Glamour shots****Not work safe***

[Hertz van Rental]

Criticism? Fuss? Mentos expressed an opinion and some of us agreed. I think it was a general comment and not specific.
If you post a picture anywhere you are wanting people to look at it and if people look at things they are going to have a view or opinion, even if it's 'I don't care for that sort of thing'.
But mostly people comment just to make bad puns.

 

[dalebe]

i agree with Hertz, even though my somewhat "short view" was different than most that have been posted on here, "respect" when it comes to opinion...

 

[FlashPhoto]

Technically speaking, the photography & lighting is OK. But the poses? None of them appeal to me. In the last one she appears to have been surprised in the act of looking for a dropped contact lens. And in the first, her face is hidden in an unusually uncomfortable looking way.

The shot on the sofa is the only one that is close to being acceptable, pose-wise. But even it is not at all sexy or interesting.

I do a lot of arty nudes and glamour. To me, all three of these are unclassy rejects.

 

[danalec99]

dito on the light being harsh but what bothers me most is the indecision about cropping. Either crop off the hands and feet or dont. Having them half in half off looks like there was no thought put into composition.

Ditto.

 

[Raymond J Barlow]

Interesting disscusion, i think everyone here has made valid points. To me, every issue comes down to respect. since this forum in not adult rated, and children have easy access to it, i find it disrespectful to our community. This kind of expression has its time and place, but i don't think it's here in TPF. (IMO)

As for the photos, and critque, I will only say that glamor does not come into play here., and suggest that further threads of this type not be posted in TPF.

 

[rob1116]

I don't know if I agree with that Raymond.

This forum is for discussing photography; a subject in which nudes have always been a topic. IMO, abstract or tasteful nudes have a place in this forum like any other photographic subject does, and the moment someone crosses the line between art and porn (a line which I believe is easily distinguishable) I trust our moderators will remove that content quickly.

As for minors having 'easy access' : Unfortunately, this applies for nearly every site on the internet. I was using Google last week, and while searching for information on cellular respiration (Bio class... no, I'm not a minor), I was presented with several 'XXX' sites... one of which promised they had a huge collection of underage 'model' photos... sigh.

The point is that most adult sites that I've seen, (yeah yeah, I'm allowed!) have a homepage message like, 'If you over 18, Click here to enter... otherwise leave...'. This is the extent of the 'restricted access', and what's worst is that this message is usually displayed on a page designed to lure people in... aka, it's already plastered with content waaaaay worst than anything I've seen posted on TPF.

Minors having access to porn IS a major problem... TPF will not add to it by allowing this. I woud bet my gear, (*gasp!) that any minor with enough online experience to find and use TPF has been presented the opportunity to view hardcore pornography elsewhere... and many times over. Sad but true.

 

[PlasticSpanner]

I might appear to be old fasioned here but anyway.......

These photos are of the kind that appear in over 18 magazines and as such I think they should be reserved for 18+ sites & forums. :thumbup:

I personally think "glamour" shots should have some kind of story or focus e.g what the model is doing or wearing etc & not just a woman (or man even!) there to be looked at!

No debate for me about porn vs art or whether porn is good or bad. It exists to please different peoples tastes but only for a suitable audiance!

 

[PlasticSpanner]

Am I the only one who noticed the wrinkled drop sheet? Might want to add an iron to your photo-gear collection

I thought it was supposed to look like that!? I like the crinkled look as it seems to give some texture to the background which is otherwise dark and blank.

 

[rob1116]

IMO, the textured effect on the floor looks alright, but the one shot with the backdrop wrinkled looks, well, like wrinkled fabric!

 

[Raymond J Barlow]

Of course it's all a matter of opinion, and viewpoint., to me, the fact that all the porn that is so readily available to minors has no relevance to this issue.

I think that art, and nudity related to art has it's place also. These photos are not what I consider art., and IMO, disrespectful to many people here. A separate topic area, password protected, and members access must proof of age would be acceptable.

But, we all have a choice, if someone views something they find offensive, they can choose to no longer login. I see so little of this type of photography in here, it really is not a concern for me personally., but if my 6 year old son was sitting beside me, and he saw these photos., it would be more of an issue.. (my baby is still in the woumb, so we won't sweat it too much for a few years) hehe.

I just think it's great we can all share opinions, and hope nobody takes it too personally.

 

[rob1116]

I understand completely... but it is pretty much an unwritten law that anyone posting anything remotely revealing includes an 'Adult Content', or 'Not Work Safe' warning in the thread title, such as this one.

 

[SonicAdvDX]

Mentos made a good point at the beginning, though. You always see that... I'll never understand softcore pornography... *shakes head*

 

[Lensmeister]

Only my own opinion.

Glamour to me falls in two two groups.

1. GLamour as in top shelf / "artistic"

2. Using a photograph or lighting or make up to make the subject (be it male or female) look Glamourous.

My own wife won a pro shoot in central Londoin many years ago. She had on a fleecy/Leather jacket slipped off her naked shoulder (covered underneath I add) .. that is a shot and a half.... both sexy and glamourous.

Call me old fashioned ... but I prefer a woman looking sexy yes ... but with something left to the imagination. These pictures, although good, are not what I'd like my kids seeing albeit over my shoulder if I am on here.

Pic 1 = Doesn't do anything for me ...... pose look awkward.

Pic 2 = Lovely shot and lighting great, posed well.

Pic 3 = Poor woman looks uncomforatable, I want to pick her up and hand her a robe, and a mug of coco and put her in a chair.

Sorry only an opinion. But a question ...... what would people think if this was a male posing with a towel or thong (and No I won't do it as I'd look like an elephant with telegraph pole between me buttocks) ?

TO each their own views ...

 

[pursuer]

What the hell I might as well throw my two cents in

First of all I don't have any problem with these kind of photos appearing here. the human form has always been an important theme in many forms of art and dezmaas has apropriatly marked this thread as "not work safe" which should make it quite clear what kind of photographs are contained within.

That said I like like the first two, although the shoes are certainly a matter of taste. The third I personally find distasteful and and certainly not flattering to the model, but thats my opinion, others may vary.

 

[Corry]

Wow...someone's diggin WAAAAY back into the archives!