Why is too far, too far?

[bigtwinky]

It also depends on what the viewer thinks. Your intent may have been artistic, but one person seeing the image may think its porn, the other may not.

You cannot control what shapes a person's view on things. One person may think that once they see a nipple, its porn. Others may lean on the intent or emotion of the image. One person may think that the lighting does not make it porn.

As was said, shoot what you feel you should shoot and let people think what they want to think. You can't draw a single line that says "this is porn, this isn't" and have it apply to every type of visual art out there.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

The difference I make between art and porn is not in the subject matter but in the artistic quality of the image.

Porn exists for someone to make money from someone else's sexual desires and it is a crank them out world where artistic quality is beside the point. And, frankly, even the lamest of the "nudie" magazines (as in Playboy, for example) have very little artistic quality. They may not be considered porn by most people but they certainly are not artistic either. They belong somewhere in the middle.

The reason I choose to not look at the subject matter in that decision is because that is just so personal that you cannot consider it. Look at Robert Mapplethorpe for example. Great artist for some, pornographer for others. Some people even find his photos of flowers to be porn...