Clinton Winant wrote:
By way of background I was raised in a city with a wealth of museums, including perhaps the best collections of classic sculptures, certainly the best collection of impressionist paintings and 19th century sculptures, and top collections of modern art.  In my formative years I found myself completely awed by the beauty of the human body, both male and female, as well as its representation in painting, sculpture and photography.  Throughout my life I have found these representations to be a source of strength when confronting adversity.  Now I feel driven to make naked portraits.

Over the last six months, looking at MM sites on a daily basis, I have been struck by the fact that the number of photographs of naked women so far outweighs the number of photographs of naked men that it can be no coincidence.  In searching for models, I have found it very difficult to find men that are interesting in posing nude, at least way more difficult than women.  I have posted pictures of nude men on my site that have remained unviewed until I removed them.  My ability to take these shots may be the obvious reason, or is there just a lack on interest in seeing the naked male? And I wonder why is this?  This may be a naive question, but one of my colleagues in this business has pointed out to me that famous photographers (Ritts and Bitesnich to name only two) offer compelling images of both men and women, so why is the balance in the average MM portfolio so different?

I see you have not yet found the Male POTD 18+ lol

AJScalzitti wrote:
You mentioned you were raised in a town with a good access to art, is it really so different?  It has been my expierence that there is far greater use of the female form in art as well.  One could argue that the social system back then allowed for men and not really women to pursue art.  Or that men controlled the wealth and therefor were the art buyers and favored female forms.

Those days have changed and I think it simply a matter of medium.  Males favor visual art and females do not on average, so a visual medium is going to be more directed at men.  I feel it's simply a matter of aesthetics, the female form is visually more appealing to both genders on average.

Regardless there are models available for whatever your art endeavor may be.

+1 exactly
i think even if you look at classic nude paintings, the vast majority are of women rather than men. for the same reasons AJScalzitti said

Lizzy Borden wrote:

+1 exactly
i think even if you look at classic nude paintings, the vast majority are of women rather than men. for the same reasons AJScalzitti said

Oh just AJ is fine Lizzy

I think perhaps MM is a little more lopsided then maybe a pure art site would be.  Commercial photography uses way more female models, so there are more females models then male.  Also you have to figure those photographer probably end up knowing more female models because of it, so when it comes time for personal creatives who do they call?

Clinton Winant wrote:
I have posted pictures of nude men on my site that have remained unviewed until I removed them.

I have 17 female nudes one just one male nude in my portfolio:

18+

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 6#24208056

The male nude has 2,481 views and the female nude with the most views has 2,029 views. And the female nude has been posted for longer.

I can not figure out why the one male nude has so many more views than any of the female nudes.  So my experience is the exact opposite of yours.

Clinton Winant wrote:
By way of background

TL;DR

Next!

AJScalzitti wrote:
Males favor visual art and females do not on average, so a visual medium is going to be more directed at men.

Not correct. Significantly more women are entering the visual arts and going to art school these days than men.




IMO, it has a lot to with tradition. The social conditions have changed somewhat since many art historical images (which predominantly featured female nudes and were created by men) were made, but those images are still being used today to define what art is to creative people and viewers alike. Photographers and artists emulate -- both consciously and subconsciously -- the canon of "great" art that has come before them.

Additionally, there's a lot of marketing of images involved. Men have historically been the only members of a family who owned money, and while that has in general changed, women's incomes do still lag behind men's. In catering to the dominant straight male market, artists who depict conventionally attractive nude women do have a marketing advantage, which is a part of how the convention persists.

Kent Art Photography wrote:
There seems to be a mentality on MM that penises are bad, particularly among Americans.  The splitting up of the POTD18+ contests was mainly, I think, at the behest of the penis haters, I'm sure some people think that looking at pictures of naked men is either sinful, or it will turn them gay.  I don't think real life, at least in Europe, mirrors what goes on here.

I only photograph male nudes, rather than a mix.  I tend to make females look butch, and that's not good.

AJScalzitti wrote:
You mentioned you were raised in a town with a good access to art, is it really so different?  It has been my expierence that there is far greater use of the female form in art as well.  One could argue that the social system back then allowed for men and not really women to pursue art.  Or that men controlled the wealth and therefor were the art buyers and favored female forms.

