One A Day, Day 68.
JohnFrim wrote:
Tim, perhaps your "true art" would be more appreciated on an "art forum" as opposed to trying to educate "us prudes" on the photography forum.
It does, as you say, come down to taste, and what you are hearing is that many of us find many of your images to be "in poor taste." There are many different styles of nude images posted on this forum, and it would not be difficult to give a rundown of examples that are considered suitable and unsuitable.
Perhaps it is not a matter of policing the forum for acceptable or unacceptable. It is probably better to use the term "appreciated" in judging suitability.
What I find most puzzling is your obstinacy to educate us "voyeurs of beauty" to become "admirers of porn/smut." OK, those are harsh descriptors, but surely you get the gist. We are not studying for an MFA degree in a study program taught by Prof Timmers.
I think you have an idea of what is appreciated here and what is not. Show us your ability to use discretion in what you post.
Tim, perhaps your "true art" would be mo... (
show quote)
Surely if you dislike so much and see a post by 'Timmers' just ignore it and move on
If I dislike something I don't bother looking at it and never bother commenting day in day out like many seem to here
JohnFrim wrote:
Tim, perhaps your "true art" would be more appreciated on an "art forum" as opposed to trying to educate "us prudes" on the photography forum.
It does, as you say, come down to taste, and what you are hearing is that many of us find many of your images to be "in poor taste." There are many different styles of nude images posted on this forum, and it would not be difficult to give a rundown of examples that are considered suitable and unsuitable.
Perhaps it is not a matter of policing the forum for acceptable or unacceptable. It is probably better to use the term "appreciated" in judging suitability.
What I find most puzzling is your obstinacy to educate us "voyeurs of beauty" to become "admirers of porn/smut." OK, those are harsh descriptors, but surely you get the gist. We are not studying for an MFA degree in a study program taught by Prof Timmers.
I think you have an idea of what is appreciated here and what is not. Show us your ability to use discretion in what you post.
Tim, perhaps your "true art" would be mo... (
show quote)
Well here we are with you once again misquoting my post. I stated, "Responding to your assertions, tasteful is part of 'taste' that went out after WW I with Dada, Surrealism, Ready Mades and the like, there is no 'taste' in art anymore."
Taste is gone, both good and bad variants of this thing called taste. I'm not here for you and your 'group' who have no clue about this 'thing' called taste. There is no other way to say this. Of course you may decide to ignore this part of Modern Art but with the loss of taste we usher in a whole basic grasp that looking down ones nose at what was classed as Folk Art. Folk Art IS Art, it sits in a place that recognizes that it is different from traditional art forms such as painting and sculpture. Photography was viewed at times like it was a mannered version of Folk Art, then it fell into the neither world between Folk Art and the world of art (read: High Art like painting and sculpture).
But then something happened, photographers of note, they who were the elitists of photography saw the stupidity of even bothering to look at main stream art and decided to just drop the whole discussion of photography as Art and moved on. Then the idiots in Art wanted to get up to speed and bring photography into their camp and call photography real art. By then the world moved on and the real photographers and free based thinkers just laughed and ignored the Art world idiots. Photography had moved on, the Arts could go hang themselves, we photographers did not need the arts, the arts need to wake up and smell the coffee.
To help you out, ask yourself was Man Ray a photographer? A painter? A sculptor? Or can we just call Man Ray an artist. But lets face the reality, some of the work of Man Ray can not and will never be shown on the Hog. His self images with Kiki called the four seasons would be regarded as pornography by the nay sayers on tis forum. More to the point, Man Ray's last group of images using papier colle combined with painting constituted Bestiality (now in the Museum of Modern Art in San Francisco).
So live in ignorance if you wish but please don't ask of others to display ignorance of their world.
creativ simon wrote:
Surely if you dislike so much and see a post by 'Timmers' just ignore it and move on
If I dislike something I don't bother looking at it and never bother commenting day in day out like many seem to here
Now Mr. Simon, be gentle with the trolls, they must feed! The live off their own notions of what is right or wrong. They are like the comical characters Ricochet Rabbit, Dudley Doright and the general collection of Knights in White!
