Sex sells

[leejay]

...but we all know that 90% of the time, its purely for jerking off purposes.

Again, an overstatement. If you don't understand art, do not debase art itself. It would be an insult to a lot of great artists and great photographers in the world. Be it nude, lingerie, bikini, or the normal fashion shoot, we photographers have only one thing in mind - that is to capture them in a beautiful way, just as they are, and how we feel about them.

I suggest you spend sometime at Kinokuniya Taka, sit down, and go through all the master photographers hardcovers (I had cleared the shelves in two weeks going through every book). There is one book call Erotic Art and another called Erotic Nude. Read them.

Finally, I totally understand your point about lechers in the name of art. Do you know why this world is so interesting? It is because we have all sorts of people, and they will still be there no matter how you sulk and complain. Note that everybody has their freedom to do what they want. It is their rights. As long as they respect (do not hurt or touch or insult) the models, things are fine. Maybe you would now hit me with "what about the mind?" Well, who cares about the mind? I bet you also think of naughty/evil things consciously or subconsciously. Does that label you as a bad person? Nope.

Be more open a bit. Have a bigger heart.

 

[scandal599]

Hi Noob here, just my two cents worth.

A couple of years back, someone I know went to Italy for a trip and he was visting a museum where the Statute of David was placed in. A couple of tourists came in from Taiwan or China for a tour of the museum. In the group, he said there were some middle aged ladies, whom, when they saw the statue of David, they remarked something along the lines of "why not big". My friend was quite amused, and it was quite loud when they commented.

In a book which I read called Defending Pornography, sometime arund the late 1980s and early 1990s there was a big hooha about a painting replica by Francisco de Goya called the Nude Manja. Apparently the student female body demanded that the Pennsylvannia schoolboard take the painting off. Irony is, if I remember correctly, was this was in the Arts Faculty.

Whether the human body is depicted as an art piece or a piece of meat, depends on what perspective and angle one views the body, regardless of male or female. Scintillating, provacative titles to attract attention has always been there. Even magazines sold on the streets like Cleo, Female, Her world for female magazines and like FHM, Playeur, Maxim for us guys, will always use sensational titles like that to sell the product. Degrading? No. Sensationalisation has and always been part and parcel of the media industry and as long as the person or group of people know the limits boundaries of what is acceptable in public eyes, that is, to me acceptable. Enticing? Yes. Admit, as guys we like to see things like that, but there after, what we think, only we know.

As in the case of the two art pieces above, it clearly reflects that how one group of people, regardless of male or female, sees things differently. Who knows that group of middle aged ladies were expecting something else. Likewise, if in place of a nude lady, was a man in the painting, might the reaction be the same?

In any case, art, has never been objective. If art was objective, we will be reading bout sciences here rather than discussing techniques of taking photos. As a subjective concern, it has and always wil be open to taboos and people wil push boundaries as far as possible to the norm and even beyond.

 

[pfurr]

i dont quite agree that i dont understand art. i studied art formally for at least 4 years and am still doing art almost everyday at present. ok fine, i agree that the 90% may be an exaggerated number, but it sure looks that way. and look carefully, the 90% i quoted was not of the 'alot of great artists and great photographers in the world'. i was refering to the men here who take supposedly nude photographs and label it art but oftentimes, the themes and nature of the shoots cross the line into erotic or soft porn. a definition change definitely needs to be enforced in a large number of these cases. i have full respect of and appreciate artistic nude photography and art. read backwards if you havent been doing so to keep yourself up to speed on what exactly we are talking about here, not jump in like you have, in follly, to throw out arguments that bears little relevance to what we are talking about.

and for the sake of this debate, DO NOT take my words out of context, quote little bits here and there and distort my points of view. if you have an argument to make, i'm sure i have the openness and the 'bigger heart' to read and understand your views, but selectively quoting to paint a different picture is definitely not the healthy way to jump into this fray, neither is not understanding the context of this argument and expressing your many cents worth of views.

the point of the argument has been reinterated time and time again the last few pages but you couldnt be bothered to go read or internalise it before spitting your 'rhetoric' in the little box. the point of contention is artistic nude photography and NOT erotic photography.

 

[pfurr]

As long as they respect (do not hurt or touch or insult) the models, things are fine.

it has happened before, not once only, if i'm not wrong. - http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=427552&highlight=cody+richards it happened to one of the more professional models on clubsnap even.

so are we to become the place where these kinda things can be perpetrated and encouraged? the reputation and future direction of clubsnap is what the people who've posted against the matter here, care about.

