl without any top on and instantly start to think about her future and what viewers might do with the picture.

 

You are right that the girl in this photo is the same as the photo - Autumn. And you said that you got the same fealing when you saw that image. But the thoughts with that image is that she is taking on a glove that by mistake have the same pattern and color as the skarf. That's why she is looking down.

 

I have a question for you. If she would cover the nipple with her hand, would the photo be okay for you then? Since I don't understand what makes people disslike the type of photo I have taken here I would be very glad if you tell me what you dislike with this picture. In that way I can become a better photographer when knowing how other people think about my photo. That's the main reason that I share my work. And I assume that that is the main reason that people are commenting images.

The overwhellming majority of people who have bothered to post do not feel the way I do. This is America, where every citizen has 10 opinions on each subject and their right to voice all of them. My rantings are just one opinion on the subject. Some agreed, some say I went to far.

 

In my opinion, this picture should not be taken at all. Plain and simple. I feel you could have gotten the same emotion from the Autumn picture. Same picture, but use this pose. See how you can evoke the same image? Why cross the line? I just hope this young girl will see the "art" in the picture when she grows up.

 

Marcus, you obviously know photography. Your other pics are great. This picture just suffers because of the subject matter. But hey if people didnt try to cross the line, would there still be a line to cross?

 

Also, don't take my comments personally. Like I said early on, I am sure you did not have any wrong intentions, I am sure you did not do anything inappropriate, I jsut think your final image, unintentionally, crossed the line.

 

 

My dear Marcus, it's incredible how many dirty minds are allowed to pollute your photo.

Perhaps if they are allowed to go to an European beach they start to act like something from Al Queda and put veils over everybody.

In Oslo (Norway) you could find a garden plentiful of statues of children made in the early 20 century and nobody said Pornography!!.

The Spanish painter Sorolla in the early century also made his magnificent paintings of children bathing in the beach and nobody said Pornography!!! only the Spanish government put the painting in stamps for the Royal Post.

To find that an almost human can feel pornography in a naked child its a symptom that he not the photographer, its sexual attracted by a naked child and a sick man.

 

Congrats Marcus for a so wonderful photograph that perfectly expresses what the world should be. Best from Spain, Luis.

Congrat Marcus.....Best regards again from Spain. Frederic

Nice picture!!! Congrats again from Spain...

Beautiful picture!

Queen Victoria of England had all her chair legs wrapped in cloths - nobody should think of something indecent by looking at them. If a chair leg reminds me of something dirty - is this the carpenter's fault? If someone sees breasts and complete nudity in this photo, whose fault is this? The photographer's?

this discussion is very sad. that it can arouse from a picture of a child (sic! nothing else!) shows how sick most people in western societies especially in the usa became. they really lost the grip to reality and any common sense.

Brian M. Your comments just show how immature you are. With every comment you amuse me more and more. Your reality and an outlok on life are so narrow and altered it saddens me. You state one false assumption after another and when people prove you wrong you insult them. Shame on you. If you see this photo as pornographic you obviously have to look into your own head.

There is a fair element of truth in what Brian says.

 

I am not saying i am uncomfortable with this photograph. I also not for it. But like I said, apart from abusing Brian, no one here really has come with a sensible and rational argument.

 

and like Gregg Schrib pointed out, how many of those supporting the "art" in this photo would post a similar one of their daughters ??

 

now please don't flame me with what i see in this picture is a reflection of my other dark half and other such similar nonsense.

 

A lot gets passed off as "art". I have to say this photograph is one of those.

 

and Brian..

Its good to see someone standing up for what they feel and not worrying about being ostracised for not accepting a photograph as "art".

The "We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are" maxim particularly appplies to that picture and the comments I could read above...

More than thoughful I feel this little girl is in expectation ... expecting though may be ...

is the empty space in her back representing the baby age which is over and past behind her?

This is not a photo taken at the beach or around the pool. It is not a vaction snapshot or a chance capture. You had to set this shot up in advance. You had to ask her to take off her shirt. I am not going to render my opinon of this photo. I just wanted to put it into perspective for the purpose of these posts. Good or bad you created it and posted it for any to see. How would it be recieved if it was on the cover of newsweek magazine. How about the art display case at her school? Do you think she would mind? Did/does she have a choice?

