Photographer
kitty_empire
Posts: 864
Brighton, England, United Kingdom
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
Bunnierabbits wrote:
fashion nudes ? It's simple really, nudes or partial/implied nudes shot with a fashion aesthetic.
Model
Gina Dee
Posts: 322
BRONX, New York, US
I'm still new here but it still surprises me that this is a big deal.
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25319
Bath, England, United Kingdom
intense puppy wrote:
Sorry to be pedantic, but nudes = no clothes. Your point?
Fashion photography is about aspiration not about clothes.
It's a common misconception that the product has to be the key element in the shot - that's just catalogue photography - often the most successful shots are where the product is merely incidental. That's why you can shoot a nude model and use the photo to sell Wellington boots if you do it right.
Sex sells. That's not to say that all nudes are sexy, but generally speaking they get more attention than non-nudes, especially if done well.
However, it's a challenge. Many photographers shoot nudes but only a few do it well. It's hard to shoot nudes well. Fashion nudes, particularly, I find interesting as there are challenges on many levels - getting the photo to look "fashiony" even with few clothes, making sure it doesn't look like glamour or cheap titillation, making it appeal to both men and women...
I was quite concerned when I started shooting fashion nudes, as I was aware that the bar of acceptability is set somewhat higher for nude work than for clothed. Shooting nudes that models (particularly fashion models) will like is a lot harder than shooting glamour nudes that the guys at the bar will like.
Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com
Photographer
kitty_empire
Posts: 864
Brighton, England, United Kingdom
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
It's a common misconception that the product has to be the key element in the shot - that's just catalogue photography - often the most successful shots are where the product is merely incidental. That's why you can shoot a nude model and use the photo to sell Wellington boots if you do it right. Maybe, maybe not.
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5214
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom
I think all photography is about desire.
Nude, clothed, whatever. It's about making an emotional connection.
The more you label the more you restrict.
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25319
Bath, England, United Kingdom
intense puppy wrote:
Maybe, maybe not. I think the number of fashion nudes in magazines like Vogue Italia etc. would indicate that it's a successful tactic when done properly.
Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com
Model
Jen B
Posts: 4474
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Anna Adrielle wrote:
I would say your avatar is glamour. I agree that the avi is glamour.
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25319
Bath, England, United Kingdom
Drew Smith Photography wrote:
Nude, clothed, whatever. It's about making an emotional connection. +1
Make your viewer want to be the model and you've taken the most important step to selling her something.
Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com
Model
Jen B
Posts: 4474
Phoenix, Arizona, US
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
...That's why you can shoot a nude model and use the photo to sell Wellington boots if you do it right.
Sex sells. That's not to say that all nudes are sexy, but generally speaking they get more attention than non-nudes, especially if done well.
...Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com
...Make your viewer want to be the model and you've taken the most important step to selling her something. Yes, sex appeal, magneticism, youth, beauty, anything interesting and a dream...sell.  I agree it is all performance and fantasy mixed in with some very fun creativity and art. This is why I love it!
Jen
Photographer
sospix
Posts: 23772
Orlando, Florida, US
If yer gonna be nekid when we shoot, then I'm gonna keep my eyes closed . . . that way it will be conceptional art . . .  SOS
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5214
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom
MyrnaByrna wrote:
Yes, sex appeal, magneticism, youth, beauty, anything interesting and a dream...sell. I agree it is all performance and fantasy mixed in with some very fun creativity and art. This is why I love it!
Jen Yup.
What's that old sales expression?
'Don't just sell the steak - sell the sizzle!'
A good sales image sells the emotion. The 'want'.
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
Bunnierabbits wrote:
fashion nudes ? It's simple really, nudes or partial/implied nudes shot with a fashion aesthetic.
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom
Gina Redd wrote:
I'm still new here but it still surprises me that this is a big deal. it's not a big deal ,
sometimes it's just confusing and this is online forum most stuff
here is not a big deal for real .
ut im not sure it's hard to explain without linking to specific
shots or portfolios which you can't do on here anyway .
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom
Drew Smith Photography wrote:
I think all photography is about desire.
Nude, clothed, whatever. It's about making an emotional connection.
The more you label the more you restrict. yea i like this ^^ but sometimes people do so
just wondering
Photographer
Bravoscape
Posts: 259
Frederick, Maryland, US
My opinion..they are both art. The first could be fashion...but I lean more to art.
Photographer
Michael Broughton
Posts: 2288
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
intense puppy wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked before but - how exactly does that work?
I mean, fashion nudes. Like dry water. Or invisible yellow.
????????? fash·ion
n.
1. The prevailing style or custom, as in dress or behavior: out of fashion.
2. Something, such as a garment, that is in the current mode: a swimsuit that is the latest fashion.
3. The style characteristic of the social elite: a man of fashion.
4.
a. Manner or mode; way: Set the table in this fashion.
b. A personal, often idiosyncratic manner: played the violin in his own curious fashion.