 

[vince123123]

These things happen whether or not Clubsnap is around or not. If you think that these things only happen because of Clubsnap as a platform for shoots, I'm sorry to say that your view is severely limited.

it has happened before, not once only, if i'm not wrong. - http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=427552&highlight=cody+richards it happened to one of the more professional models on clubsnap even.

so are we to become the place where these kinda things can be perpetrated and encouraged? the reputation and future direction of clubsnap is what the people who've posted against the matter here, care about.

 

[flipfreak]

it has happened before, not once only, if i'm not wrong. - http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=427552&highlight=cody+richards it happened to one of the more professional models on clubsnap even.

so are we to become the place where these kinda things can be perpetrated and encouraged? the reputation and future direction of clubsnap is what the people who've posted against the matter here, care about.

can u put in a nutshell what u are against? seems like alot of things in your dish right now. from porn being portrayed as artistic nude to lecherous gwcs to supposedly uber high number of guys who are wanking off to pictures in the forum.

:dunno::dunno::dunno:

 

[pfurr]

i'm against photoshoots being so blatantly marketed as soft porn.

i never said 'supposedly uber high number of guys who are wanking off to pictures in the forum.' what you do in your own time is none of my business, just clubsnap should not be a platform for this. my views have been reiterated time and time again here. funny how i have to keep pointing it out to you.

edit: i only went on about the definition and other bits because someone said he didnt know whats the difference between the two. now do you know?

 

[pfurr]

These things happen whether or not Clubsnap is around or not. If you think that these things only happen because of Clubsnap as a platform for shoots, I'm sorry to say that your view is severely limited.

thats where YOUR view is severely limited. yes, these things happen whether clubsnap is around or not but MY OWN OPINION is that it shouldnt take place in a diverse platform as clubsnap.

read properly before you shoot yeah.

 

[flipfreak]

i'm against photoshoots being so blatantly marketed as soft porn.

i never said 'supposedly uber high number of guys who are wanking off to pictures in the forum.' what you do in your own time is none of my business, just clubsnap should not be a platform for this. my views have been reiterated time and time again here. funny how i have to keep pointing it out to you.

edit: i only went on about the definition and other bits because someone said he didnt know whats the difference between the two. now do you know?

so ur definition of porn photography would be where guys can **** off to the pics and cs is not a place for such things right?

 

[pfurr]

so ur definition of porn photography would be where guys can **** off to the pics and cs is not a place for such things right?

NO. my definition of porn photography is the same one as the wiki. i copied and pasted the link for you and asked you to read it two times already!

 

[pfurr]

and in any case, its erotic photography we are talking about here.

in any case, i suggest, for your own good, you really start to read and understand what is going on before you decide to post. its for your own good, really.

 

[flipfreak]

NO. my definition of porn photography is the same one as the wiki. i copied and pasted the link for you and asked you to read it two times already!

i already read it and i know what is erotic photography way before this.

my point is definition is just that. it defines what is erotic. how u are going to implement it?

"It will be left to the viewer to interpret what sexual context, if any, is either lying behind or being conveyed by the image...and if so, to what extent it defines or qualifies that image as a communicative artifact.

This subtleness, or even ambiguity, of sexual context will not be found in pornographic images. By challenging the viewer to question the degree and extent of any sexual interpretation, erotic photography can be said to be more suggestive or provocative in nature than explicit."

the interpretation is left to the audience as defined. so by who's sensibilities do we follow? yours?

 

[mattlock]

so ur definition of porn photography would be where guys can **** off to the pics and cs is not a place for such things right?

hi flipfreak, be gentle on the girl...I think that her main point and the point of the thread is the
way the photoshoots are titled which come off as sleazy
The argument about porn/erotic/art is another story altogether....I'm a fan of all of them.
haha

 

[flipfreak]

hi flipfreak, be gentle on the girl...I think that her main point and the point of the thread is the
way the photoshoots are titled which come off as sleazy
The argument about porn/erotic/art is another story altogether....I'm a fan of all of them.
haha

haha. sorry if i sound harsh. :embrass:

bob carlos clarke rocks!

 

[pfurr]

i already read it and i know what is erotic photography way before this.

my point is definition is just that. it defines what is erotic. how u are going to implement it?

"It will be left to the viewer to interpret what sexual context, if any, is either lying behind or being conveyed by the image...and if so, to what extent it defines or qualifies that image as a communicative artifact.

