got told my photo is half-nude in series in Challenge 16-what do you think?

LindyLoo, the problem here was not a simple case of criticism. It was about "these kind of images" be used here. That is not a criticism, it is an attack. The image was not being criticized for style or artistic merit, but rather the photographer's right to post it in this forum. (Sorry Arlene, don't be offended at this next statement.. i am but a humble worm) I don't particularly like the photo, but Glamor is not my thing. I recognize that it is not my thing and would not even begin to presume myself cable of judging anything about the photo. The problem is that the annonymous poster on her image disagreed with her use of the photo, and that is where this discussion picks up.

LindyLoo said:

A criticism of one's subject is not a criticism of the photographer.

We have to remember that when we post a photo on a public forum, we
need the courage to take the comments that come our way--good and
bad. And every comment--whether we agree with it or not--give us
something to learn from if we are teachable.

Arlene said:

I'm being challenged as putting in a photo that isn't in good taste
and too provocative. I totally disagree. I think it is a tasteful
glamourous photo. Am I wrong. What do you guys think? Please read
some of the comments below the photo. Two of them are rather
negative. I was really surprised and dismayed by the reaction to
this photo. Here's the link:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1848364

Arlene

Click to expand...

--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Linda (aka Lindy Loo)

New 707 owner, but learning every day...thanks to this forum!

Click to expand...

--
Joe
'Keeping Shooting, Your Bound To Hit Something'
Lens Cap: Danglin and janglin

Sticker: off Accesories: Hood, Wide Angle VCL-MHG07A, Telephoto VCL-HG1758 , Flash, extra batteries, various filters. 7 sticks of chewing gum in the pack.

First, let me say that I think Arlene's entries are perfectly acceptable per Sarah's Challenge guidelines. They are also quite excellent photos in their own right.

Here is the question though:

Are Glamour and Portraiture photography different art forms?

My hypothesis:

A portrait is intended to tell us something about the subject's character or nature. Glamour photos are intended to impart a persona to the subject that might not otherwise exist.

So are they different or is Glamour just a subset of Portraiture?

Let's hear it....

Tom L.

--
My pbase gallery - http://www.pbase.com/lyncht3
The STF Photo Challenge - http://www.stfchallenge.com/
Ron Parr's FAQ - http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#camspecific

I hear you, Joe. Remember, though, that this particular challenge did come with a set of prequalifications (i.e, no "indecent" shots), so the poster had as much of a right to challenge her entry just as much as she had the right to post it.

It boils down to one person's opinion vs. another's, as cUrVe said very well in his post, with a lot of shades of gray.

Joe Izuzu said:

LindyLoo said:

What's that old saying? "One man's trash is another man's
treasure." In this case, it's "One photographer's indecent is
another photographer's glamour."

A criticism of one's subject is not a criticism of the photographer.

We have to remember that when we post a photo on a public forum, we
need the courage to take the comments that come our way--good and
bad. And every comment--whether we agree with it or not--give us
something to learn from if we are teachable.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Linda (aka Lindy Loo)

New 707 owner, but learning every day...thanks to this forum!

Half naked is where ????

Its a gorgeous work of art, both the shot and the model. Lighting is just perfect, I'm jealous Truely excellent work and dont worry about some dork who is that thick, they cant even spell their own name. Seems it happens on a regular basis on the challenges, sheesh.

All the best Arlene, its a stunner (now if only she had a spider on the shoulder, it would be PERFECT)

Danny.

--
Macro, what a world.
.............................
http://www.macrophotos.com

I agree that anybody should have the right to challange the shot as appropriate to the challange. I don't feel that glamor and portrait are the same thing and I feel that this photo is glamor, not portrait. However, the challange moderator makes that call, not us.

LindyLoo said:

It boils down to one person's opinion vs. another's, as cUrVe said
very well in his post, with a lot of shades of gray.