5. Kind or variety; sort: people of all fashions.
6. Shape or form; configuration.
Photographer
Ali Choudhry Photo
Posts: 196
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
So what would you say the nude images in my portfolio are? (namely the guy sitting on the table and the guy in leather cut off)
Model
Dane Halo
Posts: 1154
San Francisco, California, US
Bunnierabbits wrote:
ok so what exactly is the difference
Art nude's , Glamour nude's , fashion nudes ?
and where does it just become naked pictures with
no genre ?
does it have to have a genre guess not !
BUT.....
how exactly Do you decide & say this is an
"art nude" ect ect It varies from person to person, but generally:
Art nude: This image is 18+ or ![https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/101031/21/4cce431d0f4ae_m.jpg]()
Art nudes are supposed to be about form and flow. Woman's body becomes part of the scenery or IS the scenery. No one looks at the Venus di Milo and says she's sexy - it's artistic and beautiful. Think of coffee table black and white books.
Fashion nude: This image is 18+
This one is more about angles and shadow. Not generally meant to be sexy. Think Vogue.
Glamour nude: This image is 18+
(sorta)
I don't really do glam nudes, but the bottom one is sort of glammy. This one is about enticing the viewer. Words that come to mind are 'sexy' and 'hot'. Think Playboy.
Photographer
Mickle Design Werks
Posts: 5967
Washington, District of Columbia, US
I hate genres.
I think what people try to use genres what they're really trying to do is to establish some way to control judge others. it really serves more to the purpose of the person who is doing the judging and characterization than the work that's being judge.
One person's art nude is another person's glamour nude and one person's glamour nude is another's fashion nude and one persons fashion nude is another's art nude. It's all subjective and requires us to submit to the subjectivity of the authority of the person judging. So it's all relative to the weight of that person judgment. In sum it all bull shit.
Of course the problem that you always run into when trying to establish these categories is that something comes along that causes people to mischaracterize what's being represented. Take Mosh for example. Is she pin-up? Is she glamour? Is she alt fashion? Perhaps she's a combination of all of these things. She just does not fit neatly in just one box.
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Stanley L Moore wrote:
Simple..... if it is in B&W it's ART.
If it's in full color it's PORN.
LOL. If the model looks away and/or is far, it's Art.
If they look at the camera and/or is close, it's Glamour.
"Art nude" is overly-applied and often meant to suggest "Tasteful nude".
I am as guilty as any as far as doing this, and much of my work that I apply the label to is actually "Glamour nude".
"Fashion nude" seems like an oxymoron unless it involves shoes.
Photographer
Blue Mini Photography
Posts: 1703
Tempe, Arizona, US
Any nude can be an art nude.
Glamour nudes tend to be "sexy" nudes.
Fashion nudes, are nude models showing off a fashion product. Not used very much in the USA, but more often in parts of the world where people have more sense about nudity.
Photographer
Bravoscape
Posts: 259
Frederick, Maryland, US
OPs profile is gone? Maybe I got blocked lol
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom
Bravoscape wrote:
OPs profile is gone? Maybe I got blocked lol im still here and no your not ??:s
Photographer
Lawrence Guy
Posts: 17716
San Diego Country Estates, California, US
S W I N S K E Y wrote:
erotic nude makes you think about sex..
porn, shows you sex... I like this distinction.
Artist/Painter
aquarelle
Posts: 2056
Chicago, Illinois, US
Erotica often leaves you wanting to see more..... Porn often leaves you wishing you'd seen less.
Photographer
Barely StL
Posts: 1281
Saint Louis, Missouri, US
Several months ago I was chatting with a hair stylist after a shoot when he mentioned my large list (under my other MM account) of about 500 photos showing uncommon/unusual hair styles. He asked whether I liked all of them. I said no, but hair styling is (or can be) art, and who am I to judge what is and isn’t? He said, “Yes, art is in the eye of the beholder.”
Even a Supreme Court justice once said he couldn't define porn – "but I know it when I see it."
While it's fairly easy to generalize, fact is that different people will draw the lines between artistic and fashion, artistic and glamour, artistic and erotic, glamour and erotic, and erotic and porn in somewhat different places.
And one well-known photographer who specializes in erotic says his goal is to make his erotic photos artistic.
Eliminating snapshots and just plain poor photography, most nude photos fall squarely enough within one category or another that most photographers and models would give them the same classifications. It’s at the edges where the lines get a bit fuzzy.
Feel free to browse my Nudes I Like list. I'd venture to say that most people would agree that the vast majority of the photos in the list are artistic, and most of the others are fashion – but some people might classify a few of them (maybe 1-2%) as glamour – or as both artistic and erotic.
In all honesty there are a few where none of the photos in the portfolio grabbed me - but I would like to work with the model someday.
If you approach it with that mindset, you should be able to tell which are which – at least from your own perspective.
Model
Nym Faea
Posts: 650
San Francisco, California, US
Mark Salo wrote:
Look at the photographer's portfolio and discuss with the photographer. Don't be shy; discuss full nude, partial nude, etc. This. And what Ed B described.
Everyone's opinion is going to vary. What's important is that you and the photographer are on the same page. So talk about it till you know the intent.
