Rongnongno Loc: FL

Still no redeeming quality here.

Between old poses that seem to be underage girls and what I see as employer's abuse you have the usual voyeuristic approach to nudity that offer nothing as fas visual effect and mastering of light goes.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

So as “a voyeur and a witness,” why is your voyeurism better than others?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I do not look at naked folks.

Check the definition of voyeur and that of witness.

A voyeur sees, a witness reports what has been seen. No sexual innuendoes anyway you look at it but a strong definition of what a photographer is.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Ron, I don't know how often you visit this Section, but every now and then one of our members who understands how to photograph a naked lady to create a nude photograph worthy of admiration will post something redeeming. That makes up for a lot of the sub-par snapshots that are often posted.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Six months or so.

I open the first few threads and bailed. This time I found the picture of two girls taken in the 70s or 60s, possibly minors. While at the time D. Hamilton was celebrated for his 'dreamy' nubile models (and since accused of sexual assault) time has changed and posting these images show that the poster does not understand right and wrong... Another thread shows that one guy in a position of power as employer or mentor uses an assistant to pose nude... That is flat out abuse. 'Consent' is absent due to the relationship.

That is enough to disgust me and condemn the two posters (i commented in their threads) but also made me wonder about the folks looking at this and not voicing their dismay at what is posted.

As to a few posting good stuff, sure they exist, I will not deny that but if folks do not try to rectify the wrongness in this section, sorry, but I do not care enough.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

GOD made women- and men- in HIS own image.
Who the h e l l are you to disparage what HE has wrought?
You don't like it- don't go there.
Freedom OF religion also means I get freedom FROM yours.
BTW, "girls" get younger every year.
Or is your fetish to look at 25 year olds, pretend they're 15, and enjoy the sweet delicious joy of imagining other men's fantasies and wallowing in your disgust at your own feelings?

This was also a part of another discussion.
The earliest cave drawings are mostly men hunting, men sports, and nekkid women.
During the cold spells, those women got thicker.
Those chonker "venus" statues of obese women? Done during the last ice age?
Without enough stored calories many women couldn't survive birthing babies.
Which has maybe genetically affected men's propensity for appreciating women's physical structure.

BTW2- successfuly photographing nude women- even tastefully- is more difficult than it seems.
WAAY too many curves.
Is the light spots too light, and the dark too dark? How much is too much?
The field is definitely worth studying.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

I see TWO assumptions here. Have you checked about either of them ?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

lmao @ comment. You are so far off the mark with your comments it just out of the playing field.

No one disparage a woman here. The guy behind the camera and the folks looking and accepting this junk are at fault but then again, you are not capable of seeing this.

Religion? You are a riot. It is not about religion but about respect of one another boundaries. In this case respect of women as well as those not yet admitted in 'adulthood' (whatever THAT means). This respect also extend to men.

Difficulty of photographing women... Why only women, ever wonder that? It is about human figure, nothing else. The human body is a landscape. To capture it, in a still, a painting or in a movie is an art. This artistry has nothing to do with sex, age or shape. It is not displayed here only tawdry captures and even tawdrier comments on the 'offering'.

For info, nudity does not bother me. I have been raised in a country where nudity is/was acceptable almost anywhere. As recently as 2013 I took a landscape only to find out when I blew up the image that I had two naturists in there.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Have you checked the laws of late and what consent means? That this consent has been time and time again refuted in court when it comes to employers/employee/chain of command?

Probably not.

Have you checked the age? If society was permissive in the 60s and 70s it not so now, for good reason. A picture taken then was not an issue (even if published). Today, the same pictures can land you in jail and give you a sexual predator record for life.

I referred to Hamilton in this thread. He was accused of rape by several women who had posed for him as 'tween' and teenagers. The first one he threatened her with court action. Others came out. He took the easy way out, killed himself. We will never know the truth now. By today's standard he was a sexual predator.

No, I am not accusing the poster of being a rapist or related to sexual offence for that matter. I am accusing him of not paying attention to what is acceptable and what is not today. I also look at the folks looking at these images and looking at the 'plastic' vs the artistry. There is none. The only thing I get is from the poster is a nostalgia of being young and having possibly used nubile models. From those looking at this passively of commenting I get a sense of wrongness, cheap thrills and a mental illness.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

What a heap of sh..
Re assumptions. You have guessed at the ages. You have absolutely no idea what their ages might have been. Not sure how you would even check this now. So you assumed ! Thank God you live nowhere near me. Stop making assumptions until you have proof.
And how on earth do you have any idea at all about what consent might or might not have been given between a photographer and his assistant. So you assumed again !
David Hamilton has nothing to do with this. The only sense of wrongness I detect here is yours and the only person I suspect of mental illness is you.
Next you will be attacking the public showing of the statue of Venus de Milo. I bet you don't know her age and/or whether she was asked for her consent ?
Stop projecting your private concerns onto everybody else and even more importantly stop coming to this section.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

The load of **** is on your side.

Your successive posts show that you are completely out of whack when it comes to consent and age of consent.

As mentioned... Two girls look like teens. There is no affirmation but a suspicion. Also I entered the period and signaled that the standards have changed. So, the crap is on your side. The mistake is posting the image.

As to consent, check the successive lawsuits that took place over consent. EVERY TIME a person of power has been suspected for good reason or not that person has lost. Pressure to do something is implied. That is why companies have now stringent policies on sexual harassement. But never mind that? Your mind is full of fertilizer.

As to the 'art' excuse, sorry but there is no art involved in the great majority of postings here. Most claims or comment are: "See I have neked gerl in from of my ****, enjoy". And the viewers are going ohhh and ahhh because they are able to see a free T&A from wannabe photographers.

Anyone that pees on this type of behavior is full of **** according to you. Good luck with that.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

You just confirmed that you have been making assumptions. You cannot skirt this by waffling on about 'age of consent' etc. I made no comment on whether the models had given consent or were of a suitable age. ONLY upon you deciding that your morals were offended and that you then made some assumptions to confirm your own delusions. Get off your moral high-horse and confirm facts before posting.
I bet you don't like wearing a mask either.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

You are what? 10 years old?

Read from the start.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

From the start -
[quote] Still no redeeming quality here.[quote]
Well stop looking at this section then.
[quote] Between old poses that seem to be underage girls and what I see as employer's abuse you have the usual voyeuristic approach to nudity that offer nothing as fas visual effect and mastering of light goes.[quote]
All I see are 2 assumptions with no proof offered other than your own interpretation based on some moralistic concerns of yours. I am not interested in the fact that you don't think there is any visual effect or mastering of light, which I agree with by the way, as this happens to describe most of the photographs on here in every section. As I said get off your moralistic high-horse, stop acting as a morals policeman on a photographic forum and comment on something more useful like where to get a grey market Nikon fixed in the US.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Sorry, I was mistaken. You have the mental capacity of a two years old.