|
Forums >
General Industry >
full frontal male photos-yes or no?
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica If one wants to ponder why men have body issues, one needs only to read some replies in this thread. If I described a vagina as sad, unattractive, or in any way less than beautiful, there would be a public outcry for the castration of my 'ugly balls.' Fuck, this is a cruel and sad world...  Nov 25 11 11:27 am Link Shon D.- Femme wrote: if it's well shoot and lit ... as Art, I agree Nov 25 11 11:42 am Link JSL wrote: The worst part is the majority of the disgusted comments are coming from other males. Nov 25 11 12:00 pm Link I won't hire a model for nude unless they have full frontal nudes on their portfolio. I won't hire a model for erotic nudes unless they have erection images on their portfolio. Simple. Nov 25 11 12:08 pm Link JSL wrote: Agreed... Nov 25 11 12:09 pm Link Charlotte_Sometimes wrote: Erection images aren't allowed on MM, so you may be selling yourself a bit short there. Nov 25 11 12:11 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: "short"? Oh, wish I had come up with that first! Nov 25 11 12:16 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: Artists no less. Nov 25 11 12:37 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: So, if a male model is shot standing on his head, penis going toward his shoulders and the floor, is it an erection? Nov 25 11 12:40 pm Link Flex Photography wrote: No, because it's still not pointing up, is it? Nov 25 11 12:42 pm Link Ok i just looked at OPs Port with 'penis out' photos, and i honestly really do not want to have to see pictures like that again. Sorry male nudes are not for me. I dont particularly like female nudes but i guess i can see that the hour glass figure of a female is inviting to Photograph.......but a male? nooooooooo Nov 25 11 12:52 pm Link Elle Richie wrote: So, you just don't like humans being naked, basically. Nov 25 11 12:54 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica What cracks me up is when I look at the 18+ POTD entries. Legs spread, with genitalia just hanging there; this ugly pink color, shriveled skin all limp and crooked and some of them are either disgustingly small or big and fat - either way.... YUK! And those are just the female nudes. Things that make you go Mmm ........ Nov 25 11 12:59 pm Link Well stated. In this world, no matter what you do, somewhere it will be wrong and somewhere it will be ok. MM seems to have a bias towards anything with erotic potential = porn, and if it is asexual it can be artistic. That is a big line in the sand, where a gratuitous cheesy bikini shot could be artistic to the beholder or the model who feels she is more "classy" than a nude model" and an explicit nude is considered raunchy, trashy, etc. This is a cognitive bias to this tribe. It is and it is not the real world, depending on who you ask. At the end of the day, I think "intent" drives the equation. I like it all, done with intent and great execution. I have a good filter for naysayers as I try to do the best I can regardless of the genre. While I don't have a ton of experience shooting penises of either flavor, if I were commissioned you can bet that I would take the artistic challenge regardless of tumescence or lack thereof. Good Egg Productions wrote: Nov 25 11 01:01 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elle Richie wrote: So says the woman with a topless pic in her portfolio... Nov 25 11 01:03 pm Link Elizabeth, I believe that this has been programmed into us for centuries. It is a brave model who can buck the system with pride. I like to recount the courtesans to my models who wonder about the long standing tradition of power relating to being nude, whereby the Catholic Church got a little uncomfortable with those women having all that power. The Spanish Inquisition fixed that and we have had a few years of programming that "naughty bits" are in fact, naughty. Many models and regular humans don't really know what genitalia looks like and it scares them. The source of life is a powerful energy and as a society we are supposedly too civilized to be taken by such primal urges, but we all know that the primal urges win, albeit usually in the dark of night. I blab too much, Elizabeth, and you get to the point. Bravo. Elizabeth Claret wrote: Nov 25 11 01:05 pm Link JSL wrote: You know, you were fine with your earlier comment. Nov 25 11 01:06 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: Flex Photography wrote: No, because it's still not pointing up, is it?
