AZNikon Loc: Mesa, AZ

Well said!

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

John, I personally agree with everything you've stated. I'd just like to point out that there have been a few photographers that have managed to achieve a bit of notoriety ignoring the "positive message" aspect of your definition.

Newton and Warhol had more than a few gritty nudes in their portfolios and no one batted an eye because of their established credentials. There are others less famous of course but I can't think of any more names at the moment. The point is that at one time it was possible to hang something a bit garish and exploitative on the wall of museum and have it accepted as art. I have some other thoughts on this but they would probably be better as a separate discussion.

BB4A

Agreed with all the positive, thoughtful, and photographic art comments made here.

My perspective: there is art and there is exploitation. A photographer who understands the difference should be able to hit the “art” target, every time. If they have any doubt, their professional integrity should preclude publication.

Stephan G

Should the marital status of the model have any bearing at all on the work? When I view photos, I only look at the results.

And there will always be the 'puerulus' minded at all ages.

Side note: The chattel laws were dropped as late as the 1980s in the US, Alabama, I think, being the last.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Unfortunately this section draws all types of viewers. We used to have that weirdo from the Philippines that would go ballistic if an image did not satisfy his sensibilities. And there are those that only want to see Playboy style poses and quality.
It's too bad that by socialization some only want to see popular beauty.
All individuals have a right to post what THEY want to post in any way they see fit, whether they view it as art or not.
What they don't have a right to do is critique the quality of a model unless THEY are willing to pay the fees for acquiring the models they would prefer to be seeing. They can just simply turn the page if they don't like a Model. It's not about the model, it's about the image created with that Model!!!
SS

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

Voyeurs can't be detected until they reveal themselves so those of us that enjoy nude photography and hope to learn about posing and lighting from the posts and the comments here have to accept that those guys are out there and "...consider the source..." In any case, criticism or ridicule of the models' appearance is way over the top and and the administrator should consider censoring or deleting those people's posts and posting a warning about that behavior instead. Of course there are the silent voyuers that just look and do what ever they do and we can't stop them.

Thurber Mingus

I have not seen ANY signs of moderation on this forum, in any section.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that comments on the model are out of bounds. Sports action shots do not qualify as still life; a closeup of a bee on a flower does not qualify as landscape. My point is that the primary subject of the photo has to meet appropriate criteria for the style or class of photography.

There have been a few postings in this section (thank goodness, not too many) where, in my opinion, the model is past her prime due to aging or poorly proportioned for nude photography. I have stated before that while I may offer negative comments about the model, my criticism would be directed at the photographer for poor choice of model, poor posing, poor lighting, poor setting, etc. It is up to the photographer to bring out the best in the subject, but that includes first choosing an appropriate subject. I believe that even non-Playboy "models" can be suitable subjects for nude photography if the photographer does his/her job correctly.

There have been a lot of comments on women with tattoos and piercings. I view those less as critiques of the model and more as a personal preference for those "decorations." But perhaps those opinions could be expressed more diplomatically than they sometimes have been.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

What the #%&@$ are you trying to stir up? I have not seen anything posted in this forum that I would object to if it were my wife or close friend - the one fellow who post images of his wife just proves that a wife can share her body the way she wants - with great imagination and pride. The film photos I took of my wife - under the same conditions - 50 yrs ago- have long been lost.
Harvey

Stephan G

"...where, in my opinion, the model is past her prime due to aging or poorly proportioned for nude photography... " No model is this.

And "... my criticism would be directed at the photographer for poor choice of model,..." Who gives you any right to make this condemnation?

You are just as bad as those who heckle for the most supercilious reasons. The only thing that any of us could do is to offer our path that we would take. What we would do to make the shot *our* shot. Nothing else. "Diplomatically"? Why not say "politically correct"?

An older human being has earned every wrinkle and scar on their body. Just because you cannot appreciate their ownership does not allow you to make disparaging remarks about them. Yes, talk about the results. You can admit, honestly, that you don't like the photo. And explain why. But talk about what you would do differently.

