Do we need an Erotica section?

I've seen great work here, and it helps me to learn a great deal, but alot of time is spent by some complaining about content rather than talking photography, would an "erotica" section allow posting of pictures where the content complaints wouldnt be an issue? One mans art is anothers pornography and frankly I'm surpirsed by the (for lack of better description) "prudish" views in this forum at times. So much criticism at times rather than praise to those who share with us.

you can't please EVERYone

hahha ...i think things are fine how they are.

Lot of ppl here differnet views wich i think helps others to mould their craft.

I think you are reffering to Freddys recent thread about the "amateur pornish" looking photo. I hope you are not calling us prudes for calling it as we see it. Calling a photo "pornish" looking in my opinion isnt bad. Its like me calling a picture "glam". The way his photo was shot and composed had a certain feel to it, no big deal. Did he mean to do it that way or not, no matter, he posted the result and we all made comments. Good or bad, nevertheless they were comments.
We all practice and do new things, we have to be prepared for criticsm and if it comes off perhaps wrong, it happens. After all its hard to convey emotion over the internet as we all know.

I guess the question here is "pornish" ok, is it art, is it legitimate photograpy?

i use it as a name to describe a certain quality of photographs. But i'm sure its different for everyone so its not that simple. We all have different levels of comfort and classify differently.

There is nothing preventing the posting of erotic images as long as the images do not violate these rules.

1. All unclothed models must be over 18.
2. No genitalia closeups or sexual intercourse photos (keep in mind that forum is viewable by all). This also includes simulated sex acts.

Only rarely are images removed for violating these rules yet there are erotic images posted regularly, not only in G&N but occasionally in Still Life, B/W & Experimental. Yes indeed, we have some very talented photographers here.

I think we should have 4 sections for people.

People and portraits
Glamour
Fine-art or artistic nude
Erotica

I see a lot of things on here that barely pass as glamour--they're really portraits. I'd like to see them move to people and portraits. Then we have glamour whether with or without fashion. Then there's what I call artistic nudes. Usually B&W or toned, nude and posed and lit with some creativity. And then, there's erotica. Now the nice thing about calling it that is that it can include erotic art or porn. Either way, I won't be doing any posting there or spending much time there. To me, there's too much risk in erotic art degenerating into porn.

Anyway, you asked for my 2 cents and there it is.

I just think some images need better titles Like "CAUTION-its an upclose encounter with a vagina!" I like the forums the way they are!

kathy.patterson wrote in post #3396416
I just think some images need better titles Like "CAUTION-its an upclose encounter with a vagina!" I like the forums the way they are!

If you post a wang we can call it even stevens.

I have been following the forum for quite some time (ok, maybe not the G&N forum all the time), but I certainly do not recall any significant number of such occasions.

People who complain about seeing unclad human bodies in the G&N forum ... well, they can't really say they were not warned before...

Best regards,
Andy

I'm not complaining about an unclad human body- I've posted many pics of myself here as well....it is in the way they are presented. I have no quams with a beautifully lit, well posed completely nude male or female body.

I agree.

In the meantime I have also seen the 'incriminating' images ... and as the poster has now decided to post the more 'risqué' versions as links, I don't think there's a problem.

But I think that we do not need an 'erotica' session to post images that are too explicit by current forum rules (if this is what the original poster wanted).

Best regards,
Andy

+1 on Charles comments

I have no strong feelings on topic here one way or another.

That said, someone posted a link a while back to a site called met-art.com. It shows in some instances close up genatalia. I find it in no way pornographic, rather beautiful, but understand why it is not allowed here.

mark

charlesu wrote in post #3396314
To me, there's too much risk in erotic art degenerating into porn.

Particularly since the distinction is a very personal opinion, or to quote the OP:

I'm sure if you polled the general (U.S.) population more than 10% would consider any picture containing nudity to be pornography.


FWIW - I think the existing setup and rules work well.