Glamour comments! [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Noni

27th of July 2005 (Wed), 23:27

From a woman's perspective, I find it peurile and boring. Which is sad, because that forum has the potential to be really outstanding and educational...to be able to learn lighting techniques, or posing techniques, would be extraordinarily helpful to me as a newbie...but I won't find it there.

I will find headers like "so-and-so on her knees," which just means I won't go into that forum to see what it is. I have no interest in seeing someone on her knees. If I want to see soft core porn, or read commentary about the size of someone's chest or narrowness of hips, I'd go to a different forum specifically for that.

There is sadly very little glamorous in that forum, from what I see. I've seen some really artistic things, but if it's just to arouse males, that's not glamour; that's erotic photography...and not even erotic, at that. Nude photos are amazing when done correctly...but what I see there is closer to boudoir photography, which isn't, as far as I'm concerned, art. There was a thread by (iirc) a person posting as "bluelight' and it was beyond amazing. And yet, instead of grabbing hold of that photographer and questioning him on his technique, people were upset that it was a man in the shot...and even a comment on the size of his (nevermind...you know what I'm meaning).

It's that sort of thought pattern which is pervasive in that forum, and why I will not go there. And I'll say again: it's sad that it can't be a learning environment but instead has deteriorated into something less than classy and educational.

Flame away...I love this place, but that's a forum I think which could do with a little more user restraint and respect.

Best-
Noni

Jaymz

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 00:24

Very well put Noni. That is one thing that had annoyed me with any photography forum I have been to, people complaining about men in glamour/nude shots.

bikerider

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 03:23

Hi Noni, Isaw that 'bluelight' post and remember the comments, I thought it was refreshing yet others were offended because it was outside 'the norm', disappointing. I must admit I still go to the forum as there is some good work on there and most of the good work is non-nude. But, as you say a post that says, so and so on her knees just makes you groan. A title like that just guarantees your target audience will look at it. I'm not against nudity or for censorship of any kind, I've seen pornography done artisically that I don't have a problem with. Thanks for your strong post, I was hoping a lot of others would feel the same and perhaps that could make a difference to future posts on the glamour forum.
Roger.

Big_B

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 03:38

I'd like to add my support to this - especailly the post by noni

dewmuw

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 06:03

Personally I have stopped looking in that part of the forum because many of the shots seemed to be more for the titillation of the audience than for artistic or creative reasons. That is a shame because some of the other work is excellent and there is the chance to learn, but it is difficult to distinguish between the two when many of the subject titles are misleading.

I am also surprised that some of the people commenting, who make excellent and very positive comments in other threads, come out with the most vacuous comments that have no reference to the photograph but instead refer solely to the model's looks and features.

malcolmx

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 06:30

I have looked at this forum and as far as i can see there are distinct groups of photographers on this site . There are the ones who seem to have proffessional contracts to produce glamour type shots that in the main would be in mens mags or advertising and the others who want to post pictures that seem to have little or no artistic merrit but they expect a balanced critique of what is essentialy a poor snap shot .There are also photographers who do have a genuine interest in producing good artistic pictures and have a need for help .When a proffesional post a magazine type shot then the pupose of the shot dictates the type of critique that arrises and the whole of the shot from model to accesories to lighting should be assesed in this context . if the model is or seems unsuitable then imo it is legitamte to critise the choice by the photographer obviously without insulting the model .If the post requires tecqnical help then critique of the model is not correct ,critique of the pose or position is legitimate as is criticism of the lighting or exposure. when "snaps of the wife" are sent in i often think this is to enjender some form of envy rather than to ellicite help or advice . i find a lot of these shots to be without merrit at all and sometimes i feel it degrades the efforts of the generally entusiastic photographers glamour or artistic effort .
hope this makes some sense:)

scottbergerphoto

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 08:06

I have to agree that some of the comments made in the Glamour/Nude section would be more expected in a high school locker room. It's easy to spot comments that are just not acceptable to anyone and those that are perfectly appropriate. The hard part is the ones that are borderline. I'm not a fan of censorship. I think the best way to clean it up is to raise expectations. Suggestions?

cmM

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:00

you have to remember that it's rather difficult for most people to see past a pair of boobs. Not only photographers, but people in general. I don;t take nudes because I haven't the necessary experience and knowledge to be able to do so.... whoever I say that too tells me I'm dumb for passin the opportunity to see/photograph a naked girl. I am young, but I do consider myself an artist and I do it for many many other reasons. Anyway, I agree 100% with the original poster's comments. Focus !

Curtis N

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:01

...to be able to learn lighting techniques, or posing techniques, would be extraordinarily helpful to me as a newbie...I will find headers like "so-and-so on her knees," which just means I won't go into that forum to see what it is. I have no interest in seeing someone on her knees. Respectfully, that doesn't seem like a very open-minded attitude to me. You say you want to learn about posing techniques, yet you decline to look at a picture simply by the way the pose is described in the thread title. I saw that picture, and I liked it. But it certainly would have no value as "soft core porn" and doesn't depict the model in a demeaning way. Either you're interested in learning about the genre, or you're not.

Glamour photography and more traditional artistic nude photography are two distinctly different genres which are lumped into the same forum section. It's ok to like one and not the other, but from what I can tell, the whole point of glamour is to emphasize the model's beauty and sex appeal. The photographer's job is to emphasize her strengths and hide her weaknesses to create an appealing image. While most anyone can recognize beauty, the sex appeal aspect will be viewed differently by heterosexual men. The fact that we all look at photographs from different perspectives is part of what makes photography interesting.

Few of us have the training to critique photos with eloquence and detail. But in a genre where the goal is to make a model look sexy, most of us can say, in a few words, whether or not the photographer succeeded in that goal. Occasionally we see a lude comment which is eventually dealt with by the mods. But as for most of the discussion in that section, methinks ye dost protest too much.

cmM

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:09

CurtisN, the purpose of landscape photography is to emphasize the beauty of the particular piece of nature/landscape right?. How many replies have you seen commenting the beauty of the "hill"? the subject is only a small part of a photograph. There are many other things involved in a picture. when it comes to glamour the usual people are too narrow sighted to, as i said before "see beyond a pair of boobs".

bikerider

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:14

Perhaps some participation from posters on that forum might generate movement. Like you Scott I'm not a fan of censorship and I also guess if people were being really offensive, action would be taken. I started this thread seeking some aggreement on my view of the posts and comments on that forum and I think the results speak for themselves. Possible avenues to pursue are 1-not participate in that forum at all. This is a shame because there are some great posts and I intended to post some of my own work soon. 2-post a thread in that forum regarding what's been discussed here and invite discussion or 3-just carry on regardless accepting that you take the bad with the good. However I feel this option will deter potential posters. What does everybody else think?
Roger.

Curtis N

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:16

How many replies have you seen commenting the beauty of the "hill"?None. Since landscape shots generally bore me, I just avoid that section. People can comment on those pictures any way they want, and it won't bother me in the least.

See how easy it is?

bikerider

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:23

None. Since landscape shots generally bore me, I just avoid that section. People can comment on those pictures any way they want, and it won't bother me in the least.

See how easy it is?

Respectfully Curtis, that does not sound very open minded to me!
Roger.

cmM

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:24

None. Since landscape shots generally bore me, I just avoid that section. People can comment on those pictures any way they want, and it won't bother me in the least.

See how easy it is?

No, but i see how narrow sighted you are. I guess you are one of those who can't see past the model.

Belmondo

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 09:26

This is a worthwhile discussion. Let's not drag it down by overreacting to an unpopular opinion. It's just an opinion.

Thanks,

Tom

David1943

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:53

I agree with the poster of this thread. I myself have been known to make complimentary remarks regarding the appearance of models but I have to say that some of the remarks I've seen by others have caused me to whince.

The fact is though that, no matter how much some of us dislike such remarks, they do reflect the mentality of a percentage of the members here and are, within that context, honest. I have limited experience of both glamour / nude photography and life drawing but I wouldn't post any of my pictures on the Glamout Forum simply for the reason that I've too much respect for the models to allow their images to be subjected to the sort of laddish remarks posted on a thread featuring a native American woman. As for the headline "on her hnees" I had to look twice just to make sure my eyes weren't deceiving me.

Noni

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 12:30

Respectfully, that doesn't seem like a very open-minded attitude to me. You say you want to learn about posing techniques, yet you decline to look at a picture simply by the way the pose is described in the thread title. I saw that picture, and I liked it. But it certainly would have no value as "soft core porn" and doesn't depict the model in a demeaning way. Either you're interested in learning about the genre, or you're not.
Perhaps it is a narrow-minded attitude. But then, if a title is supposed to describe the contents, and one has some experience within the forum reading some rather nasty and vile commentary on a model, it does not create an interest in me to go see some woman "on her knees." As a woman, that title is very offensive to me, frankly, and is indicative of how women are treated by some men, and by that forum in general. Knowing it was done by CharlesU doesn't help me want to look at it; he takes some amazing shots, but there is precious little I can learn about photography from it, because the discussion is simply "wow..." or "I like her {add comment here}."

Instead, what I learn from it is that men (mostly) want to see a woman on her knees. And that's a bother to me. Narrow minded? Maybe. But maybe it's also because I have looked at that forum in the past, and know what to expect.

Glamour photography and more traditional artistic nude photography are two distinctly different genres which are lumped into the same forum section. It's ok to like one and not the other, but from what I can tell, the whole point of glamour is to emphasize the model's beauty and sex appeal.
Do you think so? I'm not sure. I think it's an idealized version of what women are, but I also don't think it's solely to establish a sexual response in males. Look at Audrey Hepburn. Or Grace Kelly. Elegance, sex appeal (by the tons!!!!!!) and beauty. Their good qualities were completely emphasised, but they were not naked, on their knees, or sticking a pinky in their mouth emulating either 'innocence' or sexual activity; and I doubt anyone came away from those shots thinking "man, I'd like to do her on the kitchen table RIGHT NOW!!!"

What people are missing is the power of a good glam shot to make women consider what they can do to create that appeal themselves...there are some women who prefer to look at themselves as sexual objects, but the vast majority of them don't. But elegant? Classy? Gracious? All of us have a part where that appeals to our femininity, and want to emulate that (to some extent). We don't want for our men to see us as "on our knees" (at least, I dearly hope not; at least not in public...and not only as that...).

While most anyone can recognize beauty, the sex appeal aspect will be viewed differently by heterosexual men. The fact that we all look at photographs from different perspectives is part of what makes photography interesting.
Then post in a soft core porn forum, where comments about her breasts are appreciated...and one does not go into the forum looking for advice on how to set up a set to create a shot.

Few of us have the training to critique photos with eloquence and detail.
Perhaps that's because there isn't any real crit to look at and learn from in that forum? Instead, locker-room behavior encourages more locker room behavior...

As for training, it doesn't take any training to ask the photographer where his lights were; why he chose that particular angle/background rather than another one; what he cropped and why; what his post was. It does take looking past a set of chi-chis, though, and looking at the shot as a whole. And that doesn't take training, it takes interest in photography as an art.

And as for crit, why don't you make an effort to learn about it, and then be able to provide some which is useful, rather than the typical comment made of "she's not pretty" or "is that a man?"

But in a genre where the goal is to make a model look sexy, most of us can say, in a few words, whether or not the photographer succeeded in that goal. Occasionally we see a lude comment which is eventually dealt with by the mods. But as for most of the discussion in that section,
Really? I can take a shot of a pair of chi-chis, and post them...would that be art? Would that do anything other than pander to childish behavior? Would it do a dratted thing other than make some men drool? That's not making a model look sexy; that's something other than that.

methinks ye dost protest too much.
You're allowed an opinion. Mine was asked for (as a woman on these forums) and thus provided.

I am far from a fuddy-duddy. I have written porn, and sold it for a decent sum. But that's far different from the general goal of my writing, and is done with specific intent to stimulate men. I have yet to have anyone actually crit any of my porn other than the occasional letter from someone telling me the effect it had...which is immediately trashed, btw. There was not (and I doubt there ever will be) a commentary on my writing style, nor a comment on how I learned it.

If the specific purpose of some photography is to stimulate a physical response in men, then it is, imho, soft porn. If it is to highlight a woman's appeal, that is something entirely different. A fine line? Sure enough, judging by how many cross it without realizing it.

And if that is not the case, I wonder why the occasional male photo is slammed with such regularity as to make me completely understand that it's not about photography, but rather the subject and her sex appeal. That it's a men's forum, and not really about photography but about showcasing a pretty woman in sexual attitudes?

Perhaps I protest too much. Or perhaps I am a woman who has a strong opinion about something, and not hesitant to share it when it's been asked for.

For me, I'd love to see the forum get to a point where there is some learning taking place, some sharing of techniques, some discussion about the shot itself, rather than the model's suitability. I'd like to see some really outstanding shots of the nude body, male or female. And I'd like to see some respect shown the models, as well...and until that happens, my choice is to not visit the forum with any regularity.

And no, I'm not advocating any form of censorship.

And yes, I realize I am completely alienating myself from those who have taken this personally.

Best-
Noni

Curtis N

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 13:33

Respectfully Curtis, that does not sound very open minded to me!Touche' :)
I'm not closed-minded, I'm just arrogantly opinionated!

Seriously, I may some day learn to appreciate landscape photography better (though I rather doubt it, since I haven't learned to appreciate Rap music, Gershwin, Picasso or Hemmingway), in the mean time, I won't complain about the way others discuss an art form that doesn't interest me.
"on her knees." As a woman, that title is very offensive to me, frankly, and is indicative of how women are treated by some men, and by that forum in general.Really now. Is it offensive when a woman gets on her knees to tie a child's shoe laces? To scrub a floor? To open the bottom drawer in the file cabinet in her lavishly-decorated corner office in the executive suite? Is it more offensive when a woman does these things than when a man does them? Would you be offended by a photograph entitled "Man on his knees"?

Ironically, this thread, "Shauna on her knees" http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=88347 has generated seven responses so far, at least one of them by a woman. Most of the comments are related to the lighting, her tatoo, and the background. It might be educational for someone interested in glamour work. Pity you're missing it because of preconceptions.

Noni

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 13:41

Is it offensive when a woman gets on her knees to tie a child's shoe laces? To scrub a floor? To open the bottom drawer in the file cabinet in her lavishly-decorated corner office in the executive suite? Is it more offensive when a woman does these things than when a man does them? Would you be offended by a photograph entitled "Man on his knees"?
In People forum? Nope, not at all. But in a sexually oriented forum, wherein the entire focus is sexuality, apparently, yes, it is. To me. I'm allowed an opinion, aren't I? I'm allowed to have thoughts about things, aren't I? And yes, a man on his knees in a sexual position would not garner my interest either.

Ironically, this thread, "Shauna on her knees" http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=88347 has generated seven responses so far, at least one of them by a woman. Most of the comments are related to the lighting, her tatoo, and the background. It might be educational for someone interested in glamour work. Pity you're missing it because of preconceptions.
Right. Lots of comments on airbrushing her tat and various other comments. One woman commenting does not negate my opinion...if so, there are many men on this thread whose comments would negate yours. I've read the thread, my friend. Assuming I haven't - well, that's your assumption, isn't it?

