Reading mode: Light Dark

Danger: Hard Core Porn Shots

  • Thread starter Thread starter James Sarantis
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
Scott Fleming said:
If this doesn't help you with your moral vacuity then go to a
prison and interview some of the really sick guys there. They all
love porn and have been immersed in it since kids. Gee, I wonder if
there is a cause and effect relationship there?
Click to expand...
Did you know that 99% of the murders in US prisons drank milk as children? It must be a cause and effect relationship!!!
 
You don't get out much do you? You stay in your protected little neighborhood, travel the same freeway everyday to your safe little job, and have no idea what's actually going on out there do you. I realize it's too scarry for you to go find out on your own so just go down to the local cop shop and watch the parade. Talk to the cops. They'll dissbuse you of your foolishness.
 
Scott Fleming said:
You don't get out much do you? You stay in your protected little
neighborhood, travel the same freeway everyday to your safe little
job, and have no idea what's actually going on out there do you. I
realize it's too scarry for you to go find out on your own so just
go down to the local cop shop and watch the parade. Talk to the
cops. They'll dissbuse you of your foolishness.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you have no idea what Paul's "safe little job" is, huh?
 
Scott Fleming said:
You don't get out much do you? You stay in your protected little
neighborhood, travel the same freeway everyday to your safe little
job, and have no idea what's actually going on out there do you. I
realize it's too scarry for you to go find out on your own so just
go down to the local cop shop and watch the parade. Talk to the
cops. They'll dissbuse you of your foolishness.
Click to expand...
 
lhsmith,

Thanks! Next time I'm trapped in a warehouse by foreign agents I'll use that but not in those office buildings!

BC
 
Andreas,

Very much agreed. What you say about some people in that industry needing help is true but I have had a number of neighbors that were just as bad off.

I suppose that the reason we wear clothes is that there is only one pigment in our bodies and there isn't a lot of color range. Fashion makes us more interesting and that is why porn shots are basically boring and in most cases uninteresting.

BC
 
Scott,

My original comment was based upon the first statement that simple nudity is porn. That was what the original poster was commenting about.

I do pose to you the question " is a crack whore a whore first or is she on crack first". I think that sex and drugs do go hand in hand and not only in porn but in Hollywood and in NY fashion and in a Nebraska neighborhood. Men use alcohol, weed, coke etc. to loosen up women. Men have always had to use something to loosen up women. And some women and men become addicted to drugs like they are also addicted to tobacco and their lives go to hell. That is a psychological problem.

One time a roomate said that if people took their kids to a nude beach it would screw up their minds. I said not. So I asked a clinical psychologist the question to see who was right. He said we both were. How is that I asked? He said because my roomate felt that way his kids would be screwed up and because I felt the other way mine wouldn't. We imprint our morals upon our children. My guess is that you came from a very strict household.

BC

PS. I do get out and I do live in a big city and I have seen those problems you speak of but sex or porn didn't do it. Most women that I have known that have had problems were messed up because of **** or abuse and it is well known and recognized that **** and abuse are not considered to be sex. I got out once to a place called Vietnam in 1969 and I've seen worse things than you mention and they weren't caused by sex either. In a nutshell nudity isn't sex or porn to me. But in Victorian times an exposed ankle may have been porn. It is just what you are taught to believe.
 
William,

Go ahead and post the statue pictures but please also use Photoshop to put some pants on them. And for everyone else I'm offended by naked animals they should also have pants.

BC
 
BC32072 said:
What you say about some people in that industry
needing help is true but I have had a number of neighbors that were
just as bad off.
Click to expand...
That's true too. But I wouldn't make porn only responsible for everything bad in this world.
BC32072 said:
I suppose that the reason we wear clothes is that there is only one
pigment in our bodies and there isn't a lot of color range.
Fashion makes us more interesting and that is why porn shots are
basically boring and in most cases uninteresting.
Click to expand...
:-) ...one can do a lot even with one pigment only; there are more than a couple of excellent monochrome nude pictures out there, for example.

But I think it's important to get the terminology right when discussing this issue. I make a distinction between...
  • Showing nudity
  • Showing primary sexual organs
  • Showing sexual "acts" of some sorts
Further, one also has to be careful in labeling the drawers: Strictly speaking, the expression "pornography" is a legal term only. On the other hand, a lot of people include in the word "porn" everything which might be "potentially sexually arousing". Sorting out the terminolog should come befor discussing the cultural depenence of attitudes towards the nude / sexuality in general. This is my explication why this thread is a bit "confusing".

