| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/16/2005 05:24:01 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Ok lets look at it another way. Forget that i find this photo slightly pornographic, lets look at the merits of the image alone. In any image there are three "contributers"- The photographer, the camera, and the subject. Now you have a high end camera and it delivered a technically excellant image as for the subject, well it is pleasing to the eye so it has made its contribution. but what has the photographer contributed to the image that i haven't seen a million times before?
And as for my opinion on the tastefulness of the photo, or lack thereof. Some might say that there is tastful nude photography. I say that you have no business looking at the naked body of a woman you are not married to. The human body is a beautiful thing and it is not something that we should be ashamed of. But a womans body is for her husbands pleasure and vice versa. That is respect. |
Well, I almost believed you when you said you wanted a fresh approach ("Let's look at it another way").
What about a crane's body, a hand-weft rug in the morning light, spray reflecting a bed of garnets? Such views (as the one allocating a woman's body to a husband's pleasure) are so indicative of a male-dominated society, that I can only think of wars and opression (which, by the way, I consider obscenities).
Message edited by author 2005-03-16 18:08:44.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:24:26 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by utro:
why did you open a thread titled semi-nude if it offends you? and why did you come back to it again? |
and again... and again... and again....
Maybe we can get a Raged G membership that restricts the nude gallery and he can switch his status??? *insert tongue in cheek smiley here ;-)*
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:24:56 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
well obviously i opened it so i could comment on what i think of nude photography. Oh and this has nothing to do with inhibitions it has to do with respect for women. |
I am a woman. And I have taken nudes of myself, and my friends. I have absolute respect for both men and women, and their bodies. This isn't an objectifying photograph. It's beautiful. Nudity is a natural state. We were born that way. The nude body has been a theme of art since art began. And it will always continue to be. I guess my point is, if you don't like it, then don't look at it.
Message edited by author 2005-03-16 17:25:58. |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:30:47 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Ok lets look at it another way. Forget that i find this photo slightly pornographic, lets look at the merits of the image alone. In any image there are three "contributers"- The photographer, the camera, and the subject. Now you have a high end camera and it delivered a technically excellant image as for the subject, well it is pleasing to the eye so it has made its contribution. but what has the photographer contributed to the image that i haven't seen a million times before?
And as for my opinion on the tastefulness of the photo, or lack thereof. Some might say that there is tastful nude photography. I say that you have no business looking at the naked body of a woman you are not married to. The human body is a beautiful thing and it is not something that we should be ashamed of. But a womans body is for her husbands pleasure and vice versa. That is respect. |
Just a thought but as such a purist why have you looked at millions of lewd/pornographic pictures?
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:32:11 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by utro:
I guess my point is, if you don't like it, then don't look at it. |
.....and certainly dont berate it. We here in India have nude statues and sculpture which dates back thousands of years depicting Kamasutra and forms of dances which have been accepted as forms of art worldwide. Would that be porn too?
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:32:43 PM · #31 |
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right.
Message edited by author 2005-03-18 16:49:35. |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:34:59 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
well obviously i opened it so i could comment on what i think of nude photography. Oh and this has nothing to do with inhibitions it has to do with respect for women. |
I think it has everything to do with inhibitions, and, possibly, with a desire to dominate. If you discern any disrespect in the photo addressed here, I urge you to try and articulate the nature of such disrespect, with regards to the image itself.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:36:50 PM · #33 |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:44:23 PM · #34 |
Let's get back to the original subject of the thread, shall we??
Tiddies! |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 05:51:51 PM · #35 |
Thanks again for all the great feedback.
steve2000,
Your comments would have bothered me a while back, but to let you affect my life, my work or my art would be a true loss. It seems to me your problems would be solved if you would go to your preferences and click the little box that says you don't want to see nudes. I am truely not interested in ignorant comments such as yours. Next time feel free to better spend your time by not commenting on my submissions. They will not be read.
Thanks again
Joe
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:02:21 PM · #36 |
| The light is beautiful (so is the model) but just sliiightly moving her torso would make a world of difference. My first impression that the crack of her a** looks really deep and her side looks ripply. (could be my ripply monitor, too tho). Like I said, they're minor, but would help a lot me thinks. |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:06:12 PM · #37 |
Boys and girls, remember not to feed the trolls. :)
Nice shot Joe!
Clara
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:06:21 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Sorry, i seem to have hijacked this thread. I'll leave you morally bankrupt heathens to wallow in your own filth.