Look, it's pointless to be arguing with you. My opinion stands...as does yours. You're welcome to have your opinion, no matter what it is, as am I. I expressed an opinion, a strong one, a female perspective as requested by the OP, and if that's a bother to you, that's fine...no skin off my nose, as it were.

If you'd like to go more indepth, feel free to pm me...

Best-
Noni

Longwatcher

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 14:17

Some of my thoughts.
I have not posted any images to the Glamour/Nude forum despite the fact that I might appreciate the help with my lighting technique usually because of subject matter. Becuase I post so few I kind of feel it is mostly unfair of me to make comments so don't visit that forum often (that and that particular forum never at work).

In my photos I take on a profesional basis, I am trying for two competing things at once.
Artistic
and
Erotic
While they are not mutually exclusive they are very hard to get together, except on a rare basis. It is because I am trying for the erotic that I haven't posted. Although I do have some artistic shots that would probably be acceptable they are still usually at least partialy nudes. I do post a select number to my own web site, but had felt that it was not proper to post most of them to this site. note that only a small percentage of the shots during a session are an actual attempt at this, but that is the ultimate goal of the photo session to get a small number of photos that are both artistic and erotic at the same time. [my non-professional sessions are for the fun of it with completely different goals)

I am kind of two minds based on the discussions in this thread. One would be that apparently some of the photos would be acceptable. The other is that apparently we have some immature folks visiting that forum, so I really shouldn't even then.

being male and hetrosexual I tend to look at glamour/nude pictures and the first thing I see is the model and how they look; I personally think this is natural. However, unless the photo was put there just to look at the model such as in an adult mag or web site, I tend to go beyond that very quickly and look at the style and quality of the photograph.
Since the gallery forums are for critique and comment as to the photographic style it is very inappropriate in my mind to say anything other then "nice looking model", "lucky Photographer" or "I'm jealous" and then continue commenting on the photograph itself.
If there is a desire from the photographer for comments on the pose/posture of the model herself then some related comments are acceptable.

On the topic of males, I personally skip right to the style of the photograph step, but eventually I will come back and think if gay men or ladies would appreciate this model in this photograph as represented. I would do this because in my goal of artistic and erotic I have a desire to be good enough that if I ever photograph a male and female together I want it to appeal to all sides of the line. I should mention that over the past few years I have had the opportunity to photograph some males in various situations and one of my greatist artistic challenge was trying to make a TS look feminine in the early stage of the change from male to female. Now being a confirmed Het Male, THAT is a difficult challenge trust me. But at the same time I like the photographic challenge it offered. BTW it is a whole lot easier making a female look male then a male look female.

Just my opinion and possibly too much information,

CyberDyneSystems

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 14:47

This thread has opened a discussion with a few layers to it.. not the least of which is the source and effect of the comments made reagrding the models.. as opposed to the comments themselves.

ie: Sexism.

Bigotry of any form is ugly to many of us,. sexism no less so than rascism, classism, or religious hatred.

The irony is that in a thread where the door to discuss the concerns of sexism, as presented in the reply comments found on this forum, has resulted in some over the line sexist comments .....

Let's please limit ourselves to posting our own feelings and opinions, and not allow this to continue to degenerate into cross examination or challenge other's..

...at the very least.. let's refrain from stating that others should shut up?

Curtis N

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 15:47

I've read the thread, my friend. Assuming I haven't - well, that's your assumption, isn't it?I made that assumption based on this statement:I will find headers like "so-and-so on her knees," which just means I won't go into that forum to see what it is. I have no interest in seeing someone on her knees.I apologize for the misunderstanding.

bikerider

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 17:40

Well my post certainly generated some discussion and the topic is fairly contentious making it hard not to have 'raised voices'. I am interested in a number of areas in photography and find photographing people a real challenge, which leads me to want to explore. My attitude to female nudes is more about my desire to communicate a strong female presence, which is so rarely communicated. The problem of objectification of women is widespread and most men probably don't have any idea how they participate and foster that view. I am in a relationship with a strong woman and I work with the same kind of women. I feel that is an advantage as my relationship with them is on an equal footing. I guess a lot of men are not in the position of living and working with educated, independent women.....maybe they do but don't recognise it. I find myself wondering now whether it is possible for 'artistic nude' to have a separate forum.......moderators?
Roger.

Noni

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 21:24

I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Nope, no apology needed, and not to worry. I figured (before I answered originally) that if I was going to use that as an example, I'd best look at it, at least. LOL...

Here is my issue, in a nutshell. Most of the shots in that forum are done specifically to titillate and stimulate a man. Because of that, there's an objectification of women that occurs, and a disengagement between the viewer and the photo subject. The photo becomes an object, when it's a person there.

Effective photography is designed to produce a response. I put up a photo of a little girl, and it was designed to make people look at it. It was effective, and I manipulated my viewers to see things my way. The problem, then, with so-and-so on their knees, is that a person manipulates the viewer towards a certain thing; in this case, for me, it was the subjugation of women in a public forum.

Someone back earlier in the thread say that men have trouble looking past a pair of breasts. I don't believe that's accurate. I give men more credit than that. Sure, there will be the typical response but that does not need to be posted; rest assured that both the subject and the photographer knows the breasts are great, small, perfect or whatever.

There is a quiet, almost sideways sort of opinion that a person will take away from shots like that, and it is not always complimentary to a woman. That's what bothers me, maybe. What people think of the person who lays underneath the body. Women are not objects, and it bothers me a lot to see that attitude so blatantly on display in there. I see precious little education, and instead see oogling.

I am a heterosexual female, and think that the human form - in all it's permutations and complexities is utterly amazing. Erotic art can be done in some amazing, unique ways. The shots that capture me (and I co-produced a calendar of nude and semi nude women, remember) and that move past the concept of overly made up, barely legal "flesh" are those with different lighting, different backgrounds, different subjects. One of my favorite shots from the calendar is a woman who is getting water poured over her while she stands in the desert...there is a sultry, explosive quality about that shot because of the light, the water against the desert and against her, and the angles of her shoulder, arm and jaw, not because she was naked (she wasn't). And another shot which stole viewers breath was a black and white shot that showed a perfect pair of breasts with arms crossed, half body (navel to jaw) but once you looked at it closely, you saw the scars from the breast cancer surgery she had and realized those were not "real" breasts. (Yes, I directed the shoot, and the photographers were brilliant in taking what I had in my head and getting it out there; it was collaborative work, and one of the most powerful, moving
things I've ever participated in). That's erotic art; that's art with a message. That's not soft core porn...and that's not what I see in the forum here.

I'd dearly love to be able to go to the forum and not feel repelled by the commentary there. I'd love to go into that forum, and post a question on lighting, aperture, posing, and post processing. As it stands, though, I vote with my feet, and with my mouse. I'd love to take some shots, and be able to put them into the forum for crit and not be concerned that someone will get hung up on the prettiness of the model, or the perfection of their skin. I'd love to take shots of men, and post those...but as it stands right now, that's probably not going to happen because of the responses people give. I won't subject myself or anyone modeling for me to that sort of humiliation.

And on an entirely different note, I find it completely fascinating (and rather demonstrative) that the only woman on this thread (me), voicing a strong, clear opinion, have taken some heat...and yet the men haven't who voice similar opinions. That, in a nutshell, is more telling than anything.

Best-
Noni

Art Rodriguez

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 22:16

“I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.”

-Voltaire

I agree with Noni. She makes some very fine points. Some of the comments that people make in the glamour and nude forum are inappropriate.

I don't agree with some of the comments made in this thread but I do respect them. Just as we should all respect what Noni has to say. She was asked for her opinion and she gave it.

I was a lurker in here at POTN. I read all the comments and enjoyed everyone joking with each other and having a good time. I felt left out, so I joined. I still enjoy it. I would just like to see everyone get along and not argue.

We all come from different backgrounds and we all are not going to agree the way a certain photo was taking or if there is to much contrast or not enough. But I think we should respect that fact that someone doesn't agree with us.

I hope I just didn't alienate myself with some of you, but I just want to state my opinion.

Thank,
Art

jimsolt

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 22:52

I'd dearly love to be able to go to the forum and not feel repelled by the commentary there.
Noni

I loved your whole post. You made some excellent points.

If I had to pick one of your points that expresses my opinion most accurately, it would be the one quoted above.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Jim

lostdoggy

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 23:10

Steve Parr

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 23:12

This isn't rocket science.

There's not a lot in this world which offends me, and school-yard comments about naked women are not counted among them.

This Forum has an "Ignore" feature, doesn't it?

Well, enter the name of the person whose comments you find so offensive, then click "Enter".

Problem solved.

I would submit that someone who's so easily offended by comments on an internet forum, and are hurt so by them, probably shouldn't be on an internet forum.

I'm not judgin', I'm just sayin'...

Steve

dispatchermike21

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 23:17

Effective photography is designed to produce a response. I put up a photo of a little girl, and it was designed to make people look at it. It was effective, and I manipulated my viewers to see things my way. The problem, then, with so-and-so on their knees, is that a person manipulates the viewer towards a certain thing; in this case, for me, it was the subjugation of women in a public forum.

An interesting comment considering the model in this tread was portraied as a Submissive.

I have read through these and seen the one of the themes be " thats my opinion and I'm intitled to it", well are not the crude fellows ( as we seem to assume they are fellows right? ) intitled to thier opinons also.

" I may not agree with what you have to say but I will fight to the death your right to say it". I am retired from the US Army and this is one of the things that kept me going for my whole career.

Noni

28th of July 2005 (Thu), 23:46

In order to learn one must be able to absorb the positive as well as the negative aspect of life. Where life come in different sh ape and form there will always be a difference in opinion and these opinion can be suppressed by Mods but not eliminated. The best thing to do is to skip thruough the bad comments and procede to the good comment.

If the photo offends you, then you have much to learn and to grow up. If you are serious about art then you better learn to face the music. The real world is not as clean as you might think. If you examine some of the fine arts you will find some people might interpet it as porn and someone else will interpet it as art. Both Fine Art and Porn, whether you like it or not, are in fact ART.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. I understand what you're saying...but I don't agree.

Facing music, and growing up, is something I've done. I'm well aware of the dirt and scum that accompanies some of the most glorious aspects of life. I am rather capable of forming my own opinion, thank you, and have done so with decades of experience and thought behind me. My opinion differs from yours; is that a reason to tell someone to "grow up"? Because their opinion is different than yours?

And frankly, a lot of the shots posted are poorly executed snapshots, and not something I consider "art" by any stretch of imagination. Some are well executed but poorly composed, if one is looking to do anything other than titillate and sexually arouse their viewers. And some are simply outstanding work.

But hey, that's my opinion...grown up or not, positive or negative, clean or dirty, porn or art...my opinion.

Jim said:
I loved your whole post. You made some excellent points.

If I had to pick one of your points that expresses my opinion most accurately, it would be the one quoted above.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
You're welcome. And thanks.

Steve said:
I would submit that someone who's so easily offended by comments on an internet forum, and are hurt so by them, probably shouldn't be on an internet forum.
I'm not hurt by them. I've given an opinion which was asked for. Should I lie? Should I dissemble? Should I make things up, or worse, stay quiet? That's not my nature, sorry. I'm not easily offended...but I'm also not a quiet good little woman. I've dealt with death, hate, violence, misogeny, and all sorts of things. I'm no virginal child at a keyboard.

As it is, Steve, I've not been participating in that forum, so I've "ignored" the whole thing. But if the topic comes up, and I've got a view to offer, then I shall. Take it or leave it, it's all good...but like your opinion, mine is valid.

Best-
Noni

lostdoggy

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 00:56

Maybe growup is not the right word. Maybe open up would be a better word. But I'm afraid it would be taken the wrong way.

Regardless if you or I think it is a snapshot is not important. The important aspect of photography as in any other hobby is that one enjoy doing it. If you gave me a Picasso I would consider it junk, but I would not toss it into the garbage because i know that some one out there will pay a huge sum of money for it. That someone may or may not have good taste but that person will pay for it. That is just life. I heard someone sold a framed T-shirt in ebay for huge some of money. The person who put it up for sale was just making a point and didn't think anybody would think it was worth anything, but it was sold. The point is that even if you don't like it doesn't mean that the picture won't bring interest to some else. Most of us here, as I notice, are here to learn or to share information. Then there are those who share some incredible images, eg Charlesu is one who share some great photos. You might or might not like his work but I'm sure there are a lot who do. Of cause there will aways be a clown who will make dumb comments that we need to ignore, me included.

DocFrankenstein

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 01:01

Such a redundant topic.

Loni - why do have a problem with "so and so on their knees"? I'm not judging you, just want you to elaborate as to why you refuse to look.

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 01:19

I'm not hurt by them. I've given an opinion which was asked for. Should I lie? Should I dissemble? Should I make things up, or worse, stay quiet? That's not my nature, sorry. I'm not easily offended...but I'm also not a quiet good little woman. I've dealt with death, hate, violence, misogeny, and all sorts of things. I'm no virginal child at a keyboard.

As it is, Steve, I've not been participating in that forum, so I've "ignored" the whole thing. But if the topic comes up, and I've got a view to offer, then I shall. Take it or leave it, it's all good...but like your opinion, mine is valid.

There's an old saying: "You have to take the good with the bad". I think that fits perfectly here.

Look, I'm no fan of some of the comments there, but I'm also realistic enough to understand that there will always be those out there, especially on a pretty anonymous internet forum, who will make them.

If I were to stop viewing that area, simply because I don't like a few comments, how does that help me? Well, it certainly shields me from that which I don't care for, but it certainly doesn't do a thing towards helping me understand that aspect of photography any better.

So, I have a choice to make. Which is more important? Keeping those comments from my view, or understanding that aspect of photography better? Well, it's the latter.

I'm not suggesting that anyone's opinion is invalid. But I also think that it's best to, in view of the fact that this is a pretty open internet forum, to accept that those kinds of things will be written, and deal with it.

I think we all know that certain types of comments will be made every once in a while. The choice we have to make is whether or not we're bothered enough by them to deny ourselves access to what is, in most cases, some rather outstanding photography.

I guess I'm just not willing to do that...

Steve

dewmuw

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 04:54

Here is my issue, in a nutshell. Most of the shots in that forum are done specifically to titillate and stimulate a man. Because of that, there's an objectification of women that occurs, and a disengagement between the viewer and the photo subject. The photo becomes an object, when it's a person there.

I agree 100%.

Whilst a certain percentage of the images I have seen posted under glamour are excellent images and truly artisitic, a fair number are simply there to titillate. When that happens we are going beyond photography and moving into the world of sexuality and arousal. I was under the impression that this is a photo forum.

I have seen posts in the glamour section that remind me of schoolboys passing round picture in the playground and sniggering. When people express to Noni that she should 'grow up' I think they should turn the mirror on themselves.

dewmuw

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 04:57

There's an old saying: "You have to take the good with the bad". I think that fits perfectly here.

Do you really believe that? Why then do we have moderators?

BearLeeAlive

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 07:19

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 08:37

Do you really believe that? Why then do we have moderators?

I absolutely believe that.

As for why we have moderators, I'm guessing that there are probably things they're responsible for other than the comments in the Glamour section.

Again, I'm not defending them. But until you have to pay money to access that area, you're going to get people who make certain comments. Asking them nicely not to won't get it done.