Further, in photography, things like "nudes", "classcial figures", certain types of "glamour photography", "erotic photography" and so on are separate disciplines, each having its own masters and techniques.

Above, you talked about wearing cloths or no cloths, respectively. Showing skin has not much to do with "porn" for me, at least.

it's an interesting topic, in my opinion. Even if one does not like porn, one cannot ignore its existence and as a photographer, one somehow has to develop an opinion about it. I do nude shots from time to time, and I learnt a lot when doing these little projects - there are many issues involved that are much more interesting than the "pigments" only.

Andi

--
http://www.andreassteiner.net/photography
 
Geeze do you even know what I do ? None of the below for sure. I wasn't calling you a liar as you are beyond knowing the truth so clouded are your biased opinions. I was calling you a idiot... and thanks for confirming my opinion with your moronic reply to that post.
Scott Fleming said:
You don't get out much do you? You stay in your protected little
neighborhood, travel the same freeway everyday to your safe little
job, and have no idea what's actually going on out there do you. I
realize it's too scarry for you to go find out on your own so just
go down to the local cop shop and watch the parade. Talk to the
cops. They'll dissbuse you of your foolishness.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting. So far the only two responses to these questions are from someone who seems to think all people with religious beliefs are hypocrites and from someone who is completely sexually amoral. Are these the prevailing views on this forum?
SteveB Ohio said:
May I propose a simple poll of attitudes? Here are some questions
for any and all to answer:

1. Do you find hardcore pornography offensive?

2. Do you believe that hardcore porn is a valid form of artistic
expression?

3. Would you ever shoot it, given the opportunity?

4. If you feel it is a harmless form of sexual expression, would
you have any problems if your daughter was a porn star? Your wife?
Your sister?

5. Do you believe that this kind of material can be addictive?

6. Do you think most people who are opposed to hardcore porn are
uptight or sexually repressed?

7. Do you believe that there are moral absolutes with respect to
sexual expression?

8. Do you believe the money that the porn industry generates
justifies the exploitation of women and the climate of drug abuse
that surrounds it?

9. Do you believe that women who perform in this industry do so
because they genuinely enjoy it?

10. Do you have any religious convictions, and if so, what are they?

Just some questions to ponder.

Oh, to keep it on topic, if you were going to shoot this material,
would you use a D60 or a 1D? ;-)
Click to expand...
 
Hmm... Don... There you are again.

Tell me: Have you ever been outside your own country (let alone your home state)? Mexico/Canada doesn't count.

Hint: American news organisations are fairly good at keeping a low profile when it comes to issues that damage the reputation of your own country. I guess it's an advertising thing. (who wants to advertise their products on a commercial TV station that seemingly says bad things about their own country?)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/
 
Andreas,

I agree with you on most topics but you must see that you are creating a set of definitions of porn for YOURSELF. And you have the right to do that BUT people who do that shouldn't lay that template down onto society. Religious organizations do this regularly and on innumerable occasions the practitioners and preachers are caught red handed doing the very things they preach against i.e. Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Baker, Priests molesting boys etc.

Yes there is more to shooting nudes than just pigments. I was only mentioning that as one thing. At one time wasn't porn defined as nudity or sex without any socially redeeming value? Wow! What if we defined product photos or journalism by their social value. That would cull out some shots.

BC
Andreas Steiner said:
Member said:
What you say about some people in that industry
needing help is true but I have had a number of neighbors that were
just as bad off.
Click to expand...
That's true too. But I wouldn't make porn only responsible for
everything bad in this world.
Member said:
I suppose that the reason we wear clothes is that there is only one
pigment in our bodies and there isn't a lot of color range.
Fashion makes us more interesting and that is why porn shots are
basically boring and in most cases uninteresting.
Click to expand...
:-) ...one can do a lot even with one pigment only; there are more than a couple of excellent monochrome nude pictures out there, for example.

But I think it's important to get the terminology right when
discussing this issue. I make a distinction between...
  • Showing nudity
  • Showing primary sexual organs
  • Showing sexual "acts" of some sorts
Further, one also has to be careful in labeling the drawers:
Strictly speaking, the expression "pornography" is a legal term
only. On the other hand, a lot of people include in the word "porn"
everything which might be "potentially sexually arousing". Sorting
out the terminolog should come befor discussing the cultural
depenence of attitudes towards the nude / sexuality in general.
This is my explication why this thread is a bit "confusing".

