Reading mode: Light Dark

What are appropriate photos to be posted here? Just got the Misha thread deleted.

Go to last post
Y

Yaamon

Senior Member
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
19
Location
Markham, Ontario, CA
Just got my first warning that the images were not acceptable and in a sexual nature and had the thread with Misha deleted.

Guess some closed minded person could not accept a beautiful photo's of a woman and complained. I swear I have seen similar photos to mine posted here before? I know the photos had no full nude body.

Just wondering what are the exact guide lines and was wondering which photos were not acceptable so I don't post in the future?

Thanks
--
Canon 5D II, 7D & Nikon D7000
 
Don't know why your stuff got taken down. They seemed ok to me. Newspaper man often posts similar stuff and never has a problem. If in doubt stick to cats dogs and brick Walls and batteries as focus targets!!
 
Glamour / Sexual content images - Please do not embed such images in your messages, while we understand that such pictures (tastefully shot) are a big part of commercial photography we do have a worldwide audience and wide range of paying advertisers. If you wish to bring a gallery of such images to peoples attention then please just post a link.

Per: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/rules.asp?forum=

That being said I have been a member here for almost 6 years and I have to say that the rules get bent in almost every direction. Typically what I have seen is if you put NSFW on the title, post a few semi-work safe shots, and then link to anything that may be too extreme the thread seems to have few problems.

But it also depends upon which forum you post in. Some members in the gear forums seem to only want to talk about gear and don't have much patience for pictures. They will be the first to respond that a picture posted has no purpose to the forum unless you have a specific question.

The lighting forum is much more laid back and pictures are well received, especially if you describe the type of lighting used regardless if you had a question or not. Misha's pictures would have been well received there.

In the end it is sort of a post and see type environment. fredmiranda is a much easier forum to post pictures on.... but sometimes I see way too many positive comments on just average shots.

John

--

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c If you find any extra letters, please place them here for future use...
 
I find the whole issue of "appropriateness" to be the pinnacle of duplicity and of all sorts of political and religious censorship. One group bans the depiction of breasts; another one bans the depiction of female noses; another group bans the depiction of images of revered persons; another bans yet something else. Yet most of these same groups do not ban the depiction of blatantly revolting violence.

So one ends up seeing pictures of vegetation, cats and dogs (in "appropriate" activities), fruits, vegetables, buildings, and the like.

And given that most patrons of gear-focused forums like to talk endlessly about gear only, perhaps the most "appropriate" images here are ones of resolution charts.

Yawn.
 
Wow , not even glamor is to be posted.. So a head shot of someone dressed up and looking good is a no no.

Because dp review don't even allow glamor my other post with Nadia will get deleted too.

I know rules are rules but not to be able to post glamor. :)

Well at least DP allows links. :)
--
Canon 5D II, 7D & Nikon D7000
 
Wow, didn't know that they took your thread down. My suggestion is just to put a link on the 'super sexy' images and maybe just embed no more than three of the non-sexy ones (if they are all super sexy, then you have a problem :-)
Yaamon said:
Wow , not even glamor is to be posted.. So a head shot of someone dressed up and looking good is a no no.

Because dp review don't even allow glamor my other post with Nadia will get deleted too.

I know rules are rules but not to be able to post glamor. :)

Well at least DP allows links. :)
--
Canon 5D II, 7D & Nikon D7000
Click to expand...
--
Grand slam
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/7d_roberta
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/cali_apr2010_faves
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/mel2_5dmkii
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/sonya_50d
 
Jose for Misha shoot I started out with swim wear and then jumped right into lingerie and then nude. :)

Next time will just show clothing and bikini and lingerie will post the links.
--
Canon 5D II, 7D & Nikon D7000
 
.. to the "other" pictures would not be un-appreciated ;-) (and tolerated)
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '
 
Again I think it has to do with which forum you are posting in. I saw your original post (now have you as one of my favorites at pbase) and wondered why you had posted it in this forum. As I said you are very good with your use and placement of studio lights and your post would have done much better in the Lighting forum and would have created more questions/comments without the complaints.

John
--

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c If you find any extra letters, please place them here for future use...
 
Yaamon said:
Wow , not even glamor is to be posted..
Click to expand...
That's because glamour is regarded by many (myself included) as often seedy and a bit grubby.

Surely if it's just a head and shoulders, then it won't look any different to a portrait or a fashion shoot? In that case I'd say it'll be allowed.

But glamour (The pre 1960s term was Erotic Photography) is something else, now I don't know if what you shoot is glamour or not.

Wikipedia says "glamour photography stops short of deliberately arousing the viewer and being pornographic photography."

But I guess how fa short, is a subjective thing.

If in doubt then don't post it. Just because you and many don't find it offensive, doesn't mean others won't.

Edit: I've seen your pbase. I didn't see anything seedy or grubby there, but then I wouldn't have classified it as glamour. Seems like PD are running a very very tight ship (Better that than a sinking ship!)
 
furano said:
Yaamon,

Do you have in your pbase some info on your lighting set up?
What's the link?

Thanks
--
Jorge

Topaz Group
http://www.flickr.com/groups/topaz/

atncentral
http://www.atncentral.com/
Click to expand...
Hi Jorge, Im currently away in the British Virgin Island when I get back I can take a photo but the setup is pretty simple.

I have two strobes on the back ground. One strobe to the model left and very close 3' away the space is tight. This light is at 45' to the model and pointed down at 40'. Did not have the height to point it down at 45'. Where the model stands I meter the main at F8 and the fill is on axis to the model but a little further away 6-7 feet away and metered at F5.6.

With both light combined I remeter and get F9 but I set the camera at F8. The back ground lights I metered at F11-F12

Hope that helps.
--
Canon 5D II, 7D & Nikon D7000
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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