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right. |
*laugh* Can I please use this one in my signature, it is priceless :)
I honestly thought that sort of thing only happened in the movies, that no real people honestly thought that way. I live and learn ;)
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:07:13 PM · #39 |
To think that I toiled laboriously all these years, only to find out that I am bankrupt.... woe is me. Can someone.... anyone.... throw me a lifeline... I feel lost... :)
Ray |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:21:01 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Sorry, i seem to have hijacked this thread. I'll leave you morally bankrupt heathens to wallow in your own filth.
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right. |
lol...You're a bit out there, aren't you? It's clear that semi-nude isn't for everyone. Why you call this filth is beyond me. I could see calling the stuff in Hustler or the stuff in Cherry filth (which I just so happen to like ;-) ) -- but this is obviously not targetted to a bunch of guys drooling over it. It's very artistic.
The human body is nothing to be disgusted about, and if you are offended by it, don't open the thread up....AND don't continue to come back to check on it again and again.
Just because something isn't 'for you' doesn't mean you have to throw your ignorant comments at it. I might not like every photo in your portfolio, but you don't hear me down-talking it just because it's not my style.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:27:13 PM · #41 |
Let's not turn this into a religious arguement or the thread will get locked, for going off topic.
Nice shot Joe. Very tastefully done. Don't quite see the "painting" effect, but it could be the file size like you mentioned.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:30:55 PM · #42 |
Yeah Joe.... fantastic job. (I only risked one eye) Very well done indeed, even when viewed with only one eye.
Ray |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:34:52 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by utro:
Originally posted by Steve2000:
any time i see the naked body of a woman i am not married to it is lewd. My moral standards may be different from yours but that doesn't make them wrong. |
why did you open a thread titled semi-nude if it offends you? and why did you come back to it again? |
I was just thinking the same exact thing :)
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:42:48 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by magicshutter:
I was messing around with some nudes I did the other day and I stumbled onto the answer to a problem I've been having..
I like to change photos into oil paintings via photoshop but they always seem to blochy. So today I found a process to get that painted look without all the bloches. I know the size it is makes it hard to see the finish but I like it.
I also think without that the shot itself is really great and thus why I'm posting it. The forementioned was more of a disclaimer incase anyone seen the 'odd' finish.
Thanks
Joe
 |
A very beautiful picture Magicshutter. Great job! |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 06:52:03 PM · #45 |
Wow, my life has changed forever. I shall never look at another... did you check out that ass? DAMN!!! ...oh I'm so ashamed!
Great shot Joe, keep 'um coming! |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 07:12:18 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Sorry, i seem to have hijacked this thread. I'll leave you morally bankrupt heathens to wallow in your own filth.
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right. |
If you don't like it go to your profile and check "HIDE NUDE PHOTOS"
Problem solved and I still love my Playboy subscription.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2005 07:58:38 PM · #47 |
I've read all the fun back and forth and my only real comment on the photo itself is that I don't really care for the hard shadow line under the model's arm. I think the shadow line is too abrupt, amybe make it like the lower shadow line?
As for being morally bankqupt....my wife has said that to me so many times I'm immune to it.
|
|
|
|
03/17/2005 01:02:48 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Sorry, i seem to have hijacked this thread. I'll leave you morally bankrupt heathens to wallow in your own filth.
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right. |
You'll be back ... and you'll hate yourself for it. ;P
If you are honest with yourself you'll know i'm right. ;)
---
The pose is great. But if you'll bear with a comment from someone looking at a monitor that can not be calibrated -- the shadow under the arm is (as was mentioned) is dark enough to be distracting, and I am not seeing any sort of seperation between the skirt (blanket, sheet?) and the background or between the dark shadows on her lower back and the background -- I think it would look better if the seperation was present. Also, I don't see the 'painted look' you mentioned -- it just looks over NeatImaged to me. As I said, this monitor is not capable of being calibrated, so if the above is not accurate just ignore it.
Thank you for showing your respect for her 'filthy' curves, and for allowing use to show our respect as well. ;)
David
|
|
|
|
03/17/2005 12:59:25 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Steve2000:
Ok lets look at it another way. Forget that i find this photo slightly pornographic, |
You have got to be joking. The sight of a woman's back you find slightly pornographic????
Steve, I suggest you hide your head away somewhere, cos the beaches are full of pornography, even those that don't have topless must offend you greatly.
|
|
|
|
03/17/2005 01:08:34 PM · #50 |
| I agree with you Mr Tee. You see more just walking down the street than what you do in that very tasteful and well done photo. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 06:59:29 PM EDT.
