mzp 0 Posted August 19, 2009 Quite offensive pose. But good light for that with good tones in b&w. Also the limited dof helps to convey an air of privacy. Link to comment
John Peri 1,029 Posted August 19, 2009 Unable to give any sevens which are merited for this photo. An amazing mood captured here, so casual yet elegantly exotic. Link to comment
wmc718 3 Posted August 19, 2009 A beautiful image... love the tonality. Best, Michael Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted August 19, 2009 This pose borders on porno. That artistic lighting is all that separates it. Link to comment
color 3 Posted August 19, 2009 Nice shot. Sexy, well lit, good composition. I like it, except for the blindfold. Maybe if it were white? Link to comment
pisq 0 Posted August 20, 2009 interesting pose, there is a relaxed feel about the image. The arrangement of the feet seem a little funny, and the mask? seems a little unsure. The tone of the image is attractive. Link to comment
gsphotoguy 3 Posted August 20, 2009 The lighting here does save this from going too far, just barely. I like the rest of the pose and the use of the blindfold. The lighting is also very effective. Link to comment
raymondborg 0 Posted August 20, 2009 A very provocative pose but the excellent lighting makes this image works. I don't agree with the blind fold. Wish I could see the eyes. Congrats. Link to comment
fabrizio_r 0 Posted August 20, 2009 Provocative and erotic pose, excellent b/w tones! Bravo! Link to comment
colindoust 0 Posted August 22, 2009 I think the image will benefit from a contrast boost that would create some whites. Link to comment
timothypaulnarron 0 Posted August 27, 2009 If someone sees porno in this image they brought that porno with them. This image makes me want to relax naked on the couch with the ceiling fan on and cover my eyes and just BE. It's like she symbolically has no reason to see what's going on around her because she is so perfectly natural where she is. I think perhaps in this case the muted contrast adds something... sort of like photo's before Ansel Adams showed us all a different way of seeing the world... somehow more innocent. Sure I bring my perceptions to the image just like the porno person but art should involve the viewer, engaged and participating. Otherwise your art was just another of the endless images we pass without seeing. Bravo. I don't normally comment but bravo! Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted September 8, 2009 Timothy Paul Narron , August 26, 2009; 11:40 P.M. BravoIf someone sees porno in this image they brought that porno with them. This image makes me want to relax naked on the couch with the ceiling fan on and cover my eyes and just BE. It's like she symbolically has no reason to see what's going on around her because she is so perfectly natural where she is. Of couse I brought it with me. I am a devout Christian and as far as I am concerned there is far too much gratuitous nudity for nudity's sake on this site. A nude woman with her legs spread open wide and exposing herself is not art, it is pornographic. Link to comment
gordonjb 10,860 Posted September 10, 2009 Whenever I stumble upon yet another " devout christian" defining for us what is and is not acceptable, I take a look through the list of photos they have commented on and cannot help but notice the usual proclivity for spending a lot of time looking at photos of nude women, particularity photos which apparently border on being pornographic. No offense intended merely an observation. The softness of the focus works well with the lighting and the toning to produce an image with an overall sense of calm. I like the concept of the blindfold, however I find the end of it falling in front of her lips to be a distraction. With the absence of her eyes from the image, I think it is important that her remaining facial features be intact to help engage the viewer. Link to comment
bjcarlton 0 Posted September 22, 2009 It's an artistic crotch shot, guys. Get over it. Link to comment
johnya 0 Posted January 26, 2010 Ok so this is an spread leg shot .... but lets face it, the issue is seeing a woman's privates... so what... lets all grow up folks... some cannot get beyond the fact that we see a vagina.... ok and I really do not get why being a Christian means that seeing a naked body is an issue... God made all these things... why is it that people who call themselves Christians, so many of them, have an issue with NUDITY... now on the other hand VIOLENCE they are ok with ... I have always believed that Christians have an issue with pleasure and nudity because it equates with pleasure and therefore they take issue because we should have pleasure here on earth... now on the other hand suffering is what we should be doing so we can be saved for the afterlife and therefore violence is ok since it is suffering and we should accept that as the price for being saved. God made us and I really dont believe he has an issue with any of the body parts. In fact I think he wanted us to enjoy them. Link to comment
george_ferguson 0 Posted June 13, 2010 I see no reason why this pose is offensive or is considered borderline pornography. The lighting and the pose pull together to emphasis the beauty of the woman's body. The blindfold combined with the pose suggest a sensual feeling about this pose but that is beautiful in itself. Thank you for the wonderful picture! Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now