This is my opinion. While I don't appreciate the comments, I appreciate the photography enough that I can dismiss any inappropriate comments. Anyone who opts not to visit that area, simply because of some of the comments made, is denying themselves exposure to some pretty great photography. I don't think that point can be argued...

Steve

dewmuw

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 09:04

I absolutely believe that.

As for why we have moderators, I'm guessing that there are probably things they're responsible for other than the comments in the Glamour section.

The mods are also there to monitor the use of abusive language and other infringements of the forums rules. Are you saying you'd be happy to see lots of "f*** offs and you're a t***" on this forum? That would after all be taking the "good with the bad".

Personally I believe this discussion is being over complicated. I simply believe that people posting responses in the glamour forum should stick to commenting on the photo style, composition, layout, etc and refrain from saying things 'I'd like to give her one'. It is a matter of respect.

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 09:13

The mods are also there to monitor the use of abusive language and other infringements of the forums rules. Are you saying you'd be happy to see lots of "f*** offs and you're a t***" on this forum? That would after all be taking the "good with the bad".

Personally I believe this discussion is being over complicated. I simply believe that people posting responses in the glamour forum should stick to commenting on the photo style, composition, layout, etc and refrain from saying things 'I'd like to give her one'. It is a matter of respect.

Frankly, and I mean this in the nicest way, I think one of the reasons it's over complicated is because people read too much into what's written.

You make an assumption that I'd be "happy" to see offensive language. Please show me where I've said that, and I'll buy you a house. What I did say was that these comments are, like it or not, going to show up from time to time.

So, before you make the logic-leap that I "like" it, you might take a breath before you start putting words in someone's mouth.

And I've yet to see the comments you mention; "f*** offs and you're a t***". I just haven't seen them. If I did, I would likely find them inappropriate, but I wouldn't dwell on them. I would move on and dismiss them. I can do that. I can acknowledge, also, that others cannot.

I agree that comments made can reflect respect or disrespect, Yes, I'd prefer that they be respectful. I understand that there will be those who are disrespectful.

I'm not about to lose too much sleep over it...

Steve

dewmuw

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 09:22

Frankly, and I mean this in the nicest way, I think one of the reasons it's over complicated is because people read too much into what's written.

You make an assumption that I'd be "happy" to see offensive language. Please show me where I've said that, and I'll buy you a house. What I did say was that these comments are, like it or not, going to show up from time to time.

One has to assume that when you argue that membership of a forum such as this means you have to 'take the good with the bad' you were willing to apply that across the board.

And I've yet to see the comments you mention; "f*** offs and you're a t***". I just haven't seen them. If I did, I would likely find them inappropriate, but I wouldn't dwell on them. I would move on and dismiss them. I can do that. I can acknowledge, also, that others cannot.

That's because the mods keep it out! There have been posts in the past that have contained obscene language or have contained links to sites with obscene language, but the mods have done their jobs and deleted them as soon as they have been alerted to the fact.

I agree that comments made can reflect respect or disrespect, Yes, I'd prefer that they be respectful. I understand that there will be those who are disrespectful.

Well the onus in on people posting to consider that when posting. Thinking before typing is a good idea.

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 10:05

That's because the mods keep it out! There have been posts in the past that have contained obscene language or have contained links to sites with obscene language, but the mods have done their jobs and deleted them as soon as they have been alerted to the fact.

Thank you for making the point.

If the mods have removed those posts, then it's pretty evident that they deem the others, which some find offensive, not too objectionable...

Steve

Belmondo

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 10:12

Thank you for making the point.

If the mods have removed those posts, then it's pretty evident that they deem the others, which some find offensive, not too objectionable...

Steve

Not always. The volume of traffic in the forum is such that we simply can't review every word that gets posted. I think we do a pretty good job, but we can always use a little help. If something gets by us, you only have to click on the little red triangle to bring it to our attention.

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 10:13

One has to assume that when you argue that membership of a forum such as this means you have to 'take the good with the bad' you were willing to apply that across the board.

And, by and large, I think I am. When things become blatantly indecent, though, I think different rules apply. One can make an inappropriate comment without being indecent. I believe their might be other internet forums where indecent comments are welcome.

Scenario: Someone posts a picture of a gorgeous naked woman. One of the responses is "Gosh, Bob, how can you concentrate?"

Is that inappropriate? Maybe.

If the question is asked due to too much distracting glare from the studio lights, no. If it's due to the woman being stunning, and naked, well, then maybe. The only person who knows for sure is the person asking the question. I think it's a bit condemning to just assume that the intent of every comment is bad.

But, it appears as though there are a good number of people who are willing to assume without the benefit of further information.

Such is life, you see...

Steve

Noni

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:22

Look, I'm no fan of some of the comments there, but I'm also realistic enough to understand that there will always be those out there, especially on a pretty anonymous internet forum, who will make them.
Sure, there will always be comments that don't fit. If the entire thread contains only those comments, then for me, it's a bit of a waste of time to view them. There's no learning done...just highschool locker room stuff.

If I were to stop viewing that area, simply because I don't like a few comments, how does that help me? Well, it certainly shields me from that which I don't care for, but it certainly doesn't do a thing towards helping me understand that aspect of photography any better. So, I have a choice to make. Which is more important? Keeping those comments from my view, or understanding that aspect of photography better? Well, it's the latter.

LOL, it's not about sheilding me. Like I said earlier, I'm no pure, uptight old maid. I *want* to learn about all aspects of photography; I'm so new at this that I know nothing. But the comments made, for the most part, don't discuss photography. They discuss other things. And so, it's a waste of my time to be there. I might be able to learn more if I spent more time on other forums, take the comments there, and apply them to a nude shot; and so I spend time where I can learn about photography...not about what's attractive to anonymous internet users. I already know that. LOL!

I'm not suggesting that anyone's opinion is invalid. But I also think that it's best to, in view of the fact that this is a pretty open internet forum, to accept that those kinds of things will be written, and deal with it.
By deal with it, do you mean not say anything when a female perspective is requested? Ignoring it? Being nice and quiet? Or...??? See, for me, dealing with it is not about ignoring it; it's not about just accepting it once my opinion is requested. It's not about saying "well, boys will be boys...so what??" If there is something which irks me, and the opportunity comes to share that, then I think, frankly, that a different view might be necessary to see the entire picture. Everyone's view is valid. Everyone is allowed an opinion. I have one, too...and it's just as valid as the rest. To shut one view out - to tell someone to "grow up" or "deal with it" - does not allow for a complete picture. What it does do is say "hey, I don't want to hear your opinion. It's not valid. It's not wanted. So go away and be quiet." That's not something I care to do.

Remember, I'm not the one who started the thread...but I am the one catching the heat. See anything interesting there? I sure do. And considering some of the pm's I've gotten, others do as well. LOL, but hey, that's fine with me. It's all good; views, sharing and discussion of same, are important to learning the whole thing, and not just what we (ourselves) see.

I think we all know that certain types of comments will be made every once in a while. The choice we have to make is whether or not we're bothered enough by them to deny ourselves access to what is, in most cases, some rather outstanding photography.
I agree - and have stated - that there is some outstanding photography in that forum. It's hard to find, though, amidst all the childish commentary, and all the discussion about breast size, submission, and hoopla that goes on. I just read a few threads as an example; there was one single thread which talked briefly about angles, and posing...the rest were highschool commentary about the model.

I guess I'm just not willing to do that...
Me either. Which is why, you see, I'm saying something about it.

Best-
Noni

Noni

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:41

I must be evil. I like to look at good photographs of nude women. I like to look a nude photographs of men too, but for some reason they draw a different response from me (anyone know why?.....lol). They are just part of ther human form which is beautiful and enticing.
Me too. And it's not evil. It's normal, natural, and fine.

I believe erotic, glamour or nude photography is art when done right, it draws out emotion from the viewer. No different than a landscape image that makes someone go 'WOW, would I every like to be there'. Ten different photographers could photograph the same nude model and get ten different emotional responses from their images. The could range from 'YUCK, that does not do justice to the subject" to eliciting a 'WOW, does that ever look great' response. I think the idea is to get the most positive response as possible from the viewer.
Solely sexual? Or is there another reason? Again I return to the Master Painters: Renoir, Reubens, Da Vinci and so on. Was their entire aim to sexually titillate a viewer, or to make them think about things? To feel something more than just a sexual arousal? To me, that's the difference. If someone can see a photo, and look into it a bit deeper than the first blush response, then it's done a job which is hard to do. And that makes the masters...

Noni, I agree with most of what you have posted. I think any negative response you got is due to the fact you come across as suggesting that your take is the only right one. There is no right or wrong to individual interpretation as long as it does not cause anyone harm (there is no harm in difference of opinion).
No harm in a different opinion. So why then am I castigated for having one? Not by you, but by some here? Just curious. The original poster posted a thread that contained some serious critique of the forum, but he's not catching flack...yet, I am.

I am left to think that it has less to do with the topic, and more the poster. I am a strong, intelligent, articulate woman (modest, too...can't you tell? LOL), and have not once stated that anyone else's opinion is not valid. If I have, please point it out and let me offer apologies for that. I have not stated anywhere that my opinion is the only right one, because that's not how I feel. All opinion is valid. Including mine.

But think about it from an objective standpoint. I am the only woman on this thread. I am stating an unpopular opinion (apparently). I am looking at the subject a bit more in-depth than I think some others have. And I am articulating it in such a way that (hopefully) people are looking at things from a different perspective.

I think that makes them uncomfortable, in some ways. Some people may never have considered subjugation of women from a woman's perspective. Some may just not like a strong, outspoken woman speaking her mind. Some may not like the fact that they have to look at certain habits they have, and consider if they're appropriate. Whatever the reason, there are reactions that are occuring, rather than proactivity and thought. There is a bit of the "be hush, now, child...your opinion is not really all right to share." There is a bit of "you are not mature enough to understand." There is a bit of "you're out of line with your opinion." A touch of "don't argue with us...you just don't understand."

That part, I think, is likely the most fascinating aspect to this whole thread. A woman speaks up, stating her mind, and is told to "grow up." I also find it rather funny...funny in a sad sort of way.

Best-
Noni

lostdoggy

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 13:34

That part, I think, is likely the most fascinating aspect to this whole thread. A woman speaks up, stating her mind, and is told to "grow up." I also find it rather funny...funny in a sad sort of way.

Best-
Noni

Noni

I think you're miss interpeting the grow up part of my statement. As you said "after the first blush" the same must hold true for anybody elses work not just the Masters. I'm not a big fan of the masters that you have mention with exception of Da Vinci. Who is to say that these work by these masters weren't works to arouse those who commission the work/porn. If you look at the time at which these work were done the Aristocrates of that era were profoundly perverded group of very wealthy individuals. It is todays so call self proclaim art experts that have misinterpret these work of art. These same have instilled into the public mind that these work of art are not porn

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 13:39

Some people may never have considered subjugation of women from a woman's perspective.

Noni, if you consider the images there a "subjugation of women", I would think that the comments there would be a secondary issue, and that you would speak out against the images as oppposed to the comments made about the images.

I'm tryin' to figure this out, but I dunno'...

Steve

Noni

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 13:44

Noni

I think you're miss interpeting the grow up part of my statement. As you said "after the first blush" the same must hold true for anybody elses work not just the Masters. I'm not a big fan of the masters that you have mention with exception of Da Vinci. Who is to say that these work by these masters weren't works to arouse those who commission the work/porn. If you look at the time at which these work were done the Aristocrates of that era were profoundly perverded group of very wealthy individuals. It is todays so call self proclaim art experts that have misinterpret these work of art. These same have instilled into the public mind that these work of art are not porn

O.K. I do see your point in some regards. But when I went back and re-looked at your comment, it read: "If the photo offends you, then you have much to learn and to grow up. If you are serious about art then you better learn to face the music. The real world is not as clean as you might think. If you examine some of the fine arts you will find some people might interpet it as porn and someone else will interpet it as art. Both Fine Art and Porn, whether you like it or not, are in fact ART."
(Emphasis added is mine).

I'm not sure how that was meant in the context of the whole thing. Yes, being told to "grow up" is pretty harsh...considering I'm probably older than you'd think. The real world is somewhere I've lived a very long time; childhood was fun, but over around 13 years old for me. So suggesting that I am not grown up, nor facing music, nor having a good grasp on the "real" world has nothing to do with art, but rather commentary on me. Which is, in the course of things, just fine. You're allowed an opinion...it may not be accurate (seeing as you don't have any idea who and what I am), but you're allowed whatever opinion you want.

So if you could explain it better, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!

Best-
Noni

Noni

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 14:14

Noni, if you consider the images there a "subjugation of women", I would think that the comments there would be a secondary issue, and that you would speak out against the images as oppposed to the comments made about the images.

I'm tryin' to figure this out, but I dunno'...

Hi, Steve.

Let me give this another shot, and then I've got to get into my office.

I don't necessarily consider the photos as a whole subjugation of women. I consider the responses such, to an extent. Why? If a photo is done tastefully, and the comments (on a photography site) are about the photograph rather than the model, then it's about photo. IF the comments are "hey, great butt" or "wow, lookit those breasts" or "man, I'd like to give her one right now," that is treating a woman as an item...there is no commentary about the photograph, or about the technique needed to create the shot.

If a series of shots is voyeuristic rather than artistic, as in a thread called 'au pair' (iirc), then it's an issue for me, and to me, a subjugation of women. I suspect (although this may take some more thought on my part) that if the entire purpose of a photograph is to arouse a man viewing it, there is a place for that (there are tons of porn sites on the net), but I'm not sure that's the object and intent of the forum here, on a photography site. And placing a purely titillating (with no artistic intent) shot here on a photography site is a call to comment on the woman's body, rather than the photo itself. I'm not too sure what to think about those comments which are "great shot" and nothing else; that could be interpreted either way.

As for my perspective on the subjugation of women, here it is in a nutshell. When a woman is presented as a purely sexual object, there is a subtle denial of her as a thinking, breathing, whole person, with complex thoughts, feelings, hopes and dreams. She becomes nothing more than flesh, a toy, a fantasy...whatever that fantasy may be. And while that is indeed a part of women, it is not she entire. It ignores her as a whole...and that is indeed a great pity.

And so the comments trigger a response in me because of the experiences I've had, as a woman. And it shows me indeed that despite people's best efforts, most of the time a woman is viewed as something far less than what she is; a piece of flesh only. The comments are not about photography, they're about the response alone. And it is that which is demonstrative of the mentality of the viewer; 'tisn't I who needs to focus on artistic value, but rather others (at least in my opinion. LOL!!!).

As to why I'm not so bothered by the photos is because I don't know the intent on some of them. The intent, however, is clear in the comments. It is not quite so clear in the making of the photo with the obvious exception of those specifically and solely designed to sexually arouse a man (or woman).

Like I said, this may take some more thinking through on my part, but I am racing the clock at the moment. Let me know if I've not answered your question, and I'll try again later.

Best-
Noni

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 15:08

Hi, Steve.

Let me give this another shot, and then I've got to get into my office.

I don't necessarily consider the photos as a whole subjugation of women. I consider the responses such, to an extent. Why? If a photo is done tastefully, and the comments (on a photography site) are about the photograph rather than the model, then it's about photo. IF the comments are "hey, great butt" or "wow, lookit those breasts" or "man, I'd like to give her one right now," that is treating a woman as an item...there is no commentary about the photograph, or about the technique needed to create the shot.