"what is an aesthetic"
Super important question. I believe it is an overall artistic vocabulary. So, it includes all the elements of a photograph. All the nouns, verbs, adjectives, punctuation, spacing of novel. And for a personal aesthetic, it includes all the art that you have digested and what you make of it. It takes a long time to develop personal aesthetic, and it's a constantly evolving processes. Personal aesthetics are always why everyone will have a different opinion. Yes, there are some hard and fast rules, but we don't live in a world of rigidly structured, universal rules, and art sure as hell doesn't abide by any codex.
Best advice, I can give: listen to what people have to say, look at their work, consider the source, choose what information to accept and what to throw aside. I.e. remember Ed's thought out descriptions, and let the b/w vs color comments roll away with a chuckle. Then you start to get your own idea of what is what, and you'll be better able to communicate about it, both in text and through your pictures.
Photographer
John Edward
Posts: 2462
Dallas, Texas, US
Its like this.
Pretty girl wearing nothing but a smile, and a very expensive pair of shoes.
One leg is in South Dallas, and one leg is in Melissa, (North, far North Dallas).
Me and John Fisher (Name Drop) look at it, and say; "Nice lighting."
Thats Art.
If some guy in Ohio paid ten bucks to see it, thats Porn.
The bottom line is, can you show it to Mom?
Photographer
Toto Photo
Posts: 3757
Belmont, California, US
Bunnierabbits wrote:
so this is where im slightly confused my avatar would be no genre or :s If those are tracks on your left arm, I'd call it artistic.
Photographer
Alluring Exposures
Posts: 11400
Casa Grande, Arizona, US
Bunnierabbits wrote:
ok so what exactly is the difference
Art nude's , Glamour nude's , fashion nudes ?
and where does it just become naked pictures with
no genre ?
does it have to have a genre guess not !
BUT.....
how exactly Do you decide & say this is an
"art nude" ect ect Art nude = studies texture, shapes, contrasts, emotion
Glamour nude = is about the beauty, sensuality, attractiveness of the model
Fashion nude = says something about fashion (clothes, styles, accessories) by what is shown and how
Photographer
Alan Agus
Posts: 3
Jakarta, Jakarta, Indonesia
If it sells it's porn. If it doesn't it's art. Pretty simple.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
There's no such thing as fashion nudes it's some interweb model site made up thing.
I'll invent one ' fashion see-though tops'.
Photographer
Supermodel Photographer
Posts: 3309
Oyster Bay, New York, US
Bunnierabbits wrote:
what exactly is the difference
Art nude's , Glamour nude's , fashion nudes ? The first two have trespassing apostrophes.
Photographer
New Art Photo
Posts: 701
Los Angeles, California, US
EdBPhotography wrote:
My interpretation...
Art Nude - It's about light, form, lines, composition, contrasts, textures and mood. It's the kind of work I'd show on a wall inside my house and not feel uncomfortable about anyone viewing it, since it's (IMO) reminiscent of the classic oil paintings. There's almost a detachment from the model and the viewer, as if the viewer is simply looking into a scene. Models can also come in any shape, from very thin to very heavy.
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/0 … 0a4d41.jpg (18+)
Glamour Nude - It's about sexuality, beauty and titillation. There's a sort of teasing going on because the model is either communicating that with her eyes, or accentuating the erotic body parts. The model, in essence, is aware of the viewers and connecting with them in a way that communicates sexual desire. Models tend to be very curvacious and have a lot of sex appeal.
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/0 … 45d807.jpg (18+)
Fashion Nude - The focus is more on style. Hair, makeup and wardrobe are very Avant Garde, or unique. Models appear detached, but still aware of the viewer. Models also tend to be much thinner and taller, with strong facial features.
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/0 … 422f3f.jpg (18+)
Erotic Nude - Similar to artistic nudes, but there's a very strong sense of sexuality and eroticism. Fetish can be a theme, but solo acts and couples can also be seen. Either way, the images are bold and can be hard for some more conservative people to look at. There's still elements of composition, lighting and tone though, so they can be very beautiful images as well.
https://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/0 … e02b9e.jpg (18+)
Porn - Google that shit, because I can't link it here. In essence though, there's penetration, bodily fluids, unusually long cocks, and at least one guy with a pony tail.
Again, these are just my own particular definitions. +1 This seems like a pretty good explanation.
Photographer
FJR Photography
Posts: 7049
Pekin, Indiana, US
T B O L wrote:
There's plenty of 18 year olds out there that would have no difficulty explaining the differences to you though! +1
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12117
Tampa, Florida, US
c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Created for web'ee people because that's where they live on the web. Oh my, I actually thought you were kidding when you attributed Fashion Nudes as a web-only invention.
You do know Iman was doing fashion nudes in the early and mid-80's...and many many others before (long before the internet) and since.
That's not a made-up internet term like GWC.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
I'm yet to see a Vogue cover with the words 'fashion nudes'.
Edit; just received an e-mail from someone who works in the real fashion industry after asking them have they ever heard of 'nude fashion'.
Their reply was ' Isn't that called naturism'.
|