Those days have changed and I think it simply a matter of medium. Males favor visual art and females do not, on average, so a visual medium is going to be more directed at men.  I feel it's simply a matter of aesthetics, the female form is visually more appealing to both genders on average.

Regardless there are models available for whatever your art endeavor may be.

This.

Nor-Cal Photography wrote:
I can not figure out why the one male nude has so many more views than any of the female nudes.  So my experience is the exact opposite of yours.

It's a more unusual nude photo and there's a prominently displayed penis, not done much.  Everyone wants to check it out.

Clinton Winant wrote:
Over the last six months, looking at MM sites on a daily basis, I have been struck by the fact that the number of photographs of naked women so far outweighs the number of photographs of naked men that it can be no coincidence.  In searching for models, I have found it very difficult to find men that are interesting in posing nude, at least way more difficult than women.

That's probably because there's probably like 10x the number of female models on sites like MM than there are men. So of course, you'll have an easier time finding females just based on sheer numbers.

Clinton Winant wrote:
I have posted pictures of nude men on my site that have remained unviewed until I removed them.  My ability to take these shots may be the obvious reason, or is there just a lack on interest in seeing the naked male? And I wonder why is this?  This may be a naive question, but one of my colleagues in this business has pointed out to me that famous photographers (Ritts and Bitesnich to name only two) offer compelling images of both men and women, so why is the balance in the average MM portfolio so different?

This observation (or complaint...I'm not sure which phrasing is more applicable) discounts the very nature of the internet. People like seeing/oggling/whatever women.

Female imagery will get probably 20x the views/comments/whatever than a greater or eqaully crafted male image. Likewise nude imagery will get 30x the comments/views/whatever than a greater or equally crafted clothed shot.

Its just the way it is.

Clinton Winant wrote:
...one of my colleagues in this business has pointed out to me that famous photographers (Ritts and Bitesnich to name only two) offer compelling images of both men and women, so why is the balance in the average MM portfolio so different?

Clinton, I'm sure that with the background in the arts that you mention you can think of notable and well known artists who were specialists in gender portrayals and those that were generalists. Although I can certainly think of examples beyond those mentioned in your op where the artist portrayed both genders, I think of more artists who were specialists, if not wholly then at least to a substantial extent. Edward Weston and Helmut Newton come to mind as examples, as does Mapplethorpe.

Neither does it seem to me to be an unusual specialization. If I look at the paintings of Michelangelo there seems to be scant evidence that he was much concerned with female models or form even when portraying females (someone once described a female nude by Michelangelo as a male with a couple of grapefruit halves stuck on the chest). Botticelli on the other hand doesn't show much of Michelangelo's interests or use of models of that body type. 

I do agree that our aesthetic and portrayal of male nudity in popular culture and low art forms is fragmentary and constricted, and that this problem exists to a greater extent with male nudes than with females nudes.


And I need to ask how you decided on the term naked portraits. Is there some special reference or meaning ?

Clinton Winant wrote:
Now that is brilliant!  So much more interesting than a debate...  PLEASE post them.

Clinton Winant wrote:
Throughout my life I have found these representations to be a source of strength when confronting adversity.  Now I feel driven to make naked portraits.

You find spiritual strength in looking at naked people?

I can see it now: The Church of the Naked Danglybits

Clinton Winant wrote:
why is the balance in the average MM portfolio so different?

Probably because there are far more heterosexual male photographers represented on llama Mayhem than any other demographic (at least, within the scope of those holding the cameras.) If the photographer community here was largely homosexual men, you would see more naked men.

You're thinking about this entirely too much.

Clinton Winant wrote:
You are absolutely right.  What I was trying to say is that there seems to be a disparity, that is not reflected in the works of the Great.  Sorry for the confusion.

Many factors in play.

1. There are more male photographers on MM then female.

2. Most of those male photographers only shoot women.

3. Of the few women photographers, MOST of them only shoot women....

So this makes MM mostly images of women.

Even though I advertise I shoot both as well as transgender.
80% of my clients are women, the funny part is MOST of the booking drama comes from men looking for something OTHER then a photo shoot.

This is what pushes the few remaining women into cutting off the few remaining (good male clients) because they are sick of booking less then 1 in 10 men who call, and getting harassed 9 in 10 calls...