If a series of shots is voyeuristic rather than artistic, as in a thread called 'au pair' (iirc), then it's an issue for me, and to me, a subjugation of women. I suspect (although this may take some more thought on my part) that if the entire purpose of a photograph is to arouse a man viewing it, there is a place for that (there are tons of porn sites on the net), but I'm not sure that's the object and intent of the forum here, on a photography site. And placing a purely titillating (with no artistic intent) shot here on a photography site is a call to comment on the woman's body, rather than the photo itself. I'm not too sure what to think about those comments which are "great shot" and nothing else; that could be interpreted either way.

As for my perspective on the subjugation of women, here it is in a nutshell. When a woman is presented as a purely sexual object, there is a subtle denial of her as a thinking, breathing, whole person, with complex thoughts, feelings, hopes and dreams. She becomes nothing more than flesh, a toy, a fantasy...whatever that fantasy may be. And while that is indeed a part of women, it is not she entire. It ignores her as a whole...and that is indeed a great pity.

And so the comments trigger a response in me because of the experiences I've had, as a woman. And it shows me indeed that despite people's best efforts, most of the time a woman is viewed as something far less than what she is; a piece of flesh only. The comments are not about photography, they're about the response alone. And it is that which is demonstrative of the mentality of the viewer; 'tisn't I who needs to focus on artistic value, but rather others (at least in my opinion. LOL!!!).

As to why I'm not so bothered by the photos is because I don't know the intent on some of them. The intent, however, is clear in the comments. It is not quite so clear in the making of the photo with the obvious exception of those specifically and solely designed to sexually arouse a man (or woman).

Like I said, this may take some more thinking through on my part, but I am racing the clock at the moment. Let me know if I've not answered your question, and I'll try again later.

Best-
Noni

Wow.

That was deep.

You know what? They're pictures. Some people will make constructive comments, and others will not.

I accept that this is the reality of it...

Steve

cjsa

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 15:55

OK I am a woman too, when you say things like so-and-so on her knees, it is offensive to anyone who knows what it means.
I could go on, but Noni has done it beautifully.
If you don't understand that some words/phrases have connotations, then I don't know where you grew up.

elkootcho

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:16

How do you bring up expectations in that forum and take it beyond simple voyuerism? Simple. Everyone in here that has a complaint about the locker room-type comments needs to visit the threads and make a meaningful contribution. Make some remarks about the artistics merits of the photograph. Ask questions about lighting, exposure, posing, makeup, etc.

The more that you elevate a discussion, the greater likelyhood that others will follow suit.

CyberDyneSystems

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:28

Thank you for making the point.

If the mods have removed those posts, then it's pretty evident that they deem the others, which some find offensive, not too objectionable...

Steve

Not by a long shot.. We work under several restrictions.. here's just two of them that impact what stays and waht doesn't;

1. The rules of the forum
2. What slips through the cracks..

RE #1:
If the criteria for allowable posts was solely my own opinion.. and not what our rules state, and not under the scrutiny of other mods, Admin and members.. .. ?

Well.. the Forum database might be a lot smaller :lol:

There are a number of posts in this thread I'd like to delete..

But if they don't clearly violate forum rules.. it's just my opionion.. and that's not enough.

RE #2:
We do not and can not catch everything.
We rely a lot on reported posts and PMs from the memebers..
So off color comments that;
A: are not spotted by the all seeing eye of the mods,
B: are not reported by another member for whatever reason,
Can most certainly go by with no action taken.

...we do our best but things will allways slip through.

Regarding rules..

We've had to remove many rude comments from recent posts, so it seems a reminder is in place:

This is a photography forum, so please stay on topic when talking about glamour and nude photographs posted here. Hold your hormones when writing - we do not need comments about model's suitability to your sexual taste and so on. Always keep in mind that the models are people, too.

...found in Glamour Forum rules;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72850

So the rule is in place.. it is NOT likely to change.
We are discussing now enforcement.

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:34

If you don't understand that some words/phrases have connotations, then I don't know where you grew up.

Well, it’s nice to see that reading too much into something isn’t constricted by gender.

I don’t recall getting the impression that anyone doesn’t “understand” this. Rather I see people acknowledging that these comments, regardless of what we’d prefer to see, do show up sometimes.

The question is: “What should be done about it?”

A problem has been identified. As of yet, I haven’t seen any suggestions of anything remotely resembling a solution…

Steve

Steve Parr

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:43

Not by a long shot.. We work under several restrictions.. here's just two of them that impact what stays and waht doesn't;

1. The rules of the forum
2. What slips through the cracks..

RE #1:
If the criteria for allowable posts was solely my own opinion.. and not what our rules state, and not under the scrutiny of other mods, Admin and members.. .. ?

Well.. the Forum database might be a lot smaller :lol:

There are a number of posts in this thread I'd like to delete..

But if they don't clearly violate forum rules.. it's just my opionion.. and that's not enough.

RE #2:
We do not and can not catch everything.
We rely a lot on reported posts and PMs from the memebers..
So off color comments that;
A: are not spotted by the all seeing eye of the mods,
B: are not reported by another member for whatever reason,
Can most certainly go by with no action taken.

...we do our best but things will allways slip through.

Regarding rules..

...found in Glamour Forum rules;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72850

So the rule is in place.. it is NOT likely to change.
We are discussing now enforcement.

I used to be one of the primary moderators on a guitar forum for a rather large and well known internet service provider. I know, all too well, the challenges that come along with a job such as that. I’m glad you’ve pointed out the rules to us; I am. If such comments are inappropriate, as per the rules, they should be removed, certainly.

If enforcement is what’s needed, and the reality is that things fall through the cracks, then maybe a positive step could be that those who see these comments and have a problem with them can forward them to the Mods. I know if I’d have had forum members who did that when I was a Mod, my job would’ve have been infinitely easier.

Aside from Mods removing “those” posts, I wouldn’t expect the problem, and the offenders, to self-regulate.

My apologies if I’ve offended anyone with my posts here. It certainly wasn’t my intent. Besides, I don’t want Noni to be mad at me. She might hit me in the head and cast me overboard on the way to Catalina!

Steve

Claire

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 17:18

Wow, this has been a most interesting thread to read. I'm probably going to kick myself later on for getting into the discussion, but I'll jump the gun anyway. Now I just have to figure out where to start...

Yes, there are comments on the glamour forum threads that make it all sound like a male high school locker room. I think there's no denying that. Now, I won't tell you the stuff I've heard girls mention in their locker rooms about men or other women, but let's just say neither of the sexes are saints...

I do browse the glamour forum occasionally. I've seen great work by J.F Doorhoff, CharlesU and others. I've also seen promising stuff and things that I too would refer to as snapshots that'd be better suited for another type of website.
I've also seen comments that have been of the "great tits and ass!" variety, as well as the regular "good photo" or "now, if you'd moved that light over there and maybe posed her this way..." type of comments. It's all there and in various amounts depending on the thread.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't get easily upset about the "tits and ass" comments, nor the "...on her knees" title. Regarding the latter I can understand that the title can be offensive as it does have very sexual connotations. At the same time I have to admit that title could very well have been posted by me if I'd been the photographer. The images shows a girl physically sitting on her knees. Knowing me I'd probably be too damn uncreative to even come up with a better title than "Miss R on her knees", and not even consider the implications until it'd be pointed out to me. But hey, that's just me.

Glamour photography. Budoir photography. Can someone please explain to me the difference? I'm not that familiar with it. For me glamour photography is the stuff you see in magazines like FHM and similar magazines. Yes, it's boring as hell at times to look at basically cloned girls (peroxide blondes with silicone implants and HUGE lips). And all the poses are the same. :rolleyes:
Now, I may have my opinions about how utterly boring and non-inventive the images in those magazines are (from a photography pov). I may also have views about what those kind of signals those images have. We all have our opinions and are entitled to them.

The reason I don't get easily upset with the comments is perhaps because they refer to a GLAMOUR photography. I may find them unnecessary, sometimes over the top and so on, but I also partly expect them. To me the FHM type of images has only one purpose: to get men to drool over the women. What those type of magazines do is bascially catering to a kind of charicature fantasy woman. The women posing for those magazines are (should be!) aware of the way the men will look at her. They know the signals they are sending out by posing a certain way and choosing to have the images published in certain magazines.
Heck, I know that if I walk into a club I'll partly expect some man to sooner or later try to hit on my friend or me. I'm even prepared there'll be some man placing his hands somewhere he shouldn't. When it happens I leave him, but I won't leave the club.

I think it's tough to give really good creative feedback to someone, especially if I'm not knowledgeable within the topic myself. I'm partly assuming this is why we don't get much feedback regarding technical improvements in this forum. Actually, we don't get that within majority of the forums. Walk into any forum and I can assure you majority of the comments are "great landscape!", "wow, your son is soooo cute" and similar.

I think that some comments are over the top in the glamour forum, but not all of them. I don't mind someone saying "she's gorgeous and I wish I had her number". It's the ones that may have a more sexual "oh, the things I'd like to do with her"- style that can get offending. It's also not that necessary to yell out comments like "get her a sandwich!". Those actually offend me tons more than the sexual ones. It's not the comments in themselves that offends me personally, but the fact that they're said in a public forum. If you're standing in a room with people, do you blurt out "geesh, you in the red dress, you really should loose weight/have some more sandwiches!" or "oooh, you're gorgeous, love that cleavage...".

Does all art have to have a deep and profound meaning? I don't think so. Does it all have to be original? Nah, but it'd be great if it was. Same with glamour/budoir/erotic photography. I love the imaged Noni described in her post. I could picture the woman in the sand and the scar on the other woman's breasts. Great image ideas. I'm all for it (actually love that stuff), but don't think there's a need for all nudes to be equally "deep". The same way I didn't agree with my video production teacher who told me "movies should have a message, provoke your thoughts and so on". Yes, those serve a purpose, but so do the box office stuff.

Those who are more offended than me with the comments in the glamour forum should not leave it. Why not instead post a good creative comment/question to help the thread to focus back on the photography? There won't be any changes unless people actually make an effort to change things.

As for some of the images being snapshot-like. Well, sometimes you can tell the photographer just couldn't get the technical aspect together like he wanted, other times it's more obvious he took the shots with other things in mind. I've seen plenty of peole telling those photographers that's what their image conveyes, and if that was his purpose he should go somewhere else. Usually if the photographer is trying this genre for the first time and really wants to improve he often will ask about advice for specific things like lighting.

Ok, sorry about the long post. I'll stop now.
/Claire

Noni

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 18:12

My apologies if I’ve offended anyone with my posts here. It certainly wasn’t my intent. Besides, I don’t want Noni to be mad at me. She might hit me in the head and cast me overboard on the way to Catalina!
ROFL!!!

Not mad at anyone. Irked, perhaps, but seeing as I don't know any one of you all (ahem...yet...) there's no anger involved.

As for the "deep" comment, perhaps. I tend to really consider things and not just on a selfish level (how does this affect *me alone*, but also how does this affect *the group* sort of considering) so on occasion you'll get a deep comment from me.

Besides, as a black belt (and a darned good fighter), I know clonking you over the head isn't the best, most effective avenue of attack. LOLOL!!!! ;)

Carol, thanks for your post. I appreciate it...and am very glad you understand my initial post.

Claire, thanks for your post, as well. You've raised some interesting points.

Best-
Noni

charlesu

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 19:08

One day my brother and his best friend went out to dine together while on vacation in the Florida Keyes. Each year they and their wives vacation there to go diving, collect shells, and eat lots of seafood. They're at a favorite restaurant and my brother, devouring a shrimp, remarks that the shrimp are "off" this time. They are not good. His best friend says, "no, you're wrong, they are good". Which of them is correct?

You see, that's what makes all the arguments in this thread about what is art, what is erotic, what is appropriate absolutely ridiculous. It's all going to be based on our perspective.

I could tell you what MY perspective is but I think you know that, or at least you have decided that from the images I post. Many feminists hate my work and think it is degrading to women. Oddly, lesbian couples (who are often strong feminists) represent a large percentage of people who like and collect my work. Which of them are correct?

As for the ORIGINAL post in this thread, I agree about some of the comments. Particularly the ones which deal with sexual remarks OR (and I especially hate these) those which are personally unflattering to the model. Frankly, you will see me remark about a model, but usually in a flattering or positive way.

I do find it interesting, though, that some people have to espouse their opinion on what is art or what is beautiful as if their opinion is the only one that matters. They often do this behind a shield of being "enlightened". The attitude is quite holier than thou. They often approach the discussion intellectually but it really comes down to is not about enlightenment but about what their individual perspective is. And of course, if your perspective is different you must be quickly dismissed because you are not enlightened. You are ignorant. Otherwise you would certainly be of the same opinion.

There will be no end to this thread until an admin locks it. That's ok. I don't think we'll resolve anthing with our posts because our perspectives are all quite varied.

I will say this for the record. I like and respect women. I work with many different women. Some nude. Some not. Some strong. Some weak. Some very smart. Others not so much. I like and respect them all. Most of my shoots are a collaborative effort. At least, some of what you see posted here. I respect opinions too. And I won't try and tell you that yours or what you are are wrong and that mine are right. Please don't tell me mine are either. If you don't like my work, fine. You're entitled to YOUR opinion about it. Just remember that it's YOUR opinion and since you're only one person, you're likely in the minority. ;)

bikerider

29th of July 2005 (Fri), 19:43

Hi Charles thanks for commenting in this thread, particularly as your work has been mentioned. Have you asked yourself why some feminists have expressed strong opinions about your work? I am also wondering why you seem to be suggesting that the discussion be shut down by the administrators. There has been a lot of open discussion about opinions regarding comments and image style presentation. I think generally that it has been constructive and encouraging for people to participate and make comments on the glamour forum. I also think this discussion has enabled both male and female members to express their opinion about how the female form is potrayed in some posts. Yes it has been an intellectual discussion and I don't see anything wrong with that. If people used their intellect more when posting both images and comments we wouldn't need to have this discussion. I would also like to say that I consider myself a male feminist and my challenge as an image maker is to portray women and men as powerful, sexual and intelligent beings. Trying to get the essecence of people accross to viewers instead of marketing a paricular image is more interesting to me.
Roger.

lostdoggy

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 01:23

Art is an expression of the human mind. Being able show our mind is what is in question and the ability to comment, whether any one care to hear/read it is the subject of this thread. I'm not saying that no one here has a right to their opinion. What I'm trying to say is that Art is Art so long as some one think it is Art. If Grandma receives a drawing from her 5 year old granddaughter and decides to put it in a custom made frame and hang it over the mantle. Would you be the one to tell her that is a piece of crap??? I certainly wouldn't. I would just look and appreciate what she is appreciating. If a wife decides to commission a nude photo shoot in erotic poses to give to her husband as an anniversary present and he in turn decides to hang it over the mantle would you not accept an invitation to dinner at their home because of the picture??? Wasn't there a book written where the government decided to burn all books that was consider immoral. Art is Art, it just an expression of the mind.

charlesu

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 08:44

Hi Charles thanks for commenting in this thread, particularly as your work has been mentioned. Have you asked yourself why some feminists have expressed strong opinions about your work? I am also wondering why you seem to be suggesting that the discussion be shut down by the administrators. Roger.

You're welcome.