Further, in photography, things like "nudes", "classcial figures",
certain types of "glamour photography", "erotic photography" and so
on are separate disciplines, each having its own masters and
techniques.

Above, you talked about wearing cloths or no cloths, respectively.
Showing skin has not much to do with "porn" for me, at least.

it's an interesting topic, in my opinion. Even if one does not like
porn, one cannot ignore its existence and as a photographer, one
somehow has to develop an opinion about it. I do nude shots from
time to time, and I learnt a lot when doing these little projects -
there are many issues involved that are much more interesting than
the "pigments" only.

Andi

--
http://www.andreassteiner.net/photography
Click to expand...
 
lhsmith said:
Scott Fleming said:
Society places taboos on sick sexual practices for the same reasons
they outlaw things like child abuse, ****, murder, etc etc. It
kills innocent people and children.

If this doesn't help you with your moral vacuity then go to a
prison and interview some of the really sick guys there. They all
love porn and have been immersed in it since kids. Gee, I wonder if
there is a cause and effect relationship there?
Click to expand...
Scott, the evils you mention (and they are that!) are
frequently-but-not-necessarily associates with "porn" (the
generalization). And every one of them can be found UN-associated
with "porn".

I always wonder how someone with your obvious fervor on this topic
explains the millions of ordinary, well-balanced, law-abiding,
drug-free, good-parenting, citizens, who occasionally enjoy (and
more often are disappointed-by), an erotic video, ...yes, maybe
even hard-core.

How do you explain the fact that despite having been among this
group a few times, I have yet to molest my first child, or even to
THINK of doing it.

Most "crusaders" simply DON'T attempt any explanation, choosing
instead to ignore the existence of these facts, because they don't
lend themselves to the argument that pornography is patently the
work-of-the-Devil.

Multiply my experience/inclinations by millions, and you have quite
a case to show that porn (meaning explicit sexual videos, etc.) is
not IN ITSELF harmful. Other elements are at work (child abuse,
white slavery,drugs, etc.).

There are laws against most of those "other elements", as there
should-be, and yes they fail to protect everyone, ...as do all laws.

But the blanket condemnation of "porn", is off-the-mark, and is
usually done by those with a particular set of concepts re."sin"
etc.

Just as there are un-harmed viewers of porn, so are there unharmed
producers/actors-actresses, etc. The "world" of porn, like the
rest of the world has its better/worse situations. But certainly
not all who participate are "slaves", or drooling perverts.

This topic is a can-of-worms if there ever was one, so I'll make no
further comment on this in this thread.

Just wanted to cast a vote for keeping the baby while dumping dirty
water.

Engaging-in, or watching, sexual activity (or depictions of it) and
viewing the nude human body are NOT in-themselfves harmful to
well-adjusted adults who choose to do so.

Let's keep our balance, (and these facts in-mind) when setting out
to save others.

Larry
Click to expand...
--

 
Thailand,Belgum/Oslo was nice/You've never met Will Rogers have you?
Rune Moberg said:
Hmm... Don... There you are again.

Tell me: Have you ever been outside your own country (let alone
your home state)? Mexico/Canada doesn't count.

Hint: American news organisations are fairly good at keeping a low
profile when it comes to issues that damage the reputation of your
own country. I guess it's an advertising thing. (who wants to
advertise their products on a commercial TV station that seemingly
says bad things about their own country?)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/
Click to expand...
--

Keep life in focus. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Brownie Hawkeye, Kodak 110, C3, Canon 28-70L 2.8, 50mm 1.8, 35-105 3Argus .5-4.5, 28-70 3.5-4.5,EOS 3, EOS 630, EOS 650, FTB.
 
BC32072 said:
I agree with you on most topics but you must see that you are
creating a set of definitions of porn for YOURSELF.
Click to expand...
Partially - execpt the definition of "pornography", which has a strictly legal origin. No lawyers / law students here in this forum???
BC32072 said:
And you have
the right to do that BUT people who do that shouldn't lay that
template down onto society.
Click to expand...
I'm not doing that, and I emphasized on that in other postings here in this thread, I think.