Joe Izuzu said:

LindyLoo said:

What's that old saying? "One man's trash is another man's
treasure." In this case, it's "One photographer's indecent is
another photographer's glamour."

A criticism of one's subject is not a criticism of the photographer.

We have to remember that when we post a photo on a public forum, we
need the courage to take the comments that come our way--good and
bad. And every comment--whether we agree with it or not--give us
something to learn from if we are teachable.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Linda (aka Lindy Loo)

New 707 owner, but learning every day...thanks to this forum!

Click to expand...

--
Joe
'Keeping Shooting, Your Bound To Hit Something'
Lens Cap: Danglin and janglin

Sticker: off Accesories: Hood, Wide Angle VCL-MHG07A, Telephoto VCL-HG1758 , Flash, extra batteries, various filters. 7 sticks of chewing gum in the pack.

Hi Arlene,

I can understand and relate to the comments left on pbase. I had the same thought that in a family centered portrait challenge that perhaps these glamour photos were out of place in the spirit of the other photos posted and within the context (perhaps unspoken because of the strict rules on dpreview) of unwritten expectations. However, it wasn't that strong a thought that I felt moved to leave a comment.

I remember when "glamour" photos were the rage in all the malls. Every mall had a booth or small space where one could go in, discuss make up, put on wigs, jewelry and costumes and pose and be a model for the day! Of course one paid for the priviledge, but it certainly lifted the morale and self-esteem of a lot of women who had their moment of glory when they saw the finished photos. Hopefully it gave them some insight into the amount of illusion that goes into producing this type of photography. Even on Miami Vice there was an episode on one of the characters becoming a boudoir photographer overnight!

So is there anything wrong with your photos -- well, no... is the portrait challenge the place for them? perhaps not, but you have to consider that your photos, particularly 3 and 4 are meant to be provocative, it was the model's intention, and your intention and you were both successful, your proof is in the comment left by someone. Take #3 and put the model in a turtleneck long sleeved top and a pair of jeans in the same pose and lighting and most people would wonder why she had such a strange expression on her face. Change the outfit and it becomes "suggestive." It's all in how it's preceived by the viewer, the intent of the model and how the photographer captured it all. You yourself label them "Glamour Series" but I'd consider 3 & 4 to be more in the boudoir category.

Glamour photography is prohibited on dpreview, and while not prohibited on pbase, since this challenge is so closely connected with dpreview, I can understand why someone would be a little put off by your photos.

For the record, our entire family laughs at the Victoria's Secret commercials aired on TV -- talk about borderline whatever. We question who the ads are aimed at? Women to buy the underwear or men who encourage their women to get the underwear? The fact that men just can't wait for their "wife's" copy of Victoria Secret Catalogs to arrive says it all.

Whether or not these ads are succesful, I don't know. Since they are still airing in various forms and advertisers don't like to waste money, I can surmise they must be successful indeed. We now have jeans ads showing young teenagers taking off and trying on jeans while showing off their abbreviated panties.

Then there are women like Britney Spears and others showing off and acting and posing a lot worse than your glamour shots. Go to photosig and which photos get all the points, comments and attention?

So in writing this, I'm not really saying you were right or wrong, not at all, I was just trying to explain how someone could be turned off/upset/angry/annoyed/furious. They obviously were upset enough to leave a comment but not their name. They may have forgotten that they were signed in under Stfchallenge and not their own pbase account name, or they may not even have a pbase account of their own and only have the stfchallenge login. Or they just wished to express their distaste without being challenged.

For what it's worth -- Dee

I was looking through the current STF Challenge and I saw the comments by the anonymous critic there and I wondered to myself, is this really a Family site? I don't recall seeing anything that would suggest this in any of the FAQ or anything.

The impression I've gotten is that this is a forum about photography and learning about photography. I've noticed that a lot of people are into putting up pictures of their children, but that doesn't make it a "family-oriented" site. Personally, I'm not so into those kind of pictures and I doubt anyones 6 year old children are coming to STF. The Challenges are just an extension of the forum so why wouldn't the same logic follow?