No, I don't really look at any particular segment of people who view my work and ask my self why they feel the way they do. I'm not selling a product or trying to figure out how to market to a niche. I'm creating images that I like. Some people will like it. Some will not. Some religious leaders will condemn my work. Some will like it. Some gay men will like it. Some will hate it. Some people over 50 will like it. Some will hate it. I could break the art world down into thousands of pieces by age, gender, sexual preference, political view, religion, etc. and wonder which segments like or hate my work. But why?

I like my work. The people I collaborate with like my work. That's plenty for me. The fact that many people here enjoy my work is nice, but beside the point. The point is, I create it and I appreciate it. That's all the motivation I need.

As for suggesting the thread be shut down. No, I did not suggest it. I merely pointed that the thread had spiraled a couple of times and threads which do that sometimes get shut down. There seemed to be a lot of emotion flying, particularly around 2-3 folks posting.

I think most of the discussion here has been very good and I do SUPPORT your initial post. But I take exception to some of the other posts in this thread.

pdrow

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 08:57

Hello,
Another woman speaking up here. I mainly browse the people, glamour, and post-processing sections. I have only commented a few times on the glamour section. There are several reasons. Mainly, I’m not always sure what the poster’s intent was when the photograph was posted.

Do they want an honest critique? Are they only showing off their wife, girlfriend, etc? Have they taken what they believe to be a wonderful photograph and want to share? I believe in the last instance, some people are opposed to critique as it takes something away from them. I see this when the original poster becomes defensive despite criticism being constructive.

Maybe even give us some of the motivation for taking the photo. Is it going to be used for press? Is it just for the family album?

I enjoy critique. I like to look at a photo and see what makes it good. I like to look and see what might make it better (to me). I believe critique should focus on the good and the potentially better. It should not be a personal attack on the subject or the photographer.

Often when good critique is offered, that poster is chastised for stating their opinion. Yes, it is their opinion. They are not stating that the photographer must run out and reshoot the photo. They are not stating that different post-processing must be applied. However, by making constructive criticism, they are giving other readers ideas on which to hone our craft. I thought that was what most of us wanted.

For those photos where someone is just showing off their wife or girlfriend (or other family members in the people section), they are not asking for critique. They want to hear “cute kid,” “beautiful wife,” “man, you are so lucky,” etc. Honestly, I’ve been tempted to post the question, “why didn’t you wash their face before you took the photo?” I don’t mean the birthday cake ones.

Now, on to the comments in the glamour section and the original intent of this post.

Yes, I find a number of the comments juvenile and offensive. I don’t believe there is anyway to stop them without having all posts in that section moderated before posting. And that would be a full time job, and cause us to have to pay to utilize the forum.

As for the S on her knees post by Charles, I cringed when I read the title. I looked at the photographer’s name, and since Charles has a reputation of artistic photography that is not demeaning to women, I looked at the photo. It did not fit what I expected from the title. I looked at the pose and the lighting and liked the overall shot. I did notice the wrinkles on the floor and they pulled my eyes away from the subject.

Also, and please note this is my personal opinion, I do not care for tattoos, which to me detracted from the photo. I would not tell the photographer that I don’t like tattoos. I might say it pulls my eyes away from her and therefore I would like to see it cloned out. I would also tell him something positive about his shot as well, as those who critique should always express the positive and the negative.

Granted, there are a number of pros on the forum. There are also a large number of people who want to improve their photography. We learn from the mistakes and successes of others. I would like to see more constructive criticism on the photography and less commentary on the models.

pam

mijbril

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 09:31

As for the S on her knees..... I do not care for tattoos, which to me detracted from the photo. ......
pam

I couldn't work out what was actually glamorous about that shot (& I love tattoos & I liked the shot btw). It's was like 2 friends in the studio having a giggle.

The recent one of the young girl in the forest by Deedspender held for me much more "glamour" & was far more "enchanting" than S on her knees.

I've given up trying to work out what glamour actually is now in terms of photography. Can anyone actually define glamour?? (apart from "An air of compelling charm, romance, and excitement, especially when delusively alluring.")

Ah, I think I'll go back to the Animal forum & look at Rocky's cat terrorising the local snakes.

Noni

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 12:31

Wasn't there a book written where the government decided to burn all books that was consider immoral.
Wow. Are you suggesting that I have that opinion? LOL, not in the least. I'm suggesting that the commentary be of a higher calibre, and of actual value, rather than highschool locker room stuff. I'm suggesting that actual critique of the shot - rather than the model's suitability - be offered, so that at least on a forum in a photography site, people can learn, rather than simply oogle.

I have great respect for men; I figure that they can elevate themselves to a level where, should the thought arise that the model is someone they are willing to "do," that those comments are held to themself or exchanged in pm, and that what is posted is a bit more respectful and mature. That's all...

I'm not about banning books, photos, or censorship in that manner whatsoever. Good grief.

Best-
Michele

Noni

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 12:49

I've given up trying to work out what glamour actually is now in terms of photography. Can anyone actually define glamour?? (apart from "An air of compelling charm, romance, and excitement, especially when delusively alluring.")
The definitions *I* work from are:

1. Glamour: shots that can appear in Vogue, GQ, or high key sales stuff like high end jewelry. Make-up and hair impeccable, an idealized model wearing clothes. Perfectly lit, perfectly executed, and subtly posed to give an air of sensuality and/or sexuality. Something along the lines of Grace Kelly, Audry Hepburn. There is an air of sexuality, but not a blatant disply of such; more is left to the imagination than is shown.

2. Boudoir: Semi or fully naked women, with the intent to stimulate and excite the viewer, to create the beginning of a fantasy, and to give them something to look at and oogle. Generally more tasteful than visual porn, but a step away from Glam. More often a sexual pose, rather than a sensual one.

3. Naked/Nude: the body in it's glory, but still not showing the private bits (or at least, not necessarily, or not the objective). Something which may immediately bring to mind sex, but also may not.

4. Erotic: See Boudoir

5. Porn: something which actively, intentionally stimulates the viewer into a sexual fantasy. Playboy, Hustler, Playgirl, and the like. Generally one model by themselves, although there can be several models participating. Not graphic sexual depiction, but far more than a hint is there. The intent is to immediately arouse the viewer.

6. Hard Core porn: Sexual acts being depicted.

Now, keep in mind those are my own definitions, and not one found in dictionaries (at least, I've not looked them up...they might be in dictionaries). (And good Lord, I feel I must include the codicil that these are *my* definitions, and not any that I believe should be imposed on anyone else...because if I don't say that, someone is going to tell me I'm being prudish, wanting to censor people, and/or "emotional." Rueful LOLOL!!!!)

There are tons of fine lines, and those lines are easily crossed. Especially when a photographer is new and/or inexperienced, and is actively learning. But with appropriate crit, a photographer can move to a better level of execution, and thusly improve.

Best-
Noni

Noni

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 12:58

As for suggesting the thread be shut down. No, I did not suggest it. I merely pointed that the thread had spiraled a couple of times and threads which do that sometimes get shut down. There seemed to be a lot of emotion flying, particularly around 2-3 folks posting.

I think most of the discussion here has been very good and I do SUPPORT your initial post. But I take exception to some of the other posts in this thread.
Hi, Charles.

I too read it where you were asking (or suggesting) that the thread be locked. I am glad you clarified your position. As for you taking exception to some of the other posts, why is that?

And a quick observation...in the two posts you've placed here, you've mentioned you're completely satisfied by your work, that you've got all the clients that you want, and that all is well with your world. Well DONE!!! But the repitition of such makes me think of a phrase used earlier..."methinks thee doth protest too much." But it's all good; you are, as everyone is, allowed an opinion. I'll not catagorize it as "emotional" either...just you voicing an opinion and one which is just as valid as others.

Have a great day!

Best-
Noni

charlesu

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 14:53

Hi, Charles.

I too read it where you were asking (or suggesting) that the thread be locked. I am glad you clarified your position. As for you taking exception to some of the other posts, why is that?

And a quick observation...in the two posts you've placed here, you've mentioned you're completely satisfied by your work, that you've got all the clients that you want, and that all is well with your world. Well DONE!!! But the repitition of such makes me think of a phrase used earlier..."methinks thee doth protest too much."

Best-
Noni

No, I was really commenting that the way the thread was spiraling "it might not end" until locked. A request to lock a thread looks like this:

"Admin, would you please lock this thread"

(Note: I am not really asking that this thread be locked.)

Why was I objecting? Good question. I suppose it's obvious. I was objecting because I disagreed with what was being said.

Do I "protest too much"? Well, I can assure you that all I care about is my approval. If I repeated myself and that makes it look like something else, so be it. Or it could be just that I am getting old. :lol: :lol:

Noni

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 17:42

No, I was really commenting that the way the thread was spiraling "it might not end" until locked. A request to lock a thread looks like this:

"Admin, would you please lock this thread"

(Note: I am not really asking that this thread be locked.)
Oh. I see. Some of the forums I post (and modded) to, this thread is nothing near lockable or even very contentious. It's funny, the different styles of general group acceptance. I've seen some threads at the other forums that keep the mods busy editing the thread, and temp banning folks who go over the line. If that's all it takes to have you wish a thread would get locked, a difference of opinion and discussion of said opinion and couterarguments of such opinion...well...I just dunno. I'm not judging, I'm just sayin'...as they say. I think that this thread is not anywhere near needing to be locked; a relatively free exchange of ideas and opinions have been expressed here, with a very few making it over the line. And I'm frankly appreciative that it hasn't been locked, because there is interesting commentary taking place.

Why was I objecting? Good question. I suppose it's obvious. I was objecting because I disagreed with what was being said.
Oh. Again, like I've objected to posts made in Glam. I see. So why can't I express my opinion (and others express theirs, as well) which are different from yours, and not have it be deemed as "spiralling"? Do you always suggest that a thread be ended simply because you don't like the comments? LOL, hey, it's all good...I just find it funny, is all.

Do I "protest too much"? Well, I can assure you that all I care about is my approval. If I repeated myself and that makes it look like something else, so be it. Or it could be just that I am getting old.
LOL, maybe age has something to do with it; I'm not gonna comment on that (considering I'm not a youngster myself). Congratualtions! It's a very good thing that you've got your audience as wide as you'd like, and that you're completely comfortable with your technique. I'm pretty proud of my writing abilities, and when they're critted, as they've been on websites specifically for writing, I use that to make a piece better and more appealing to a wider audience. I guess I'm always willing to learn, and to reach more and more people.

As for your work, I think some is good, and some isn't. Some of it has crystal clear intent, and some is rather muddled. I'm not nearly as good as you in photography, I'm just letting you know my thoughts on the body of work I've seen. For you to post the comment you did in the thread that we've discussed is fascinating; it points out that you haven't read this entire thread, because had you, you'd've noticed where I was asked had I seen it, and my response was yes, I had. Furthermore, the way you articulated what you were going for in that shot was very good...and educational, despite it being somewhat defensive. I understand more where you were trying to get in that shot, and that's the sort of commentary which will spark discussion/ questions/answers/ technique tips, rather than some of the other stuff I've seen in that forum. Kudos to you for elevating it...let's see if it catches on.

Best-
Noni

Claire

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 20:15

I think we all have our own definitions of what goes under glamour/budoir/erotic/porn. Same as we have various definitions what should go under music vs noise and good vs bad writing.

The main issue here is that many seem to at times get tired of some sexually related comments on the glamour forum.
I'd suggest that every photographer who posts on the forum could write a short intro to what his thoughts behind the image was. That'd make it clearer to the viewer what he's trying to achieve and the purpose of the image. This in turn will hopefully help us when giving feedback. Maybe the photographer can even give a small reminder to others that he'd appreciate that the comments are not sexually related or straight out insulting to the model.

I do not believe any type of photography to be easy, but I've been thinking a bit. Perhaps when we go into the glamour forum we all have too high expectations. Because we're so used to seeing stunning flower, sunset, people shots we expect to see equally good glamour stuff. I might be totally off, but it's just a thought.
When we see snapshot-like (i.e. very amateurish) photos of some half naked girl our mind might automatic react a bit harsher than if we see an amateurish shot of a child. I have no doubt that taking semi-nudes, implied nudes, full nudes etc are damn hard to take. We all know the line between making it tasteful as opposed to cheap is very thin (and it's also judged by our individual tastes).

On another note, majority of us who frequent the glamour forum would like to learn. At the same time I don't know how many of us actually give it a try ourselves. It's awfully easy for me to think "oh, that shot is really bad", but then I later on realise that if I gave it a try, my photos might look equally bad (eh, most likely worse!).
It would be quite fun to see everyone who's been participating in this thread to give glamour photography a go. Take an idea, see if you can make something of it and post on the forum for feedback!

Noni

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 20:39

On another note, majority of us who frequent the glamour forum would like to learn. At the same time I don't know how many of us actually give it a try ourselves. It's awfully easy for me to think "oh, that shot is really bad", but then I later on realise that if I gave it a try, my photos might look equally bad (eh, most likely worse!). It would be quite fun to see everyone who's been participating in this thread to give glamour photography a go. Take an idea, see if you can make something of it and post on the forum for feedback!

I'd love to, with the exception that I don't have anyone who'd model for me, and I haven't got the lighting stuff yet. I'd love to replicate some of the shots I did with the calendar, for my own body of work. And I'd *love* to shoot men.

And I like your idea of a short synopsis or "back story." That might let people do more than just look and go "cool." Honestly, I'd like to see that with the majority of shots in both the Glam and People forum.

Best-
Noni

Citizensmith

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 01:27

Citizensmith

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 01:29

Guess I was ****ing right. Whatever ****er wrote the scripts for this forum did a ****ing great job.

merde.

Citizensmith

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 01:36

Guess it only does it in English.

Anyway. I like the portraits section, some good work. As for the glamor section, there is often great stuff there. However there is also lots of 'hot wife' type stuff which often gets the lower grade comments. Thing is, if someone wants to get better at that type of photo they may well be able to get advice. And, I'm sure the poster often expects and possibly enjoys the comments. If you don't really like it just don't go there. There is plenty of other good stuff in this here PoTN.

Not sure about the rest of teh intarweb though. Some odd people out there.

lostdoggy

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 01:59

Sometime it is difficult find subjects to shoot and family members are the most accessible subject. If I could get my better half to pose for me it would be great, but I don't think I would post it.

lostdoggy

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 02:00

36 more post to 1000. Ooops 35 more.

Belmondo

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 02:02

Guess I was ****ing right. Whatever ****er wrote the scripts for this forum did a ****ing great job.

merde.

Yup. And sometimes, we have to clean up the ****ing language manually.

chris.bailey

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 04:05

I too have read this thread and have tried to avoid posting. I think a significant point, however, has been missed.

This forum contains members with a wide range of equipment and ability who have particular photographic interests. Thats a part of what makes it a great place to visit. That diversity helps all of us develop our particular areas of interest and keeps the forum alive. I dont think anyone could argue against the human form being a subject for photographic study and some of our members (Charles and Frank in particular) share photos that act as inspiration and instruction to those of us who only dream of creating such images. I have watched Franks ability (bad choice of words but..) grow over the last couple of years to the point where some of his images are exceptional. He has developed a style such that you could probably pick out one of his pictures from a bunch. To brand anything of lesser quality as a 'snapshot' applies equally to any of the photo sharing forums. Look in sports, for instance, to see a huge range of ability from the likes of RFM, to myself who tried really hard to get some similar pics at the British Grand Prix and in failing miserably in the process realised just what a hard job it is. Some of those so called 'snapshots' show the results of the taker trying really hard, and they are brave to post them. Yes some of the comments in glamour and nude relate more to the subject than the picture. That also applies elsewhere. "Great car" or "nice waterfall" also relate to the subject rather than the technical content of the picture. So what?