JSL wrote:
Nov 25 11 01:07 pm Link JSL wrote: NUDES. as in VAGINA out in picture. The topless pic was for a magazine...i personally dont see the point in Nudes. Nov 25 11 01:07 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elle Richie wrote: Thanks. I was wondering what to do with the next ten seconds of my life and now I know I will spend it figuring out the logic in your reply. Nov 25 11 01:09 pm Link JSL wrote: wow you are so witty. i am pretty sure this topic was designed to gain peoples opinion on male nudes. Nov 25 11 01:10 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elizabeth Claret wrote: Well, my first wife painted a bullseye on my head and my second wife printed up a set of instructions on how to hit it most efficiently. Nov 25 11 01:11 pm Link Oh JSL im leaving this topic you clearly have some underlying issues with your own naked body. Um go photograph some naked ladies with their legs spread and call it 'art' Nov 25 11 01:14 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elle Richie wrote: Okay, I will be respond completely without sarcasm. Nov 25 11 01:14 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elle Richie wrote: Only if you promise to go fuck yourself. Nov 25 11 01:15 pm Link Im afraid i don't have enough time, got too much work on as a 'professional' model sorry! Nov 25 11 01:15 pm Link But I do think it's absurd how the male body is ridiculed - especially with an erection. Hell, it's a perfectly natural state for males to be in, and it's so sad to me that our society in general looks at male images as dirty and disgusting. It's actually shocking to me how many men (and women) find the male body appalling. I completely agree with the above statement. As one of the few women who shoot only male models, most of the time I would rather shoot the implied. But seriously, there are artistic ways to show, without being what others call 'pornographic'. My honest opinion, do what is comfortable for you, only you. Talk with the photographer ahead of time of their vision vs. your vision. I always talk with the model before I shoot them nude, so we both are on the same page. Sometimes seeing is good, other times, implied is much better. I show both on my portfolio. My honest opinion, most of the 18+ women on the contest and portfolios, should be considered pornographic, if the men are. Women should also show implied. But then I prefer the more sensual side. Unfortunately in our Society, where it's okay for the woman to spread her legs and show it all and it's okay, the male is not. It is considered pornographic or gay, when in actuality it is not. Just Sayin' Nov 25 11 01:18 pm Link Elle Richie wrote: There's enough irony in this post to feed an anemic. Nov 25 11 01:21 pm Link Elle Richie wrote: Except when they pay? Elle Richie wrote: Elle Richie wrote: Elle Richie wrote:
Nov 25 11 01:27 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: If that were really the case, if what created the "lines" in your images didn't really matter, you could shoot still life images of fruits and vegetables instead. It would be a lot cheaper, more original, and in many ways easier. You also wouldn't have many worries with censorship, and the number of venues where you could exhibit your work would increase dramatically. Nov 25 11 01:34 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Well, now that I have taken some time to drink some Jack Daniels and regain my composure, I feel strongly about two things: 1. a windmill/beard is funny... and, 2. taking a picture of a girl with her legs spread is not only 'art,' it's just plain fun... Nov 25 11 01:39 pm Link Glen Berry wrote: I do that as well. Nov 25 11 01:40 pm Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Elizabeth Claret wrote: Funny you should mention this. My Dad was just at the doctor's and he was told he was anemic. Nov 25 11 01:40 pm Link Through Elizabeths Eyes wrote: Model Mayhem isn't the only site that I use... I was just talking generally. Nov 25 11 01:42 pm Link Elizabeth Claret wrote: Fruits and veggies. TOTALLY a new euphemism. Nov 25 11 01:46 pm Link T n K Arts wrote: Thanks for TRYING to get this threat back on topic. Nov 26 11 04:58 am Link George Ruge wrote: +1 Nov 26 11 05:03 am Link I think it's got something to do with the (mostly American) notion that looking at pictures of naked men will turn a man gay. The POTD18+ competition is going to be split into separate male and female competions, see the discussion page https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thre … 713&page=1 because there's a loud body of opinion that thinks only pictures of naked females are acceptable. Nov 26 11 05:16 am Link Ronald Nyein Zaw Tan wrote: +1 Nov 26 11 05:17 am Link S W I N S K E Y wrote: I've seen some pretty aesthetically upsetting female nudes! Nov 26 11 05:18 am Link |