I understand the need to make a general rule of no nudity, but at the same time its a shame because there have been many rightfully famous nude photographs in the history of the artform. Since photography is an ART, people should understand that sometimes it might challenge their way of thinking or their morals. That's part of what makes it great!

-Aaron

miaowcat said:

I agree, Arlene, these are tasteful. You do a beautiful job with
them. I understand the point that it's a "family" site but you are
right, a swimsuit shot would (could) be much more provacative than
a glamour shot like this.

Click to expand...

I am not a learned photographer so I can't answer your question based on training, but I can say with all my 30 years of photography experience that there has never been anything glamorous about my portrait.

Ogre

Tom L. said:

First, let me say that I think Arlene's entries are perfectly
acceptable per Sarah's Challenge guidelines. They are also quite
excellent photos in their own right.

Here is the question though:

Are Glamour and Portraiture photography different art forms?

My hypothesis:
A portrait is intended to tell us something about the subject's
character or nature. Glamour photos are intended to impart a
persona to the subject that might not otherwise exist.

So are they different or is Glamour just a subset of Portraiture?

Let's hear it....

Tom L.

--
My pbase gallery - http://www.pbase.com/lyncht3
The STF Photo Challenge - http://www.stfchallenge.com/
Ron Parr's FAQ -
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html#camspecific

Click to expand...

--

Ogre - DSC-F707 - Just push the button and see what you get, it might surprise you.

I agree. Maybe "nudity" should be the next challenge topic! kidding.

Aaron Meyers said:

The impression I've gotten is that this is a forum about
photography and learning about photography. I've noticed that a
lot of people are into putting up pictures of their children, but
that doesn't make it a "family-oriented" site. Personally, I'm not
so into those kind of pictures and I doubt anyones 6 year old
children are coming to STF. The Challenges are just an extension
of the forum so why wouldn't the same logic follow?

I understand the need to make a general rule of no nudity, but at
the same time its a shame because there have been many rightfully
famous nude photographs in the history of the artform. Since
photography is an ART, people should understand that sometimes it
might challenge their way of thinking or their morals. That's part
of what makes it great!

-Aaron

miaowcat said:

I agree, Arlene, these are tasteful. You do a beautiful job with
them. I understand the point that it's a "family" site but you are
right, a swimsuit shot would (could) be much more provacative than
a glamour shot like this.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Camera Slug
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/cameraslug

very funny, Mr. Slug. Just for the record... my remark regarding "family site" was because of the comment left for Arlene's entry. I don't have any opinion on what should or should not be allowed on this site or in the challenge. Personally I don't think one of my three entries is a portrait but they fit the description enough and I wanted to participate. Oh well...

Peggy

Camera Slug said:

Aaron Meyers said:

The impression I've gotten is that this is a forum about
photography and learning about photography. I've noticed that a
lot of people are into putting up pictures of their children, but
that doesn't make it a "family-oriented" site. Personally, I'm not
so into those kind of pictures and I doubt anyones 6 year old
children are coming to STF. The Challenges are just an extension
of the forum so why wouldn't the same logic follow?

I understand the need to make a general rule of no nudity, but at
the same time its a shame because there have been many rightfully
famous nude photographs in the history of the artform. Since
photography is an ART, people should understand that sometimes it
might challenge their way of thinking or their morals. That's part
of what makes it great!

-Aaron

miaowcat said:

I agree, Arlene, these are tasteful. You do a beautiful job with
them. I understand the point that it's a "family" site but you are
right, a swimsuit shot would (could) be much more provacative than
a glamour shot like this.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Camera Slug
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/cameraslug

Click to expand...

--
Peggy - CD1000 and S85
http://www.pbase.com/puck

Actually, it is a family site. I know lots of families that look at the challenges on a regular basis. Many of the entrants and/or STFers have mentioned that their children look at the challenge galleries with them.