This is not a pro only forum and the danger of posts like this is that we will alienate anyone from posting anything less than perfection and also put off the pros and semi pros from posting. That would be a huge shame.

bikerider

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 05:08

Chris, you think it's dangerous to discuss things! I think you like some others have missed the point of my original post. I was expressing an opinion, my opinion about a lot of the comments on the glamour forum. I was asking for comment on that opinion, I got it from the for's and againsts! What's the problem? Its' suppression that's dangerous mate, not discussion.
Roger.

ilya

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 07:19

Also tried to bite my tongue, but couldn't -

The point on silly comments in the glamour section is fair. I especially dislike comments on the models (she could use a meal or she has the physique resembling a man - latter being most distasteful). The rules are there for a reason.

The thing that turns me off to this discussion - or any discussion is that moral values of the few are being forced onto many ... and also the fact that its not unusual for folks possessing very strong moral values to have an aptitude for admiring their voluminous prose in a public place (aimed at the state of moral activism in general, not necessarily anyone here).

Charles and others go out of their way to enhance the value of this forum. Imagine this forum without these folks. Its not a trivial time investment to share their knowledge to extent that they do.

So I would just advocate a "lighten up" attitude around here. This forum is not trying to solve the world's problems - its photography.

Just my "opinion" if you will

Ilya

juneappal

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 12:33

I am also at least a little bit annoyed by some of the comments in the glamour forum. However, when I look through other forums there seem to be the same mix of posts: Those where people are showcasing a picture, and those where people are showing the contents of that picture. The discussions of technical aspects of shooting car racing are interesting to me. The comments about how sweet the exhaust manifold is are not.

If there is any problem with Charles' (and a few other's) posts to the forum it is that they are so well-executed that it is intimidating to give feedback. We should not be intimidated, though.

While I do not feel qualified to say that one part or another of a photograph is wrong or right, especially in those from the masters, I can look at a photo (such as the contentious "S on her Knees") and describe for Charles what I see when I look - where my eyes move, where they linger, what I wonder. That is critique which is neither positive nor negative, but reflective, so that he kows what impact/effect the photo has on a random stranger.

All that said, while there is as bit of annoying locker-room snickering, there is also a LOT of very good discussion of technique in the glamour forum. I am not interested in glam shots, but I read the forum anyways (For the articles, of course) I refer to threads such as Erin smoking, The photo of the wife's back, models in front of the graffitti and, yes, S on her Knees. (Especially Charles' own thoughts on the photo) There is a lot to be learned about photography in that forum. I would suggest that anyone who isn't happy with the level of discussion should keep reading and help to elevate it.

-Adam

JMAS

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 12:49

Why not address the uncalled for commments on a one by one base?
I feel that generalizing is almost always bad.

When there is one comment which is not appropriate on one thread why not address it there?
If it doesn't work, PM a mod, and things will get setled.

My € 0,02...

chris.bailey

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 13:25

Chris, you think it's dangerous to discuss things!

In normal circumstances probably no but I do think its a shame if such discussions makes someone fear posting an image for comment lest is be considered a 'snapshot' and therefore not worthy of posting. The old adage about holding your own and holding your peace as seems appropriate comes to mind.

Claire

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 05:45

I'd love to, with the exception that I don't have anyone who'd model for me, and I haven't got the lighting stuff yet. I'd love to replicate some of the shots I did with the calendar, for my own body of work. And I'd *love* to shoot men.

Best-
Noni

Noni,
I think that majority of us here lack either the proper equipment or the models. Now, the equipment issue hasn't really stopped majority of us before, has it? I'm pretty sure 80% of people posting photos on POTN don't have the lighting gear we'd like to, nor the lenses. We still do our best with the things we have though. And in all hoensty I think we're all doing pretty well! :)

The issue that many of us may not have access to a model...that's a bit tougher. Many of us use friends and family, and why not within this category too? It doesn't have to be nude shots. Or, do like some of the men I've seen here; use yourself as a model if it's feasible (granted, it's bloody hard to be both in front and behind the camera!).

I don't think we should be scared of posting shots just because we don't have the correct technical equipment. That's also part of the learning process, to make do with the basics.

/Claire

bikerider

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 06:43

In normal circumstances probably no but I do think its a shame if such discussions makes someone fear posting an image for comment lest is be considered a 'snapshot' and therefore not worthy of posting. The old adage about holding your own and holding your peace as seems appropriate comes to mind.

Let me get this straight Chris, you're objecting to my having started this post, or just to some of the comments such as 'snapshots'? Your last sentence certainly seems to be telling me and perhaps others to keep our mouths shut and don't 'rock the boat', however nicely put.
Roger.

scottbergerphoto

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 07:33

Please, Lets keep the heat down. Attacks of a personal nature serve no purpose other then to make what would be a useful exchange of ideas a dead end. If you don't like someones position, refute it with a better one. Please do not an attack their motivation, character or photographic skill, regardless of how much better it would make you feel to do so. ;) .

mijbril

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 12:31

Something comes to mind, I wondered what "glamour" was before, but now I'm actually asking.

What is the qualifications for a glamour photo??

I ask because a lot of what I see in that forum is (to me), anything but glamorous, but more often just someone having some fun with a pretty friend or capturing someone attractive with the lens, but glamorous???

Technically it's an adjective & means "having an air of allure, romance and excitement". I think a lot of the photos posted under that forum fail to satisfy the meaning of glamorous but should be posted instead in the "People" section or elsewhere as appropriate.

Steve Parr

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 12:49

Technically it's an adjective & means "having an air of allure, romance and excitement". I think a lot of the photos posted under that forum fail to satisfy the meaning of glamorous

But I think we're dealing with subjectivity here.

Ones' man trash is another mans' treasure, and all that.

What excites or romances one person may do little to another...

Steve

Noni

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 12:51

Please do not an attack their motivation, character or photographic skill, regardless of how much better it would make you feel to do so.
My apologies.

An old phrase comes to mind, one which I might be well served to pay a tad more attention to: "Play the ball, not the player."

With that in mind...

The thing that turns me off to this discussion - or any discussion is that moral values of the few are being forced onto many ... and also the fact that its not unusual for folks possessing very strong moral values to have an aptitude for admiring their voluminous prose in a public place (aimed at the state of moral activism in general, not necessarily anyone here).
Is it moral to bite one's tongue and not speak up when there's something wrong? Is it wrong to say "this bothers me," or "that can be improved" ? Why is it catagorized as 'strong moral values...voluminous prose...public place' and why is it wrong?

I was raised to believe that if there is something that needs to be said, to say it. I believe that if one speaks their mind about something, that should be seen as their opinion. If a piece of commentary stimulates someone into thought, that is not a bad thing. If it futher stimulates a person not simply towards thought, but towards examining self's long held opinion, then that, as well, is not a bad thing. And if something is said which allows one to see things from a different point of view, well, then, that's all right, too.

If blanket agreement is what is wanted, if differing opinions cause a group of people (also known as a clique) to attack another...well, then, that isn't so good. That's mob mentality, that's synchophantism, that's unchallenged, unquestioning, lemming behavior.

I for one find myself admiring Bikerider for putting the post up in the first place. To have the courage to challenge the status quo is not always an easy event. Historically, those who've stood up to the status quo have been able to make some significant changes in the way things are done, and often history shows us our error when we don't have the courage to stand up.

In this specific thread, there are phrases scattered about, such as "my women" and "hold your peace," and "not very open minded." (Many more, but those demonstrate certain things). It's that sort of defense of status quo that I find significantly objectionable. Why should any woman be "my woman'? Why should one hold their peace, as long as it's not rife with foul language, or derogatory to a person? Why is one's mind catagorized as 'closed' if one holds a different opinion?

And frankly, it's rather humorous (in a sad, rueful way) to see little comments thrown in on posts not here discussing this thread...and commenting in a negative way about opinions and thoughts on this post. The sniggering, the childish attitude, and the "good ol' boys" network that becomes apparent with that is what I'm talking about in this entire thread. I left high school a long time ago, and have learned to form my own opinion about things, and not just follow someone around because they hold themselves out to be an expert on something...which is part of the growing up process, and part of life. As for being a strong person, darned right I am. I speak my mind...there's an ignore feature if it bothers one too much. I'm also willing to discuss it, and explain it, and elaborate on it when asked, backing it up with arguments. And how is that wrong? If strength in a woman is offensive, please be offended. But look to see why you are. Examine self to see what the issue is, because I promise you, we do not know each other well enough to have it be personal in any way.

S on her Knees. (Especially Charles' own thoughts on the photo)
Which, I might point out, did not occur until after this thread appeared.

Why not address the uncalled for commments on a one by one base?
I feel that generalizing is almost always bad.

When there is one comment which is not appropriate on one thread why not address it there?
If it doesn't work, PM a mod, and things will get setled.
I did that...and nothing happened except to have the thread locked. I gave an opinion, it was not useful, and did not spark a discussion about things in the manner this thread has.

I agree; generalization isn't useful for the most part. But sometimes, light can be shined on something by generalization, too, and I think that's what this thread was doing...bringing to light some issues which some members of POTN found problematic.

In normal circumstances probably no but I do think its a shame if such discussions makes someone fear posting an image for comment lest is be considered a 'snapshot' and therefore not worthy of posting. The old adage about holding your own and holding your peace as seems appropriate comes to mind.
LOL, why is this not a normal circumstance? And I've seen people afraid to post not because of the quality of their work, but because of some of the comments they recieve. As for holding one's own and holding's one peace, it's all good if that's what you choose to do, but if I choose to speak, that's also fine.

Best-
Noni

Noni

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 12:54

Noni,
I think that majority of us here lack either the proper equipment or the models. Now, the equipment issue hasn't really stopped majority of us before, has it? I'm pretty sure 80% of people posting photos on POTN don't have the lighting gear we'd like to, nor the lenses. We still do our best with the things we have though. And in all hoensty I think we're all doing pretty well!

The issue that many of us may not have access to a model...that's a bit tougher. Many of us use friends and family, and why not within this category too? It doesn't have to be nude shots. Or, do like some of the men I've seen here; use yourself as a model if it's feasible (granted, it's bloody hard to be both in front and behind the camera!).

I don't think we should be scared of posting shots just because we don't have the correct technical equipment. That's also part of the learning process, to make do with the basics.
You're 100% correct. As for family and friends modeling for me, my bother and his family live in Oregon...my mother lives in NJ, and my Dad is 82. My best friend has said she'd let me practice on her, but not to post. LOL!!!!! I've been considering where I could get people to pose for me, and I've got some ideas. I'm going to work on how to approach them, and see what happens.

And thanks for the reassurance, btw. I know I don't have to have all the equipment, but like in skydiving, I want the best, because then any errors can only be me, and not the stuff I use. OTOH, I can't afford L glass, nor the lighting setup that I want, so....we'll have to see what occurs.

Best-
Noni

mijbril

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 15:59

But I think we're dealing with subjectivity here.

Ones' man trash is another mans' treasure, and all that.

What excites or romances one person may do little to another...

Steve

True, but there was a thread recently of a photo of Deedspender's 9 year old daughter which was posted into the glamour forum (but subsequently moved into the People forum, why I don't know but I don't think DS did it). It technically (& subjectively, LOL) was a lot more glamorous than say the F1 Babes (which just looked like snap shots of hot chicks at the track) or the S On Her Knees shot (which just looked like 2 friends having a giggle in the studio).

But you're right, subjectivity & all that.... Long may it reign in the world of photography :D

CyberDyneSystems

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 16:34

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/talkingheads.gifhttp://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/proffesor.gif

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/loo.gif

Belmondo

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 16:55

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/talkingheads.gifhttp://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/proffesor.gif

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/loo.gif

Geez, you're bad! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Big_B

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 16:57

Geez, you're bad! :lol: :lol: :lol:

But, strangely, he always seems to get away with it! :lol: :lol:

CyberDyneSystems

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 17:05

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/noevil.gif

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/monty.gif

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/monalisa.gif

Big_B

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 17:08

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/noevil.gif

You're such a liar!

CyberDyneSystems

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 17:15

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/gangpunch.gif

...that's me in the middle http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/duck.gif

Big_B

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 17:17

I would reply with something witty, but I just can't stop laughing! :lol: :lol:

Noni

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 17:39

LOLing! Thanks you guys. Very funny...

I would reply with something witty, but I just can't stop laughing!
Ditto. And I looked for a smilie "beating a dead horse," but there isn't one to be found!

Best-
Noni

CyberDyneSystems

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 18:12

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/giddyup.gif

not quite dead but ... ;)

bikerider

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 19:12

Wow. This thread has been one heck of a ride.

I think that everyone gets an A+ for lively argumentation. I don't think I've seen anything like this anywhere in a long time.

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue.

Did I ever tell you about the time I walked in on the bride while she was getting dressed?

Never mind...it wasn't pretty.

I think the issue is dead now that I'm here.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, excellent........I think you should change your name to 'The Cooler'!
Roger.

Noni

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 20:23

http://members.bellatlantic.net/%7Evze2hdzu/pics/giddyup.gif

not quite dead but ... ;)

No, the horse is not at all dead; more of an "off to battle!!!" sort of smilie...but "A" for effort in any case ;)....

Bloo, shall we just call you "Thread Killah"?? LOL!!!

Best-
Noni

Claire

2nd of August 2005 (Tue), 06:00

I think the smilies did the trick of cooling us down. I'm still laughing! LOL

Big_B

2nd of August 2005 (Tue), 18:02

I think the smilies did the trick of cooling us down. I'm still laughing! LOL

I wish I knew where CDS gets all these smilies.

By the way, I like the quote in your sig. Who said it?

bachscuttler

3rd of August 2005 (Wed), 01:11

A classic example how the wise old men here (Mods) can lighten up a situation whilst injecting a little humour...and it worked!

My hat goes off to them :D

Anyone wanna fight? I can't wait to see more of them smilies :rolleyes: :D

charlesu

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 05:51

OK OK I know the horse is dead. And I know this might bring him back to life. But I have 2 thoughts that I would like to share.

If you're going to critique something on GN or anywhere on POTN, then keep it to photography. No one is interested in your enlightened views or moral dogma. Those comments and judgment are no more welcome than the "nice a$$" comments.

If you're going to critique, hold it to a reasonable standard--and show an example. The best being your own work. Why complain that someone's work is not to the level of some lofty master? No kidding. If you are going to offer the critique, show an example from your OWN hand. That is a requirement on some forums and I think it would be good practice here. I'm really tired of reading negative comments about some folks work (usually beginners or intermediates) by other people who never or rarely post work and who likely couldn't do as well and certainly no better.

I think both of the suggestions are good examples for us to follow. Certainly, I won't be responding to moral judgements or personal taste. "i don't care for the tatoo" isn't a critique of the photographic work, unless what you mean is "i don't care for how the tattoo was lit, etc.", it's a value judgment.