This subtleness, or even ambiguity, of sexual context will not be found in pornographic images. By challenging the viewer to question the degree and extent of any sexual interpretation, erotic photography can be said to be more suggestive or provocative in nature than explicit."

the interpretation is left to the audience as defined. so by who's sensibilities do we follow? yours?

nopes. a general set of standards i suppose?

let me just make clear that i'm not imposing my point of view on anyone but rather just expressing it. i never said that i expect my views to be the be all and end all of this argument. you guys wanted a female point of view, and here it is. we may be a small minority in this community now but would you like to deter future female members from coming into this forum because it objectifies women? also i understand that my views are not representative of the female population over here and i dont expect it to be so because, honestly you may find this funny, but i am considered quite open on topics such as pornography and nudity. what irks me and drove me to make comments here is the innate hypocrisy that is so rampant in the photoshoots section of this forum and how it inadvertently made me judge the quality of photographers in this forum when i first came here. you cannot blame me for doing so previously and neither can you blame any outsiders reading stuff like that. good thing is my hope for the forum was renewed after seeing these many pages of arguments from men.

the big question here is should the shareholders/moderators of this forum close one eye and perpetuate the problem and let it get any worse (because honestly i really dont believe all photoshoots started out sounding this raunchy already. people just kept pushing the envelope to get to where we are now now very now) at the expense of the reputation of this forum, or do the contrary.

again, i am not imposing on anyone my views, i do not expect anyone to follow it either. this is a healthy debate, i respect everyone's views and i similarly expect no one else to take whatever views i've posted here personally, to do so would be childish. i think we can agree that we are all mature adults here pursuing the agenda for something we care about so lets just keep it this way.

in response to your idea of interpretation - i just feel that we have societal norms and we ought to at least give that some respect. and you already quoted it yourself - 'suggestive and provocative in nature'.

and how am i going to implement it? its not for me to say. i'm just a small fry here taking time to share my views.

 

[sORe-EyEz]

proponents of the freedom to express should note their behaviour points to a lack of respect to those whom sleaze is deemed unsuitable. freedom to be, does not make 1 any less responsible.

those who choose staunchly to exercise their percieved 'absolute' freedom should have the freedom curtailed. for such level of freedom shows an utter disrespect for other individuals.

 

[sORe-EyEz]

so where does the line for artistic nude stop and soft porn begins? pls enlighten me. i am very new to photography.

:dunno::dunno::dunno:

how time flies for some, 1 moment new to photography, the next....

i already read it and i know what is erotic photography way before this.

 

[vince123123]

Yes, and MY opinion is that it makes no difference to have shoots organised in Clubsnap because simply, they do not contribute to whether or not these things occur.

Unless you are telling me that it is your view that CLUBSNAP is RESPONSIBLE for such things happening. If not, then there is no reason to champion against.

thats where YOUR view is severely limited. yes, these things happen whether clubsnap is around or not but MY OWN OPINION is that it shouldnt take place in a diverse platform as clubsnap.

read properly before you shoot yeah.

 

[sORe-EyEz]

Yes, and MY opinion is that it makes no difference to have shoots organised in Clubsnap because simply, they do not contribute to whether or not these things occur.

Unless you are telling me that it is your view that CLUBSNAP is RESPONSIBLE for such things happening. If not, then there is no reason to champion against.

guilty by association!! :bsmilie:

 

[yqt]

Again, an overstatement. If you don't understand art, do not debase art itself. It would be an insult to a lot of great artists and great photographers in the world. Be it nude, lingerie, bikini, or the normal fashion shoot, we photographers have only one thing in mind - that is to capture them in a beautiful way, just as they are, and how we feel about them.

I suggest you spend sometime at Kinokuniya Taka, sit down, and go through all the master photographers hardcovers (I had cleared the shelves in two weeks going through every book). There is one book call Erotic Art and another called Erotic Nude. Read them.

Finally, I totally understand your point about lechers in the name of art. Do you know why this world is so interesting? It is because we have all sorts of people, and they will still be there no matter how you sulk and complain. Note that everybody has their freedom to do what they want. It is their rights. As long as they respect (do not hurt or touch or insult) the models, things are fine. Maybe you would now hit me with "what about the mind?" Well, who cares about the mind? I bet you also think of naughty/evil things consciously or subconsciously. Does that label you as a bad person? Nope.

Be more open a bit. Have a bigger heart.

Clearing the shelves in 2 weeks do not make you a master of the arts, just a fast reader. How much you're able to gain from all that reading is still something to be seen.