Andi

--
http://www.andreassteiner.net/photography
 
lhsmith said:
I always wonder how someone with your obvious fervor on this topic
explains the millions of ordinary, well-balanced, law-abiding,
drug-free, good-parenting, citizens, who occasionally enjoy (and
more often are disappointed-by), an erotic video, ...yes, maybe
even hard-core.
Click to expand...
There are degrees to all things, of course. I think what Scott is saying is that the porn industry tends to attract and foster much more than its share of the dark side of society. Those who ignore this are simply choosing to be blind.
Larry H. Smith said:
How do you explain the fact that despite having been among this
group a few times, I have yet to molest my first child, or even to
THINK of doing it.
Click to expand...
And yet those who do molest children or who commit other sexual crimes will almost unanimously tell you that they are obsessed with hardcore pornography... and it started out as a "casual" interest. There are also plenty of "casual" drug users who will swear that it hasn't affected them, either. Yet.
Larry H. Smith said:
Multiply my experience/inclinations by millions, and you have quite
a case to show that porn (meaning explicit sexual videos, etc.) is
not IN ITSELF harmful. Other elements are at work (child abuse,
white slavery,drugs, etc.).
Click to expand...
And there is also overwhelming evidence that children who are exposed to this kind of material grow up with a very distorted view of sex and male/female relationships. Even the "responsible" porn providers recognize this by attempting to restrict access from those who are underage. Now the logical question to ask is, if we must be so diligent to protect our kids from seeing this kind of junk, then what business do we, as responsible adults, have in supporting it ourselves? In my mind, that is the highest form of hypocricy.

"Mommy, where did I come from?" "Here, let me show you Daddy's copy of 'Debbie Does Dallas.".....
Larry H. Smith said:
But the blanket condemnation of "porn", is off-the-mark, and is
usually done by those with a particular set of concepts re."sin"
etc.
Click to expand...
Even if you don't agree with the concept of "sin" you have to look at the evidence: there are far more negative results from porn than can be offset by claims of its "good" aspects. Pornography is just one symptom of a sexually-ill society that is also characterized by increasingly deadly STDs, abortion, child abuse, divorce, sexual slavery, prostitution, drug abuse, etc. You might not like the word "sin," but few would say that any of these things have a positive effect on society. If you agree that these things are "bad," then why even trifle with one aspect of it because you might find it entertaining from time to time?
Larry H. Smith said:
Just as there are un-harmed viewers of porn, so are there unharmed
producers/actors-actresses, etc. The "world" of porn, like the
rest of the world has its better/worse situations. But certainly
not all who participate are "slaves", or drooling perverts.
Click to expand...
You have to define "harm" without assuming it always means the extreme. One documented harmful effect of porn is that it damages relationships between husbands and wives by giving unrealistic expectations. In the porn world, everything is bigger, more beautiful, more willing, more frequent, etc. Things are just not that way in the real world. It also desensitizes those who use it to the real beauty of sexual relationships, and tends to dehumanize people. Women are portrayed as receptacles who have a never-ending desire for sex; men are portrayed as machines that can always perform at the drop of a hat, etc.
Larry H. Smith said:
This topic is a can-of-worms if there ever was one, so I'll make no
further comment on this in this thread.
Click to expand...
More like a sewer than a can of worms! :-)
Larry H. Smith said:
Just wanted to cast a vote for keeping the baby while dumping dirty
water.
Click to expand...
The difference is that pornography tends to keep the water dirty no matter how often you try dumping it out. Eventually the baby will be affected.
Larry H. Smith said:
Engaging-in, or watching, sexual activity (or depictions of it) and
viewing the nude human body are NOT in-themselfves harmful to
well-adjusted adults who choose to do so.
Click to expand...
That's a true statement that comes with a LOT of variables. Most people who view this kind of material do not do so with the same kind of casual motivation that they would in, say, eating an ice cream cone. There are very strong forces at work there. People can and do get addicted to it without even realizing it. If it is just casual innocent entertainment, why is the porn industry so huge, and why is it largely controlled by organized crime? Where do most of the women come from who perform in these movies/pictures?

On-Topic paragraph: To use an excellent camera such as the D30/60 or 1D on such trash is a pitiful waste of a good tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Flycaster
Hobbyist's shots: Worth printing?
Replies
17
Views
18
Flycaster
Flycaster
Satyaa
Opinions on 400mm zooms for Z7ii ??
2
Replies
21
Views
444
olyflyer
olyflyer
NowHearThis
  • User review User review
My Wandrd Rogue 9L Sling Review
2
Replies
30
Views
979
Bast Hotep
Bast Hotep
O
Photography versus mobile story telling
Replies
6
Views
230
Ferenc MOGOR
Ferenc MOGOR
O
Photo for Diagonal Aliasing and Moire 45 deg, 22.5 deg
Replies
2
Views
68
J A C S
J A C S

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top