Frankly, I think I will start asking people to post examples when I see critique. Especially if I am not sure of what they mean or if I don't think it could have been done reasonable in a given circumstance.

ryno4youth

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 06:01

Charlesu, I think that you are right on, and that we should all hold to giving examples. The only problem that I see with that some of us view this site while at work and we don't have our own images with us. However, I do agree, and I will be the first to say that when I can, I will hold to this. I know that when I was starting out (wait...I still am), that I would get frusturated with comments on what not to do, but no suggestions/examples of what to do. Good work!

Claire

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 13:18

charlesu

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 19:00

Charles,
I think it's a good idea to try and show an example what is meant, but in some instances that's not always feasible either. I'm afraid I won't be able to run out and get hold of a model straight away when wanting to critique a photo. Ok, that might be overdoing it, but you get the picture. I think it's a good idea to keep in mind though if it's possible to show one's ideas.

Of course, both of you are right. You won't always have an example shot. And serious, legitimate crit should always be helpful. The example helps because, as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. And to be able to comment about it AND show how it is done is the ideal.

This is a really good community on the whole. And we're very fortunate. I hope we continue to have and develop the kind of camaraderie and respect that's so beneficial. I've been to many other forums that were far less successful at this.

We really don't have abusers here (that just sit and nit pick everyone else's work without posting their own or showing how things are done). We're lucky. Maybe we should just encourage examples whenever possible. It certainly lends the feedback more credibility.

Barb42

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 20:34

Thank you Noni. Good comments.

As for me, I personally hate 'glamour' photos. They are not usually that good - poor setups, exposure, etc. To say nothing of being same'o, same'o. They all look pretty much alike. TA, TA, TA.

Just because a guy has a cute girlfriend (ok, sometimes they are not that cute) doesn't mean she really should be (or wants to be) shared with every other man in the world. [She may just want to please you!] And just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I often feel embarassed FOR the women and wonder if they realized their T&A would be flashed all over the world wide web for men to oogle. If my husband did that to me, I would feel more than a bit betrayed and used. I don't care what forum he did it on. However, I do like good art nudes. A man and wife doing lovely art nudes can be wonderful. But - ART NUDES are NOT glamour. Not even close.

But, thats just me. Maybe there are women who don't really care how the world 'views' them. Maybe the guys and the girls really think those shots are lovely. All I can say is God save us from illusion and may they all have a good time and not regret it in 10-20 years.

Please don't flame me - its just an opinion. And I like to live to shoot another day.

JMAS

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 20:43

A classic example how the wise old men here (Mods)

Me thinks you're in trouble...:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Noni

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 21:17

If you're going to critique something on GN or anywhere on POTN, then keep it to photography. No one is interested in your enlightened views or moral dogma. Those comments and judgment are no more welcome than the "nice a$$" comments.
Enlightened as in "stick to photography on a photography forum?" YAY, I'm an enlightened master. Or perhaps I simply read the forum rules a while ago. As for judgment, if you mean keep my opinion to myself, I shall...unless and until I don't. In which case, it's all good (and always has been). If everyone had the same opinion, the world would indeed be a very boring place.

If you're going to critique, hold it to a reasonable standard--and show an example. The best being your own work. Why complain that someone's work is not to the level of some lofty master?
See, this comment bugs me. And yes, stop reading now if you don't want to see an opinion. If someone had said "man, Reubens, you're not really getting the lighting right," do you think he'd've rolled over and quit painting? "Geesh, Michaelangelo, you really don't know how to handle a chisel" would not have upset him..."All right, Van Gogh, you need to do something in color. This B/W stuff just doesn't work" didn't send VG running off...

The finest of all artists were taught, critiqued, learned their craft. They were critted harshly, I am sure. But what came from it was marvelous work and incredible talent was honed.

Why shouldn't one hold themselves to the highest possible standards? Why shouldn't one strive to emulate those whose art has lived for centuries? And if one believes that painted art is not connected to photographic art, I hold a vastly different opinion. I think that the connection is very strong, very clear, and very easily seen.

Why shouldn't one be the best they can be? Unless, of course, the intent is to simply provide voyeuristic titillation to a group of friends and followers.

O.K., you can start reading again. LOL!!! enlightened moral dogma over for the mo'.

If you are going to offer the critique, show an example from your OWN hand. That is a requirement on some forums and I think it would be good practice here. I'm really tired of reading negative comments about some folks work (usually beginners or intermediates) by other people who never or rarely post work and who likely couldn't do as well and certainly no better.
I've been shooting seriously since April 27th of this year. Until June, I had not taken a class. When I get to shoot a model, then I'll find out if I'm any good or not. But that may or may not occur anytime in the next few months...or years. So, why is my opinion less valid because I'm new? I have eyes, I see things, I understand things...do you really mean that only those with work which matches a pre-set approval standard can comment on the photography? Ask questions? And where would one find a pre-set approval standard list? 'Cause I'm curious about that.

I *know* I can't paint worth a hill o' beans. I don't know if I can photograph a model in the way I would want - until I shoot them. Past experience tells me that I might have an eye for this stuff, but we'll see.

Certainly, I won't be responding to moral judgements or personal taste. "i don't care for the tattoo" isn't a critique of the photographic work, unless what you mean is "i don't care for how the tattoo was lit, etc.", it's a value judgment.
Totally your prerogative.

Frankly, I think I will start asking people to post examples when I see critique. Especially if I am not sure of what they mean or if I don't think it could have been done reasonable in a given circumstance.
I am reminded of an old chinese saying (paraphrased):
"Rivers are not denied entrance to the ocean; all are accepted, small and large. Thus is the expanse of the sea explained."

If the criteria is "you must've already posted a good shot to have anything you say listened to," I think that is a pretty elitist position. If your position is "well, you can't do any better," then I think that's a pretty defensive position to take. If your position is "put up, or shut up," I guess you should mark the "ignore" button on my name.

It is, as I've stated, all good...I just disagree.

Barb, thanks for your comments. I appreciate them.

Best-
Noni

lostdoggy

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 21:42

There is another Chinese proverb:

"... if you keep your shut no one will think you're dumb..."

Something my mom used to tell me when I was young. Never did understand it 'cause I would just keep on ranting on until that sting on the back of my head. May be that explain why I'm nuts.

ilya

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 22:23

I remember an old chinese proverb also

"Your fingers can't be of the same length."

(bout as relevant to the issue as much of the preceding)

All best

Belmondo

4th of August 2005 (Thu), 23:03

lostdoggy

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 00:46

If you keep your what shut? I sure hope that wasn't directed to anyone posting in this thread. Please clarify.

Thanks.

No it wasn't. Wasn't there to insult anybody except my myself. Like they say if can't insult anybody insult yourself. Just a quote I got from My Dear Mommy. But it is a real old Chinese Proverb. I should know got smack enough behind the head for it.

Just another useless/meaningless comment!!!

Belmondo

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 00:58

No it wasn't. Wasn't there to insult anybody except my myself. Like they say if can't insult anybody insult yourself. Just a quote I got from My Dear Mommy. But it is a real old Chinese Proverb. I should know got smack enough behind the head for it.

Just another useless/meaningless comment!!!

Thanks for the clarification. Moms have a way of confusing us, don't they?

bachscuttler

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 01:19

..."All right, Van Gogh, you need to do something in color. This B/W stuff just doesn't work" didn't send VG running off...

He did cut his ear off, so maybe he couldn't take criticism? :D

Noni

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 01:21

He did cut his ear off, so maybe he couldn't take criticism? :D
I thought that was all about psychotic love....you know, like stalking, except by sending his own body parts. LOL!!!! Ewwwwwwwww....

Best-
Noni

lostdoggy

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 01:35

Thanks for the clarification. Moms have a way of confusing us, don't they?

You better believe it, I'm still confused.

bachscuttler

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 02:58

charlesu

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 09:22

Everyone has opinions. Everyone certainly has the right (at least where I live) to express them. Some are just more meaningful than others.

Show me a critique by someone who knows what they are doing and the odds of it being valuable go up considerably. Show me an example, and the chances of my really learning from it increase even more.

charlesu

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 09:25

I agree with CharlesU's suggestions in principle but have reservations.

I am a relative newbie.
Before I can really critique my own work effectively I look at other peoples' work and critique it (usually in my own mind!) and observe other peoples' critiques, all as part of the learning process.
You have to learn to critique as well as shoot!

I admire CharlesU's work immensely and try to avoid the bland 'nice shot' critiques.
Sometimes (very rarely) I'll spot something that jumps out at me that maybe someone has missed or had a valid reason for and I would want to know why they did that.
I would feel very intimidated critiquing the work of someone like CharlesU and would be put off contributing if I were expected to show my own work as it isn't in the same league.

What I would always try to do however is make balanced comments ie: praise and critical comments/questions...

and of course contain the comments relevant to the image!

CharlesU..don't think about following Van Goghs' example of cutting your ear off..it plays havoc with your sunglasses :cool:

Thanks for the comments. Don't hold up questions or commentary. Not my point at all. Really, what I am talking about are the naysayers who simply point out what is wrong but never showing how it should be done or really teaching anything. Every forum has them. Nothing measures up to their standards and they rarely, if ever, post anything meaningful themselves.

Critiquing, even to yourself, is a great way to learn. I learned what I know of lighting by trying to dissect images. If you have questions, ask them!!

Longwatcher

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 12:42

I find this thread interesting...
One of the more thought provoking threads in awhile.

However, I noted that someone was wondering where to find models.

Try One Model Place
www.onemodelplace.com

They have a large number of models available (like about 80,000 across the planet) Most in US, but also a fairly large number in Europe with scattered number elsewhere.

While they have a higher percentage of female models, they also have a large number of male models so something for everyone. And from my bias view it appears the male models are on average better looking then the average female model. But then I may be pickier on my selection of female models (darn het. male bias getting in the way)
Not sure how many male models will do TFP/TFCD (meaning basically free) but if they cost they tend to cost far less then female models (supply and demand at work - at least I hope that is all it is).

So OMP is probably the best source for finding models in your area and then you will be able to get in some practice and then whine that your lighting needs work, your lenses aren't good enough, find you need to learn hair and makeup (even for male models), need to work on your people directing skills and learn that it is way more work then it looks. On the other hand if you do it with the sole purpose of having fun with your photography then you win and that is all that really matters.

Everything below this point is a bit rambly and may be slightly off topic....
.................................................. ...................................
BTW: my OMP photographer # is #8493 some of my best work ends up on that page. And I keep trying to figure out what I need to do to get my pictures selected for the gallery section of the site (can't remember the term they use and can't access site at work). Now that is a challenge. I have noted they tend to like, what to me are, clean backgrounds that are over saturated in a boring pose and PS'd into art work and no longer photography; but still I try to get at least one that makes it. At least CharlesU has a few that have been selected (which were all outstanding photos BTW) even if I note that he shot one of the same models I did and personally I think I got better pictures of her. We have shot at least 2 of the same models, but being as my memory is faulty at the moment all I can think of is Gina, Julie, Renee and Savannah (of which only 2 count). He did a far better job then me on the other, but I claim early lack of experience on that one. :)

When this month is over and I start having a little more time I will try to get some of my work up for critique for the fun of it. Between this month and last I have or am taking a total of 7 flights, including a 9 day one at the end of the month. I think I have an interesting mix in that I have my models in both warrior get up and then in submissive outfits/poses. Somewhat strangely more then half prefer (or expect) the submissive poses and get tired of the carrying the weapons. I like the dual aspects and try to represent my models in both ways. This may be saying something about me, but would require a very long thread even by my standards to explain it correctly.

Just me,

nat869

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 15:21

Wow, great thread, I have a lot to say on the subject, as I think I have received more than my fair share of negative comments.

Let me say, I have become a much better photographer because of the constructive comments and critiques I have received, but I have really had to filter out the negatives to get good information. Most of the time I can deal with the guy expressing his lust at some model (my wife usually), at least it means it was a good image to him. What makes me mad are the insults to how a model looks, usually it is about her physique being too manly or some steroid comment.

I did have to laugh, one of the guys in this thread refered to glam section only in regards to women, never once mentioning guys. I think men can take some glamorous pics too and this same poster is one who made rude comments about my wife. I guess for some folks, they only can deal with seeing what they consider attractive.

Noni, great posts, you make some good points. I too really enjoyed bluelens' male nudes, they were of exceptional quality I thought and made good art.

Charles, I agree with you.....I would love to see a negative poster put up his/her's own work, lets see what they got.

THANKS!!! to all who have offered me advice and critiques. Please keep it up.

Steve Parr

5th of August 2005 (Fri), 22:40

I like the first shot a lot.

I have to be honest, though. There are few things more unattractive to me than a muscle bound woman who is, otherwise, quite attractive. I know guys who don't have the legs that are seen in shots #3 & #4.

But I like the first shot a lot...

Steve

charlesu

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 05:56

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 11:38

Let's keep the comments on the photography and not on your taste in women.

Well, Charles, "glamour" is something different to different people, is it not? If we're not going to discuss the subject contained in a "glamour" photograph, one might as well be taking "glamour" photographs of Triscuit boxes.

Is it an unfair assumption that an unglamorous subject can cause an otherwise good shot to be unglamourous, as well? Why do you use beautiful women in your shoots instead of overweight women with bad teeth?

Well, that would be unglamourous, correct?

Perhaps I could've worded my response differently, but the point would have remained the same...

Steve

whatdidIdo

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 12:02

Well, Charles, "glamour" is something different to different people, is it not? If we're not going to discuss the subject contained in a "glamour" photograph, one might as well be taking "glamour" photographs of Triscuit boxes.

Is it an unfair assumption that an unglamorous subject can cause an otherwise good shot to be unglamourous, as well? Why do you use beautiful women in your shoots instead of overweight women with bad teeth?

Well, that would be unglamourous, correct?

Perhaps I could've worded my response differently, but the point would have remained the same...

Steve

I do agree with you in all points... the subject matters, especially if it's suposed to be a glamour shot.

In the pictures I think the location is amazing, the lady alas, is not glamourous, far from it!! A beautiful model with more attractive shapes and with more sex-appeal would have made the diffrence and the shot would have looked glamorous!

To criticise the photograph without mentioning if the subject is right or not would mean not to criticise the photograph at all, if it's galmour we are talking about!!:cool:

deedspender

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 12:07

Perhaps I could've worded my response differently, but the point would have remained the same...

i'm with you two on this one!!

Pekka

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 14:59

I disagree. The images are posted as springboards for comment and discussion, not as gauntlets for mean-spirited competition.

If an image, comment, or title draws repeated negative comments, then the one who posts it might want to take notice and learn from the experience.

I agree with your disagreement. If I post a photo of something, and people comment it I would not expect everyone to post a photo which shows as example why the comment is valid and how the better photo would look like. Words are enough if thoughts behind them are sane well and have content.

Problem is: I do not shoot glamour, so does that make me invalid to comment glamour shots?

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 15:23

I would love to see a negative poster put up his/her's own work, lets see what they got.

So someone shouldn't make a negative comment unless they provide a sample of their own work?

How silly.

I don't have the facility for doing glamour shots. I don't have the lighting, the studio (or an acceptable environment), and I don't have the models. Does that mean I should avoid providing a comment if it's going to be negative?

If I see something in an image which I have a criticism with, I will share it, be it something about the lighting, shadows, or even the subject of the shot. That's the point of a "critique" forum, is it not?