This is a site for photography and learning, but never rule out that a six year old WILL be looking at these pictures. Think of that before you enter a picture that may be indecent, do you want a six year old looking at them?
Besides that, the host of this challenge (me) is not old enough to drive!!!
Sarah

Aaron Meyers said:

I was looking through the current STF Challenge and I saw the
comments by the anonymous critic there and I wondered to myself, is
this really a Family site? I don't recall seeing anything that
would suggest this in any of the FAQ or anything.

The impression I've gotten is that this is a forum about
photography and learning about photography. I've noticed that a
lot of people are into putting up pictures of their children, but
that doesn't make it a "family-oriented" site. Personally, I'm not
so into those kind of pictures and I doubt anyones 6 year old
children are coming to STF. The Challenges are just an extension
of the forum so why wouldn't the same logic follow?

I understand the need to make a general rule of no nudity, but at
the same time its a shame because there have been many rightfully
famous nude photographs in the history of the artform. Since
photography is an ART, people should understand that sometimes it
might challenge their way of thinking or their morals. That's part
of what makes it great!

-Aaron

Click to expand...

--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...

Sarah said it was OK, right? Therefore, don't the photos meet the prequalifications set forth by the challenge moderator/creator? So it does not boil down to anyone's opinion unless you are talking about voting, right?

cUrVe - "...is not a black or white issue. but one with 254 shades of grey."

I think that what cUrVe said refers to people's opinions about decency, etc. There are certainly many differing opinions about this issue. But, again, this is really not a question of whether other people find something offensive but whether they should tell an artist/photographer that their work is inappropriate for this particular challenge, especially when the person making the rules accepts the photos. I guess a real problem here is that the anonymous poster does not follow the forum closely enough to realize that Sarah and Arlene already ironed out this issue (earlier thread that I can't locate right now) and that they should not be trying to interpret the challenge rules any further.

Who's to say that the next challenge wouldn't be tastefull nudes??? It is all up to the challenge creator.

LarryS

LindyLoo said:

I hear you, Joe. Remember, though, that this particular challenge
did come with a set of prequalifications (i.e, no "indecent"
shots), so the poster had as much of a right to challenge her entry
just as much as she had the right to post it.

It boils down to one person's opinion vs. another's, as cUrVe said
very well in his post, with a lot of shades of gray.

Click to expand...

DeeDee, I think you have dug a big hole for yourself here. Of course Arlene's photo is provocative. Most good photographs are, including landscapes and still lifes. The question should not be whether it is provocative but whether it is indecent.

As for any red-blooded guy "wanting" this model, would you also ban photos of Ferraris?

I'm afraid that it's impossible to impose androgyny upon the world. Men see women in a different light to the way women see women. Women see men in a different light to the way men see men. However you truss up the turkey, you won't ever change that. Are you going to ban photographs of men in the military because a lot of women get turned on by men in uniform? And what about photographs of beautiful kids taken by their loving parents? Does it not worry you that a hopefully small proportion of viewers find pictures of children provocative?

Here's a fact of life: whenever a man looks at a woman (or a woman looks at a man), the first thought which passes through their mind, consciously or unconsciously, is: Do I find this person attractive? This is true whether the subject is naked or fully clothed and nothing can stop it happening. The best you can hope for is that the vast majority of adults are decent, responsible people. Those who are not will be misinterpreting all manner of photographs posted. But the chances are that they are seeking their thrills elsewhere - in places where there are much richer pickings.

Your viewpoint simply cannot prevail unless you ban all photographs of human beings.

Simon
--
Prototype Communications, England
Design & DTP • http/ :www.pr100.com

DeeDee G. said:

Hi Arlene. I can going by definition only here:

Main Entry: pro·voc·a·tive
Pronunciation: pr&-'vä-k&-tiv
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century
: serving or tending to provoke, excite, or stimulate

• provocative noun
• pro·voc·a·tive·ly adverb
• pro·voc·a·tive·ness noun

She has a very provocative look that is conveyed IMO. She looks
like she wants to "Rip some guy to shreds, if you know what I mean."

