William Michael

I think you will find that the latest gallery images don't appear, because for that page, selected under [Theme] drop-down menu is: "PhotoNet No Sidebars v2.1" Please see samstevens' post a few up from this. Here is a screen shot to assist -

North Cronulla Beach, AUS. Winter. X100s Hoya R72 Filter

That's not my experience. I too have traveled a bit the past 10 years - Europe, North America, Australasia, Asia, Canada, South America Air France, Emirates, American Airlines, Ryan Air, Air New Zealand, Jetstar, Qantas, Rex, Qatar, Singapore Airlines are (I think) all the airlines who have weighed (some multiple times) my carry-on camera backpack, spanning travel 2014 to 2023. Never been caught overweight and never over-sized, but certainly my carry-on has been weighed, regularly: sometimes at check-in, where they usually give a tag indicating the pack has been weighed. However, here is a list of airlines which have weighed my carry-on, at boarding - Ryan Air, American Airlines, Jetstar, Rex, Singapore Airlines, Air France. WW

Can you please provide more information - Which photo? What is the equipment page? The "Equipment" link on the Home page of Photo,net, open to "Gear & Equipment Discussion". What does "tried to access" mean? - I think you clicked on a thumbnail photo on a page somewhere and instead of it opening to a new page displaying the photo, you arrived at "Access Denied" page. Specific details are required to comment and/or assist further. See link provided by samstevens. (BTW The new header for that section of forums is "Community & Help Center" - I only recently noticed that change) WW

I reckon that it is a BIG dustbin. However, forwarding a conversation, no matter how much effort, promotes good Kama: it's not about the 30 seconds of fame that goes to dust very quickly. WW

Big Thank you - samstevens. So simply. So effective. So helpful. *** I am kicking myself because I didn't think to explain that. Similar to samstevens I select the "Theme" selection at the bottom of the page. (My selection does change, according to my particular use, but that's irrelevant to this conversation, yet it does show that having the selection is useful). I like to land on "All Activity". I use that page in my one click (saved) login to PN in my Browser Favourites - https://www.photo.net/discover/ Note choosing "All Activity", without sidebar, you will see little thumbnails of images posted and they are very small. WW

Repeating details I have been provided addresses some technical aspects you mentioned: the NSFW function ("Not Suitable for Work" function) is not native to this (new) "Invision" platform which Photo.net now uses. Presently, the partially adapted NSFW function fails on the images displayed at the front end - i.e. "All Activity" page. My understanding is a fix is unlikely to happen in the near future. WW

Of course - Your wrote (by bold for emphasis) "I'm well aware that many people are turned on and off by various subjects or genres in themselves and try to appreciate the sensibility and sensitivities behind that as well, while for the most part resisting calls to ban or even hide such for various reasons." I understood the meaning to be, rewritten now in five simple sentences with words understood in brackets - "( )" 1. Many people are turned on and turned off by various subjects or genres of Photography. 2. (some of) Those people, try to appreciate the sensibility and sensitivities (behind their own reaction). 3. (some of) Those people resist the urge to call for the banning or censoring of the genres (which they are turned off by). 4. (some of) those people hide their sensibilities and sensitivities. 5. There are various reasons why people hide their sensibilities and sensitivities. Thus - My response spoke to observations. These observations were outside was the main study. These observations were: 1. The interviewed people who were the Subjects of the Photos, displayed a thought-about and cohesive understanding of their views on photography genres employing nude and part-nude subjects and sexual implicit themes and the like. 2. On the other hand, the interviewed people in the target market groups, did not display a similar depth of understanding of their views, or they chose not to discuss their views on those matters. I might have misunderstood your intended meaning. None-the-less the observation as a stand alone, is probably not too far off the main topic. WW

I think that's an interesting tag to your commentary. It opens another tangent. I believe this is not unrelated: (referring to my comments above concerning my research paper) - When interviewing - the women whose images were used in the advertising photographs were candid, open and forthright and many often asked to extend the interview to add more, unsolicited commentary as 'their opinion', the men whose photos were used in the advertising photographs had a similar disposition and 'enthusiasm' to have their 'voice' heard. Those people who were in the sample group of 'the target market' were less so candid and open, very few opted to add their unsolicited commentary and none requested that. (The 'target market' interviewees comprised approximately equal numbers of men and women. The interviewees who were 'the subjects of the advertising photos', approximately were 2:1, women to men. All interview groups were statistically robust.) WW

Fire Hydrants and Fences are the new Nude and Erotic. Humour aside - I too reckon it is a glitch I have no idea why, though - so I'd roll with it and bask in the glory. WW