To suggest that one be prepared to provide an example of work after a negative comment is, like I said, silly...

Steve

txdude35

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 16:19

charlesu

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 17:14

Problem is: I do not shoot glamour, so does that make me invalid to comment glamour shots?

No, Pekka. It doesn't make your comment invalid. What *I* said earlier in this thread and what I think most people would agree on is that some opinions may carry more weight.

Think of it this way. Someone who has NO website experience other than cruising and who really doesn't understand IP, nets, or HTML (even in theory) cruises by your website and offers comments like. Man, your color scheme stinks. Your page is really slow to load. What's with the light fonts on the light background? Hey, your layout isn't efficient or practical. Etc....

He has opinions. They are "valid". But maybe this opinions just aren't that relevant. Maybe your web page is way better than he is giving you credit for? Maybe it would help if he showed you how to get your pages to load faster, or to improve your layout. What if he pointed you to better forum management software? Etc. (By the way, I am NOT picking on POTN, just trying to draw a parallel.)

I also suggested that if you can post an example, it's even better. Much easier to learn from an example image than just a description.

From what I am seeing here, most of the negative comoments, not all but most, are simply negative comments. No real attempt to educate or assist.

Why not try and raise the bar? I'm not saying make posting an example a rule. But it should be a common occurence.

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 17:38

I still think it's a bit silly to suggest that someone who doesn't shoot a particular type of shot has opinions which are less valid, simply because they don't shoot a particular subject.

As for the comparison you gave concerning a website, it's enitrely possible that if someone with little or no web experience says "it loads too slow, the colors are harsh, and there are light fonts on a light background", it may be due to the fact that the site loads too slow, has harsh colors, and has light fonts on light backgrounds. It doesn't take a webmaster to recognize such things...

Steve

Pekka

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 17:52

No, Pekka. It doesn't make your comment invalid. What *I* said earlier in this thread and what I think most people would agree on is that some opinions may carry more weight.

Think of it this way. Someone who has NO website experience other than cruising and who really doesn't understand IP, nets, or HTML (even in theory) cruises by your website and offers comments like. Man, your color scheme stinks. Your page is really slow to load. What's with the light fonts on the light background? Hey, your layout isn't efficient or practical. Etc....

He has opinions. They are "valid". But maybe this opinions just aren't that relevant. Maybe your web page is way better than he is giving you credit for? Maybe it would help if he showed you how to get your pages to load faster, or to improve your layout. What if he pointed you to better forum management software? Etc. (By the way, I am NOT picking on POTN, just trying to draw a parallel.)

I also suggested that if you can post an example, it's even better. Much easier to learn from an example image than just a description.

From what I am seeing here, most of the negative comoments, not all but most, are simply negative comments. No real attempt to educate or assist.

Why not try and raise the bar? I'm not saying make posting an example a rule. But it should be a common occurence.

Yes I agree comments should have more depth and be more constructive and communicative than mere blunt statements. Trying to make people do so is commendable. The original poster can help in "educating" people into this by challenging one-word commentators to say more and invite verbal commentators into discussion. Making rules rarely inspires people :)

Noni

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 18:16

Problem is: I do not shoot glamour, so does that make me invalid to comment glamour shots?
Not in the least, or there'd never be anything said anywhere.

So someone shouldn't make a negative comment unless they provide a sample of their own work?

How silly.

I don't have the facility for doing glamour shots. I don't have the lighting, the studio (or an acceptable environment), and I don't have the models. Does that mean I should avoid providing a comment if it's going to be negative?

If I see something in an image which I have a criticism with, I will share it, be it something about the lighting, shadows, or even the subject of the shot. That's the point of a "critique" forum, is it not?
I thought so. I also think that Nat's commentary stems from being slammed repeatedly - and harshly - because of his wife's physique, and not because of his photography skill (indeed, with the exception of the last few days...things seem to have been changing in there...)

And honestly, I see a ton of comments about a model's appropriateness for someone's personal tastes (ugh...) than I do about the photography itself. So I'm not sure Nat is saying that people should put up or shut up, as has been intimated many times in this particular thread...rather, I think that was more an emotional comment about the heat he's taken because of Sam's lifestyle rather than his photography.

Frankly, I think also that the concept of negative v. positive needs to perhaps be clarified.

To some people, saying "great a**" or "she can tie me to an ant hill any day" or "too bad you didn't get her a top that fits" is "postive" feedback. Instead of commenting about the photograph itself, the model's physical attributes are denigrated. I can't see that as positive feedback in a photography forum.

I've seen people slammed hard because they dared to say "well, that photograph looks like a snapshot. Try it this way." I've seen photos of men in that forum that are panned simply because they're men. That's not positive feedback; but that is encouraged and "egged on" by the comments made subsequent and prior to the posting of the shot. Does agreeing with the group mean that it's right?

I participate in a sport that has life or death consequences. If a newbie asks me some questions about skydiving, I give them the information. If someone asks me why they repeatedly botch a landing, I'll watch a few and comment. Do I hit it on my feet every time, a picture of grace and fluidity? Nawp...I'm far closer to a flying michelin man than to anything approaching graceful, but that does not invalidate my comments. Further, if an inexperienced person notices something with my gear, my landings, my flying, and makes a comment, I look at it, and if there's a good reason X is the way it is, I explain it...and if there isn't, then it gets changed. People who believe that no-one but someone better than they can comment and teach are likely to die in my sport.

On a far less dramatic aspect is a photograph. If I see something which I think could've been done better, I am rather likely to say it. If I see something which is great, I am likely to ask for information about it. I am neither great nor perfect in photography, and so I learn, learn and learn some more. Because of that, my shots have gotten progressively better since April 27th...and I look forward to continued growth.

Best-
Noni

Persian-Rice

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 18:25

Thank god I don't post my work.......ever see a really pretty girl covered in blood while posing in the nude?? Maybe Ill do a shoot for POTN next month in digital.......

I would like to see the outrage then....

I don't really get the point, what's the difference between making a "smart" comment or "wow what a great picture"? Neither of them are constructive in anyway, other then boosting someones ego, they do nothing to help the photographer improve. People don't criticize at all.

I understand this, I can imagine if people start criticize work, all hell will break loose. People always take things the wrong way, they might ask for criticism, but then they become really defensive about it. Personally, I love criticism, because it just makes me better and better, and if people adopt that look on things, then people would start making comments with more depth.

If you are going to say you like a picture, give a detailed reasons why, don't just say "wow, sexy". No picture is perfect, everything can be improved up. Even if you want to make a short comment, wrap it in a tasteful sentence, where you say why you feel that way, what is it about the picture that evokes such an emotion.

There are differences in taste, I see some picture and cringe, while others see them and love them, it's really a matter of what you like and what you shoot. But opinion is opinion, nobody's is wrong. The best is to take both sides and see what you can do by merging many ideas, making bigger and better photographs.

If you don't like the way something looks in the picture, then suggest a better idea, it doesn't need to be a destructive comment. For example, as above mentioned, if you have an issue with the physique of the model, then suggest better poses that would suit the specific model. You would be surprised how you can hide things at different angles. I mean, there is no denying if someone doesn't have a great look, they just don't, but trust me, there are ways to get around problems like that.

Cheers

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 18:44

I'm always amazed at how in all of Nat's posts a good portion of the responses are about Samantha's body and not the shot. To all who don't care for this type of model, there's an easy fix-don't look. We all know who Nat is shooting, so if you see his name on a post, skip it and go to the next. If you feel the need to check out the shots anyway, keep your opinions to yourself. This is the man's wife you're talking about, after all. Show a little respect. Nat, keep 'em coming.

The subject, be it his wife or otherwise, is integral to the picture, yes? I had no idea it was his wife, so perhaps you should stop making assumptions. I commented on the picture I saw.

It seems like you're tryiing to turn the comments into something personal about Nat, and that's not the case at all. In fact, if this "common knowledge" was so out there, perhaps it would've caused some to temper their comments, perhaps then not offering their true critique of the image. How does that help anyone looking for an honest opinion?

I commented that I don't find muscle-bound women attractive. By saying that, I'm not talking about his wife, I'm talking about muscle-bound women. I know people who find brunettes unattractive. I've been married to one for almost 20 years.

Should I be offended that some people in this world find brunettes unattractive?

Steve

txdude35

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 19:43

The subject, be it his wife or otherwise, is integral to the picture, yes.....
Should I be offended that some people in this world find brunettes unattractive?

Steve

I never said anything about "common knowledge", and truth be told, I don't remember where I got the idea. I believe it was in one of his posts, but I could be wrong. If you're going to get defensive about something I've said, stick with what I actually said.
My point, and one which might have been missed, is this: you know what this gentleman posts, as does anyone else who has been around here for any length of time. Knowing that the pictures are going to contain a _very_ fit woman, you have the option of not opening it or keeping your opinion of the model to yourself.
Post something of your wife. Perhaps a few "I really like the shot, but that woman sure is ugly" comments may change your perspective a bit.

charlesu

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 21:27

Yes I agree comments should have more depth and be more constructive and communicative than mere blunt statements. Trying to make people do so is commendable. The original poster can help in "educating" people into this by challenging one-word commentators to say more and invite verbal commentators into discussion. Making rules rarely inspires people :)

I agree. I don't think the rule works.

No matter what anyone says, I will respect and value an informed opinion more than a novice. Let me share some insight on this.

On the rare occasions that I have seen the folks I am talking about try to share insight, they usually don't know what they are talking about. Yes, the idea of what they want maybe fine. But they have no idea how to execute on it themselves. Most of them don't try, they just spend their commentary career in slamming other people's work.

Those people know who they are and I think (based on posts, emails and PMs) this thread has made them immensely uncomfortable.

Maybe some of the many people who have decided NOT to post here, because of unhelpful, negative posts will choose to participate.

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 21:31

I never said anything about "common knowledge", and truth be told, I don't remember where I got the idea. I believe it was in one of his posts, but I could be wrong. If you're going to get defensive about something I've said, stick with what I actually said.
My point, and one which might have been missed, is this: you know what this gentleman posts, as does anyone else who has been around here for any length of time. Knowing that the pictures are going to contain a _very_ fit woman, you have the option of not opening it or keeping your opinion of the model to yourself.
Post something of your wife. Perhaps a few "I really like the shot, but that woman sure is ugly" comments may change your perspective a bit.

Kudos on avoiding answering any of the questions I asked.

Here's an idea for you: You know when you see my name, in a thread discussing muscular women, you know what my comments might be. I'd recommend passing by them.

That makes about as much sense as your suggestion.

Again, I've not seen too many people addressing the fact that the subject of a photograph is, or should be, susceptible to critique. As I said in an earlier post, if the subject wasn't open to critique, why not just take glamour shots of Triscuit boxes?

Steve

Steve Parr

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 21:35

txdude35

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 22:53

My apologies if I have assumed anything incorrectly. For future reference, make note of nat869, and understand that if you are in the "glamour" section, his posts will most likely be of his wife, who happens to be in outstanding physical condition.
I do not, however, see how "There are few things more unattractive to me than a muscle bound woman who is, otherwise, quite attractive." is any sort of valid critique. Neither is a comment like "great t**s" or "man, she can butter my toast anyday!"

The debate over comments like this is raging. If the focus isn't kept on the shot and off the models attractiveness or unattractiveness to you personally, I fear this forum will not be long lived.

Persian-Rice

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 23:38

I agree. I don't think the rule works.

No matter what anyone says, I will respect and value an informed opinion more than a novice. Let me share some insight on this.

On the rare occasions that I have seen the folks I am talking about try to share insight, they usually don't know what they are talking about. Yes, the idea of what they want maybe fine. But they have no idea how to execute on it themselves. Most of them don't try, they just spend their commentary career in slamming other people's work.

Those people know who they are and I think (based on posts, emails and PMs) this thread has made them immensely uncomfortable.

Maybe some of the many people who have decided NOT to post here, because of unhelpful, negative posts will choose to participate.

Although I agree with the gist of what you are saying, I don't agree that just because a "novice" gives his/her opinion, it may be wrong. I am in the same boat, I agree that I take the comments and suggestions of a person with experience a lot more seriously then someone who may be a novice, most things can't match experience, but I never discount any opinion.

I think thats photographic ability can be derived in two ways in it's most primitive form. Ability through practice and experience, and ability through natural talent. Some people are able to grasp things better then others, right from the start with little experience. So not everyone's opinion, just because they are a novice, is to be always considered lightly. Because that novice might already have a far more developed eye then someone with 15 years experience.

I am being a little bit of a hypocrite, because I am guilty of this myself at times, but when it comes down to it, I truly believe this, and for the most part, follow it.

Persian-Rice

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 23:43

Pyromaniac

7th of August 2005 (Sun), 01:45

I have to agree with some of the others, this is a GLAMOUR and nude section and granted what people find glamorous is subjective, but in glamour the model should be fair game for critique as well as the location and technical merits of the photo. Really I think that goes for just about any photo. If you took the same locations and instead of a model put a rusted out Ford Pinto and said hey look at this cool car, or look at these product shots the first thing most people would say is “that car is (insert expletive here) ugly”. Now should we not say the car is ugly, it is some body’s car and they maybe proud of it. The subject of a photograph should be open to the same critique as ever thing else about the photo, whether it’s a model or an inanimate object.

Before you post ANYTHING on the internet be it a photo or a reply to a forum thread you should remember that you a essentially putting it out there for the world to see.

That being said I don't have any problems with Samantha’s looks. I do think that the poses make her look less glamorous than she really is, they seem to forced and unnatural. I think that she (or maybe Nat) is trying to hard to get "that perfect pose". There is no perfect pose, some are always going to be better than others, and there will always be something wrong with all of them. What we as photographers should try to do is find the poses that work best for each specific model and try to make the problems that come up as discrete as possible.

I’m not into body building and don’t know much about it but most of the poses seem like they would be good for competition in front of the judges. I think that in glamour the poses should appear natural and relaxed like there’s no effort at all put into holding the pose. The first pose looks pretty good, like she’s just standing there doing what she’s doing. As I said before that other poses look like there is too much effort being put into them.

On a side note, I know people that go to the gym a several of times a week and aren’t in nearly as good a shape as Samantha is, what kind if training does it take to get that kind of shape and definition and maintain it?

nat869

7th of August 2005 (Sun), 02:32

Having read through this entire thread, and recognizing that people don't want to see negative comments about the subject of a photograph, I just have to ask: Why is it that positive comments concerning a model are welcomed, and some negative ones are not?

Steve

I never thought in a society that to directly insult someone was ever ok. You do not like the pic, that's cool, I can handle it. I did a poor job posing the model, no problem. I underexposed the shot, fine, I suck as a photographer, thats ok too. Insult the model who posed, I do not think thats cool. This is a photography forum, not a model forum. If you were lookign to hire a model for work, then you would judge a model's looks, that s appropriate. How is commenting about the pic them adding your own preference on a woman's looks helpful.

My guess is you do not tell women in person, to their face, that they are un-appealing to you. The anonymity of the internet makes it possible for you to act rudely without fear of something bad happening. In my case, I know not everyone finds my wife attractive, its actually better that way, but never has someone come up to her and said "I think muscular women are unattractive" and I doubt you would as well. I would guess a sense of self-preservation makes you think twice about it.