It's an absolutely incredible picture. I would think any guy that
is a red blooded heterosexual would "want" her.

Excuse my lingo here.

Do any of you guys feel that way when looking at that picture??

Click to expand...

I can't wait for it to happen. Though I doubt anyone has the temerity for such a choice. BTW the word 'tasteful' is ambiguous. Its in the eye of the beholder. Man if a silly thread like this one can go on for 100 replies, I can only imagine the wrath of a Winner choosing a NUDE challenge. lol

LarryS said:

Who's to say that the next challenge wouldn't be tastefull nudes???
It is all up to the challenge creator.

Click to expand...

--
-photoave

Good Grief, they can take a hike, Arlene........it's a beautiful photo! of a lovely model! If that shot freaks them out, they'd be apoplectic at any beach!
Beautiful photo.......well done........excellent photography!
--
Lucy
C3020Z
pbase supporter http://www.pbase.com/lucy

Why would you say that Pbase is a family site simply because minors can (and do) look at it? We are talking about Pbase, right?

Dpreview certainly has rules about types of photos you can and can't post. But Pbase does not. (Have you ever looked at Slug's own photos on his site? I won't give a link because I wouldn't want my daughters looking at some of his stuff, even though some of it is really good art.)

Maybe we are suggesting that because the STF challenges are basically a part of the dpreview forum that they have the same rules. But the challenges are not part of dpreview and that is why we have rules for every challenge, at least I think so.

Let me ramble a bit more about families and the internet...

The internet is a great thing and it is a terrible thing. Even in our own forum (if we can call it our own) we have seen comments that most of us find quite offensive. These have lead to threats of trashing the challenges, beating people with 2x4's, shooting people, etc. These are horrible examples of what can happen on a site that is geared towards a family. Folks like Ulysses will tell us that these things happen in forums and they are to be expected. So be it but it means that I will not let my young daughters read anything on this site without my review first (when they are old enough to read, of course).

Again, I am only talking about dpreview. What happens when you venture away from this sacred ground into the open internet. Does your mom review the sites you surf for hidden links that lead to inapproriate material? Pbase is one of these sites. Photosig is another and I know that you have been their because some of your great work has been featured on that site.

I guess my point is that you almost can not classify any internet site as a family site, or at least it is difficult because I immediately think of some places that are always fairly wholesome like disney.com. Families need to experience the internet together so that when inappropriate material is found, it can be explained appropriately to young minds.

Way too much information...

Oh, yeah. I applaud the job your mom has done as a parent! You represent yourself in a very respectful manner which is getting more and more rare in people your age. Good job CindyD. And, Sarah, your art work is excellent and always getting better.

LarryS

1ofUs! said:

Actually, it is a family site. I know lots of families that look at
the challenges on a regular basis. Many of the entrants and/or
STFers have mentioned that their children look at the challenge
galleries with them.
This is a site for photography and learning, but never rule out
that a six year old WILL be looking at these pictures. Think of
that before you enter a picture that may be indecent, do you want a
six year old looking at them?
Besides that, the host of this challenge (me) is not old enough to
drive!!!
Sarah

Click to expand...

You've seen Photosig.com, right? They have an erotic category. Some really good art by some professionals. I wonder how many of us in this forum have seen this stuff and can appreciate it for its true prupose.

LarryS

I would say that the challenge galleries should be a family site, not PBase in general. The same rules that apply to DPReview should apply to the challenges, because the participants are the same.

LarryS said:

Why would you say that Pbase is a family site simply because minors
can (and do) look at it? We are talking about Pbase, right?

Dpreview certainly has rules about types of photos you can and
can't post. But Pbase does not. (Have you ever looked at Slug's
own photos on his site? I won't give a link because I wouldn't
want my daughters looking at some of his stuff, even though some of
it is really good art.)