The “Kinsey Report” comprises two books - Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). The research I mentioned above - "Impact of Still Photography as used in Advertising – post WWII to Present Day" - cited both. “Kinsey Report” is ‘outdated’ - arguably. There are many factors to the argument for ‘outdated’, not the least of which is the (now seen as questionable) method and manner which data was collected. In any case – I think that ‘attitudes to nudity do change’ is a more important point for this conversation, as mentioned in John's example, the Daughter appears topless on the beach. On the other hand, I note, also anecdotally, that there are swings through time to more conservative positions. \ For example I have a close friend of more than 50 years. His Mum and Dad were not particularly religious, though they did observe what one might describe as a basic faith. He (and his Wife from an even more liberal family), have progressively developed over the past 30 years, not only a most conservative religious viewpoint, but also, amongst other opinions they now hold, their viewpoint on the depiction of nudity in Art, or any form, is a great distance from the views their four parents held. WW

I too am skeptical of this generalization (underlined). I think - acceptance, tolerance and defining what is: 'pornography', 'nasty', 'tasteless', (et al including all the descriptors as already mentioned in this conversation), are dependent upon a range of factors, including and not limited to those already mentioned. Researching "Impact of Still Photography as used in Advertising – post WWII to Present Day" (obviously) necessitated the interrogation of a range of images. Many contained women as the main or supporting Subject and many depicted those women as the vehicle of the Advertising Message. Some women were photographed: naked, part naked, in suggestive sexual poses, etc - I think all reading here have seen a broad range of advertising photography used between WWII and 1990 - it doesn't require a tome. Many of these women were interviewed. Many people from the 'target market' were interviewed also. Though the three year research was not specifically directed toward "X-rated" images, I believe there is a tangible and strong enough link to make the claim above that there are indeed many factors which influence people's views on the topic that is being discussed here. Additionally and importantly, whilst one factor might affect one persons view who (for example) sits as a Minister of Religion in a middle class large city western society, it is unwise to conclude that the same opinion will be held by all Ministers, or all people in a middle class large city western society, or all people who sit in both of those groups. WW

Agree with the first part: "To some people, even abstract nudes or B&P glamour images are 'filth, obscene and pornography'," However whilst a person's upbringing might have an affect on what they view as 'filth, obscene and pornography' , there is not dependence. I believe a necessary point to be made in this conversation - (noted that you might have meant not to state "dependence" - of one, on the other.)

Although, as it appears, all commentary here thus far is scripted by men, the comment above clearly excludes, or dismisses, about 50% of people who might view photographic images and: have an opinion on what they view. Notwithstanding the above - the conclusion quoted is non sequitur. WW

Moderator Note In context of the original posting being published in "Site Help Forum", the question, "Is there any way to avoid these x-rated pictures" has been addressed. From the get go, this conversation's responses were better suited to " Casual Photo Conversations", where this thread is now being moved.

That's correct. It is a Public Forum and in so far as "anybody can join" all who do guarantee that they are over 18 years of age and that they will maintain the confidentiality of their account and restrict access of their computer and/or account and they agree to accept responsibility for any and all activities or actions that occur under their account. Therefore I return to the point, if you want to avoid these images for your own eyes the action to do so remains with you, some good options have been given here. Similarly if you want to not allow children to see these images, then that is also determined by your actions WW

The question is vague. However, thanks to Papa's comments above, I note you've recently made comment on another Member's Album. If you are referring to nude and partial nude images appearing on the "All Activity" page, then this might assist: As I understand, the NSFW function ("Not Suitable for Work" function) is not native to this (new) "Invision" platform which Photo.net now uses. Presently, the partially adapted NSFW function fails on the images displayed at the front end - i.e. "All Activity" page. My understanding is a fix is unlikely to happen in the near future. Therefore - specifically to the question of how to avoid your children viewing these images: that is under your control, according to how you choose your usage of and to whom you provide access to the Photo.net website. *** To the other points raised: On a day to day basis, the line is drawn by Moderators. The Owner or their delegate (formerly known as Editor-in-Chief) would direct as and when necessary. I believe such was stated under (the old) "User Guidelines". User Guidelines was referred to in (the old) "Terms of Use" as an adjunct to Terms of Use. I believe "User Guidelines" no longer exists, however, depictions of sexual acts, graphic sexual images continue to be deleted. Members publishing same are still warned and if necessary banned. WW

What items, if any, are still offered for sale? Thanks

I thought that is the definition of "Insurance"? Clever (and probably very wealthy) person who thought up the concept. WW

Thinking on this over the past two days: I am not a worry-wart by any stretch of the imagination, I am however, one, when doing business, to think through all the possibilities based upon the facts as I see them. Irrespective of whether you were asked to ask this question or you asked simply because of your curiosity: based on what has been written, I reckon it is very important that your friend do her homework diligently and seek advice outside the "major video camera company" mentioned. My advice, agreeing with samstevens, to ask the employer still stands, and so does the advice 'scaffold for questions she could ask' - in fact many responses here provide a more precise scaffold for her questions. The message of this comment is: I suggest she be very thorough - it would be a mistake for a self employed person, ignorant and a first timer to a particular type of job, to seek advice only from the employer, especially if that job (as it appears), has a (large) degree of confidentiality to it. WW

Please respond via Personal Message only, to the message that I have sent to you. WW

See Here: LINK WW