Gee, the usual no point conversation that does not ever speak to the work. One wonders why there is never a discussion about the values these trolls hold to be true, or share their own image work? Image or philosophy of photography would be refreshing instead of empty and hollow opinions.
After all I put up work to share, so to quote an old advertisement, Where's The Beef!
JohnFrim
Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.
Timmers wrote:
Well here we are with you once again misquoting my post. I stated, "Responding to your assertions, tasteful is part of 'taste' that went out after WW I with Dada, Surrealism, Ready Mades and the like, there is no 'taste' in art anymore."
Taste is gone, both good and bad variants of this thing called taste. I'm not here for you and your 'group' who have no clue about this 'thing' called taste. There is no other way to say this. Of course you may decide to ignore this part of Modern Art but with the loss of taste we usher in a whole basic grasp that looking down ones nose at what was classed as Folk Art. Folk Art IS Art, it sits in a place that recognizes that it is different from traditional art forms such as painting and sculpture. Photography was viewed at times like it was a mannered version of Folk Art, then it fell into the neither world between Folk Art and the world of art (read: High Art like painting and sculpture).
But then something happened, photographers of note, they who were the elitists of photography saw the stupidity of even bothering to look at main stream art and decided to just drop the whole discussion of photography as Art and moved on. Then the idiots in Art wanted to get up to speed and bring photography into their camp and call photography real art. By then the world moved on and the real photographers and free based thinkers just laughed and ignored the Art world idiots. Photography had moved on, the Arts could go hang themselves, we photographers did not need the arts, the arts need to wake up and smell the coffee.
To help you out, ask yourself was Man Ray a photographer? A painter? A sculptor? Or can we just call Man Ray an artist. But lets face the reality, some of the work of Man Ray can not and will never be shown on the Hog. His self images with Kiki called the four seasons would be regarded as pornography by the nay sayers on tis forum. More to the point, Man Ray's last group of images using papier colle combined with painting constituted Bestiality (now in the Museum of Modern Art in San Francisco).
So live in ignorance if you wish but please don't ask of others to display ignorance of their world.
Well here we are with you once again misquoting my... (
show quote)
Tim, just what qualifies YOU to tell me what to LIKE or DISLIKE? Taste still exists in everything, and everyone has -- and is entitled to -- their own taste.
I don't happen to like most of the images that you post here. I don't see creativity, talent or technical skill in much of your work. I have told you I see your photos mostly as snapshots that somehow stimulate you to unleash a barrage of ephemeral diatribe that many on here have told you is essentially a waste of internet bandwidth. Recent posts confirm that I am not alone in my thoughts.
Professor Tim, your arrogance and superiority complex emanate strongly from your lectures, and I for one will be quitting your classes. Out of respect I have generally plowed through almost every word that you have written on UHH to date; now I am dropping this class. I will not get my MFA degree from you... I fear that if I were to end up in your state of mind after graduation I would rather fail and take up basketweaving.
You can take comfort in knowing that I will undoubtedly continue looking at what you post (that is why you post, is it not?) but I will refrain from commenting... until I see something that deserves an "attaboy." You may or may not care about those accolades.
bizarre and uninteresting
newsguygeorge wrote:
I am a little confused. If some of you find these images distasteful, inappropriate or “pornography,” what are you doing looking at posts in the forum’s “Nude Photography, Boudoir Photography, NSFW, Discussions and Pictures?”
Let that question sink in.
Let that sink in...? Wow!! It seems that it’s just more “FAKE- NEWS” from the news guy. You are entitled to your view, but you must report the news NOT “MAKE- IT-UP. Media has no restraint!!.... RJM
When inadequate minds can't argue on the merits, they resort to name calling.
Your lack of civility disqualifies you from further conversation with me.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.