Semi topless underage pics by Vanity Fair

Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by Heck, Apr 27, 2008.

  1. Heck
    Offline

    Heck New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    988
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New York, Bronx/Westchester
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0
    I like to see where this story goes. If It were any of us taking "Art" Photos of a 15 year old how long before we get put in jail or sued, But I'm not Annie Leibovitz and don't shoot for Vanity Fair. Then again maybe there is no victim here other than Disney Channel.

    Story here:
    http://www.etonline.com/news/2008/04/61009/index.html
  2. JIP
    Offline

    JIP New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0
    With all the people that surrounded her on the day of the shoot if someone thought this was going badly I think they could have pulled the plug in a second before the shots were ever published. To criticise the photographer when everyone involved had every opportunity to see the images instantly is a dangerous game. I think if they did not want these kinds of images done they should not have agreed to them in the first place. I get the feeling this was some kind of grab at mabye tarting up her image or something that has gone terribly wrong.
  3. Mike_E
    Offline

    Mike_E Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Messages:
    5,240
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The Upper West Side of Mississippi (you have no i
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +247 / 0
    Too early to tell, could just be hype.
  4. Rick Waldroup
    Offline

    Rick Waldroup New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +35 / 0
    This apology of hers has to be coming directly from Disney. C'mon, she knew what she was doing, her parents and handlers knew what she was doing and so on. Disney has to protect that so-called squeaky clean image, don't you know.
  5. abraxas
    Offline

    abraxas Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,416
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0
    check out the 'cleave' on the photo in the article.
  6. JimmyO
    Offline

    JimmyO New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NJ
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Is it me or does anyone else think that picture isnt very raunchy at all?
  7. Harmony
    Offline

    Harmony New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    The picture above the article is not the one mentioned in the article itself...
  8. JimmyO
    Offline

    JimmyO New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NJ
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    ohhh
    gotcha
  9. Harmony
    Offline

    Harmony New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
  10. eravedesigns
    Offline

    eravedesigns New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    624
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    I think thats an amazing shot and artistic. It makes her look older and maybe thats why I find it ok.
  11. usayit
    Offline

    usayit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,497
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +341 / 0
    Exactly... Publicity is publicity and usually is good for a budding celebrity. Simply put.. sex sells... and they are in show business. Tt is easier to ask for forgiveness than get permission.

    How "raunchy" those pictures are will greatly depend on the beholder's upbringing, environment and culture.

    Personally.. I don't like what they are stooping to. I don't like the message it sends out to millions of very young fans. The parents, handlers, guardians were there and knew exactly what photos were being shot... it was all about $$$, status and image.

    As a photo in of itself.... I do think it is nicely done.
  12. Hertz van Rental
    Offline

    Hertz van Rental New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Where am I now?
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0
    You see a five-year-old running around on the beach in just her knickers and no-one cares.
    You see a twenty-year-old running around on the beach in just her knickers and you admire her.
    You see an eighty-year-old running around on the beach in just her knickers and you wish she'd put some clothes on.
    But if a fourteen-year-old takes her top off then everyone starts worrying that it's a criminal offense.
    You humans are strange.
  13. Iron Flatline
    Offline

    Iron Flatline Guest

    Top Poster Of Month

    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    I am fascinated by the fact that there are people in America who are professional alarmists about this kind of thing. In Europe and Asia this would bother no one. But then again (as usayit and others have already pointed out) it is simply Disney preemptively protecting an asset. Maybe even they are underestimating the American public, and no one seriously thinks this is a big deal.
  14. abraxas
    Offline

    abraxas Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,416
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0
    Controversy sells. This is a lesson in promotion. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
  15. ScottS
    Offline

    ScottS New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    I agree, its a beautiful photograph. I find nothing raunchy about it.
  16. Alex_B
    Offline

    Alex_B New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14,491
    Likes Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Europe 67.51°N
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +204 / 0
    Well said!
  17. LaFoto
    Offline

    LaFoto Just Corinna in real life Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    34,747
    Likes Received:
    763
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Lower Saxony, Germany
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +763 / 0
    This is what I was thinking.
    I mean: what does she reveal? Nothing at all. Why the craze?
    (Yes, I guess all those who say it is yet another promotion trick being pulled by the Disney Corporation are right).
  18. Garbz
    Offline

    Garbz New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,712
    Likes Received:
    202
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +202 / 0
    I am personally sick of people crying foul every time someone is seen without a shirt or what not. Some people say it's a fine line. I personally don't think it is at all.

    If an image is designed to impose an erotic response in the viewer it is porn. If not it is art. To photography her fully nude in that position is not porn. To photograph her fully nude from the front is not porn if it is done right. But photograph someone with legs spread, or clearly aroused (erect nipples or other appendages) that THAT is porn in my eyes.

    The over conservative people are setting art back many years. They should take a walk through an art gallery one day and find out just how many nude women and children are featured in classic portraits.

    I vote the original article as the biggest non issue the news has published all year. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to get back to reading about the lost puppies and rescued kittens in my local tabloid.
  19. usayit
    Offline

    usayit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,497
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +341 / 0
    Yes well said.... But here is the difference (or perhaps its just me... background, environment, and culture)

    Young toddlers running around in bathing suits are not suggesting anything in regards to "sex" sells.... they don't have fans that revere them.

    Young adolescents running around in bathing suits are also not suggesting anything. They are not in the spotlight in those bathing suits. They are not in the context of increasing their popularity, fame, and bank account.

    This young "superstar" in those pictures is being featured in a magazine. She is in a different context than those running around on the beach.

    It is not the amount of skin that does bother me a bit... It is the context of which the pictures are being done. I think it is very easy for a young immature mind to infer that sexuality sells IS the TOOL for getting anywhere in life... why? .. hey it worked for Britney and now Miley. My young niece, who is a big fan of Miley, is going through a tough adjustment period at this time... things like this will just add to the complication. The good news is that she doesn't read Vanity Fair.

    Now if these photos appeared in a fine art book, I wouldn't give it a second thought... it is a nice photo. BUT.. you'd be fooling yourself into believing that those photos to be printed in Vanity Fair were done for the sake of photographic Art. They were done for sales and $$$.
  20. usayit
    Offline

    usayit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,497
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +341 / 0
    Here is where I also don't agree. I don't find an image designed to impose an erotic response in the viewer as porn. A nude woman in a sexy pose doesn't invoke that response in you??? What is the difference of a nude Miley not showing anything (like in that photo) and a young teen being depicted in sexual intercourse with everything covered?? If you put that same photo in a spread on a young teen porn magazine, I bet you all would have a problem with it.

    For me.. it is not all about the photo or the amount of skin... it is a combination of various things including the context of which the photo is being published.

Share This Page