And what criteria do you set for amputees?

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

John I agree with most of what you say but also disagree with some of it.
There was a famous(or became famous) Japanese photographer that embarked on a body of work and photographed nude women. The criteria was that the women had to be 100 years of age or older. By design, the models were past their prime! But it was about the work which was pretty amazing and the condition of the human body.
I could take any model ever used here and make good art with her/him.
True, some of the models will not fit within the stereotypical mold, but it’s not up to us to tear that work down but to give a crituque that will help the photographer grow. And telling them their model is not pretty will help nothing since that says nothing about the work.
You can protest by simply saying, “I don’t feel that model is appropriate for that pose, in my opinion”! Because it IS purely your opinion.
Most of us old codgers are not as in tune with, “body positivity”, as are younger people today but that does not mean we should forget our manners!
SS

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

John,

I think you have to remember that this section of the forum is a catch-all for any image with nudity and there are many types of images that fall into that category. I assumed the goals of this section were to get feedback on what would make an image or session better and to exchange ideas and concepts about working in genres that could include some nudity.

To my eye, bodyscapes are often more interesting if the model is not in shape. Notice I did not say they were more aesthetically pleasing, I said more interesting. As another example, often customers of boudoir photos are not "ideal" models and yet they show up to the studio, money in hand wanting their images taken. If a photographer has a question about a client's image and permission to post it here, I think any comments about the model would be out of line.

Put the shoe on the other foot. If someone was commissioned to do a portrait of a disfigured client and posted the results in the portrait section of this site, I'm sure most people would be appalled if someone suggested the subject was too ugly to have their photo on display. If we were to filter out images that were not esthetically pleasing who's criteria would we use and how would we prejudge the model. Would you suggest that every thread that contains nudity first contain a clothed image that allows us to vote if we want to see more?

Two years ago, I did a boudoir set for a woman that had been involved in a major car crash and barely survived. She ended up loosing a piece of ear and fractured many of the bones in her face and jaw. Her face, nose, mouth and skull lost a great deal of symmetry. Luckily for her, most of the scarring was hidden in her hair. Along with her injuries, she was also quite a bit plump. For her, the photo set was not only a gift for her husband, but a personal declaration of acceptance. She had finally healed from her surgeries, was still in her thirties, and wanted to document the body she had come to terms with. My wife really liked her and they ended up posing together. I have a release for their work together and I will try to find an example image and post it to this thread soon.

In my opinion, if someone wants to experiment in this genre and they have found a model willing to take off their clothes and share the results I say go for it. If you don't like what you see, move on or go back to looking at the thousands of wonderful bird and landscape images elsewhere on this site.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

By all means we could offer suggestions for improvement but the shot will NEVER be our shot because we did not create it or conceptualize it.
But we are free to recreate that shot, make it our shot and then post it!
I’m not disagreeing, I do see your drift!
SS

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

Here is an image from the set of the disfigured woman posing with my wife. It is by no means a great image of either of them but for those on here that would think I would invent the story, here is some photographic evidence that still shields her identity. In this image you can see the shape of her jaw and mouth as she gets ready to kiss my wife's neck. My wife is in front.

(Download)

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I did say "in my opinion", so that is how I would judge the photo. You may like it, I may not. The model might be suitable for you, but maybe not for me. I am entitled to express that opinion, including the suitability of the model, if done politely. And you saying "No model is this" is simply wrong, because the corollary is that "everyone" is suitable for nude photography; I don't buy that at all.


As I said, it is my opinion. Just as any critic can critique the pose, the lighting, the setting, etc, one can also critique the photographer for his choice of subject/model.


So what might I do to make the shot *my* shot? Use a longer focal length lens for a front-on shot of a model with a long/large nose; change the angle/perspective of the shot to improve the balance of a somewhat disproportioned body; ask a model with bad teeth to not smile so strongly or at all; or maybe simply choose a different model.


See comment above, including choose a different model.


That question has nothing to do with the topic.