The pic is wonderfully done. I think if we could leave behind every bad thing people have ever done in the past, this would be a wonderful pic of innocence.

 

These unfortunatly are the days when people have children torn from homes for taking pics of their children playing in the tub, or babies nursing.

 

Somewhere there is a middle ground. Maybe. I think the most interesting part of this photo is the social commentary it has caused.

 

 

I'm amazed. I even feel sullied by adding to the conversation. I would love to suggest that the critics here have not had and raised kids, but I'm afraid some of them probably have. There is absolutely no moral negativity in this photo. Those who see it are pulling it out of themselves.

WHAT A COMMENTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

ABOUT A NICE PHOTO.

NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.

 

AND TO REED ALL THE NEGATIVE COMMENTS, IT MAKE ME SICK. WHAT A WORLD.

ITS UNBELEAVEBLE : WE ARE 2003 !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I all wish you a happy Christmas and lots of wisdom in 2004.

With love.,

 

Loft/Portugal

Only a sick mind would think this photo is pornographic. (and there are plenty of those out there) It is a beautiful photo and well done.

That some bozos get any sexual idea in connection with this innocent photo is terribly sad. What has the world come to? Will all children be forbidden outdoors soon?

Marcus, this is a very nice photo, keep up the good work and don't pay any attention to the maniacs.

I have to thank you all one more time. I couldn't ever in my wildest dreams think that this photo would cause so hard feelings on somebody. And Digitri I have to congratulate you for being the 100:th person that has commented this image :)

 

/ Marcus

I will not quote by name (if you need to know who said it, read the posts). Civilized society, pornographic, child abuse, censorship, closed minds, open minds. It's how you see it. In defense of the Photographer - nice photo. I like the crop and extra space on the left it really adds to the image. The choice of black and white is good as I like all portrait's to be in B&W.

 

In defense of "This is not art" - I also never saw the word pornographic come from him (but there was alot of reading and I might have missed it). His problem is with "nude" young girl. His opinion is his own (and maybe shared by many others), but it is still his opinion. It might have been stated wrong on his part, but blame can not be laid upon him for that. If he does not see this as art, then he does not see this as art. I have seen many pictures that people call art, and I would not. The ARTIST that took the picture of the cambell's soup cans said "This is art because I am an artist", well said. I on the other hand think it is a picture of soup cans. The arguement of art or not is a mute point because it is opinion, not fact.

 

Now, saying anything bad about people of America because of the views of some, or many, is not a very educated, or civilized way of speaking. Comparing someone to the ways of the Al Quida (spelling?) because of their opinion on this picture is very childish.

 

No matter how much we discuss this picture as "ART", "Pornography", "Nudity", will not change the fact that we are not talking about what was asked of us, "us" including novice, and pro alike. There are several message boards that you can go to to vent your anger/frustration/lack of intelligence. Instead, discuss and give views on what WAS asked. Lighting, color, focus, crop, and all that.

I have been taking pictures for a while, I'm a novice, and an American. I do not find this picture to be obscene. I find it to be very good. I see it as art because of what was wanting to be acheved, and actually acheiving it.

 

I do however want to add that "This is not art" is 100% right about one thing that he said. If a photo of a nude female (older than 20) is placed on this site, be it a good photo or a badly shot one, it almost ALWAYS get's good reviews even when it is out of focus, badly lit, horribly cropped, and just plain bad. Color would not have changed this picture unless you view color better than B&W. Would age have had an impact on the picture?? No. It could have been acheived with an older model also. Did the Photographer acheive what he wanted by using the model of this age?? In my opinion, yes. Could it have been better?? Everything can be better.

 

Beautiful picture. - Phantom

I don't know if you will see this comment, but this stupid puritan people what was writing comments about this picture just forget it it is very beautiful picture light is perfect and all your pictures are beautiful I am europian and this stupid puritan americans and canadians have no feeling they see just themselfs forget them I wish you good luck with your future work