Maybe we are suggesting that because the STF challenges are
basically a part of the dpreview forum that they have the same
rules. But the challenges are not part of dpreview and that is why
we have rules for every challenge, at least I think so.

Let me ramble a bit more about families and the internet...

The internet is a great thing and it is a terrible thing. Even in
our own forum (if we can call it our own) we have seen comments
that most of us find quite offensive. These have lead to threats
of trashing the challenges, beating people with 2x4's, shooting
people, etc. These are horrible examples of what can happen on a
site that is geared towards a family. Folks like Ulysses will tell
us that these things happen in forums and they are to be expected.
So be it but it means that I will not let my young daughters read
anything on this site without my review first (when they are old
enough to read, of course).

Click to expand...

My mother trusts me to know what is art and what is trash (at least in my opinion, which means nothing to some other people), and doesn't feel it necessary to review the sites I surf, she usually frequents them anyway, because we share the interest in photography.

LarryS said:

Again, I am only talking about dpreview. What happens when you
venture away from this sacred ground into the open internet. Does
your mom review the sites you surf for hidden links that lead to
inapproriate material? Pbase is one of these sites. Photosig is
another and I know that you have been their because some of your
great work has been featured on that site.

I guess my point is that you almost can not classify any internet
site as a family site, or at least it is difficult because I
immediately think of some places that are always fairly wholesome
like disney.com. Families need to experience the internet together
so that when inappropriate material is found, it can be explained
appropriately to young minds.

Way too much information...

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your compliments. To find people my age (or any age) that respectfully represent themselves, one has only to look.

LarryS said:

Oh, yeah. I applaud the job your mom has done as a parent! You
represent yourself in a very respectful manner which is getting
more and more rare in people your age. Good job CindyD. And,
Sarah, your art work is excellent and always getting better.

LarryS

Click to expand...

Sarah
--
CindyD or SarahD
If one of us is laughing, and the other one isn't, one of us must be wrong...

Excellent.

Simon Chapman said:

As for any red-blooded guy "wanting" this model, would you also ban
photos of Ferraris?

I'm afraid that it's impossible to impose androgyny upon the world.
Men see women in a different light to the way women see women.
Women see men in a different light to the way men see men. However
you truss up the turkey, you won't ever change that. Are you going
to ban photographs of men in the military because a lot of women
get turned on by men in uniform? And what about photographs of
beautiful kids taken by their loving parents? Does it not worry you
that a hopefully small proportion of viewers find pictures of
children provocative?

Here's a fact of life: whenever a man looks at a woman (or a woman
looks at a man), the first thought which passes through their mind,
consciously or unconsciously, is: Do I find this person attractive?
This is true whether the subject is naked or fully clothed and
nothing can stop it happening. The best you can hope for is that
the vast majority of adults are decent, responsible people. Those
who are not will be misinterpreting all manner of photographs
posted. But the chances are that they are seeking their thrills
elsewhere - in places where there are much richer pickings.

Your viewpoint simply cannot prevail unless you ban all photographs
of human beings.

Simon
--
Prototype Communications, England
Design & DTP • http/ :www.pr100.com

DeeDee G. said:

Hi Arlene. I can going by definition only here:

Main Entry: pro·voc·a·tive
Pronunciation: pr&-'vä-k&-tiv
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century
: serving or tending to provoke, excite, or stimulate

• provocative noun
• pro·voc·a·tive·ly adverb
• pro·voc·a·tive·ness noun

She has a very provocative look that is conveyed IMO. She looks
like she wants to "Rip some guy to shreds, if you know what I mean."

It's an absolutely incredible picture. I would think any guy that
is a red blooded heterosexual would "want" her.

Excuse my lingo here.

Do any of you guys feel that way when looking at that picture??

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I agree with Lucy. Is the world gone mad!! If a man with a baldhead walks into a room and takes off his hat. Would he qualify as half nude?

MickF.