Forums > General Industry > Has Sensationalism Gone Too Far?

Photographer

Ben Hinman

Posts: 596

Westwood, California, US

lately i've been seeing images on modelmayhem that have hundreds of comments and show up in countless lists with everyone commenting "WOW! PERFECT!" or "oh so very sexy" but all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public. And i mean, i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line? Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

Dec 31 12 12:36 pm Link

Model

angel emily

Posts: 1020

Boston, Massachusetts, US

This is MM, pretty much anyone can pick up a camera, take a few photos of their friends, and start an account.

Many may be on here to do little more than gawk and comment at the things you mention. 

Just ignore it and move on if it's not to your taste. 
The world is full of creeps, and MM is full of porn disguised as art.

Dec 31 12 12:41 pm Link

Photographer

M Pandolfo Photography

Posts: 12117

Tampa, Florida, US

So you're looking at the images too...just not commenting? Is that the gist of the thread?

Dec 31 12 12:43 pm Link

Photographer

Ben Hinman

Posts: 596

Westwood, California, US

emily, i'm not interested in any "thats life, deal with it" speeches. thats like, 90% of posts on this forum.

michael, yes, obviously i am looking at the photos. otherwise the photos i would be talking about are imaginary. -_-

Dec 31 12 01:13 pm Link

Model

angel emily

Posts: 1020

Boston, Massachusetts, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
emily, i'm not interested in any "thats life, deal with it" speeches. thats like, 90% of posts on this forum.

It's a good response to about 90% of posts, too -- yours included.

Dec 31 12 01:14 pm Link

Photographer

Ben Hinman

Posts: 596

Westwood, California, US

model emily  wrote:

It's a good response to about 90% of posts, too -- yours included.

Not really. Actually, i would have preferred no comment from you at all.

This is less of a matter of what IS and more of a matter of what SHOULD BE. When i ask if sensationalism has gone too far, i am not asking how far it has gone, i am asking if you think that is too far. If i wanted to hear another cynic tell me to buckle up and deal with the big bad hard world, i would have posted in the 'serious critique' section.

Dec 31 12 01:38 pm Link

Model

Jordan Bunniie

Posts: 1724

Los Angeles, California, US

Dec 31 12 03:51 pm Link

Photographer

DougBPhoto

Posts: 39088

Portland, Oregon, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
lately i've been seeing images on modelmayhem that have hundreds of comments and show up in countless lists with everyone commenting "WOW! PERFECT!" or "oh so very sexy" but all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public. And i mean, i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line? Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

Have you been under a rock for the last 10 years?

Dec 31 12 03:56 pm Link

Photographer

Lazyi Photography

Posts: 1224

Columbus, Ohio, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
lately i've been seeing images on modelmayhem that have hundreds of comments and show up in countless lists with everyone commenting "WOW! PERFECT!" or "oh so very sexy" but all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public. And i mean, i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line? Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

so you see people licking strange objects and suddenly think "turn-on" and "pervert"? Might say something here.
No, I don't think it turns photography into a joke, rather I see it as people expressing themselves in pictures or comments. Why spend so much time judging others?

Dec 31 12 03:58 pm Link

Photographer

Jeffrey M Fletcher

Posts: 4387

Asheville, North Carolina, US

You find licking slightly unusual objects and mildly risque toplessness shocking?

Dec 31 12 04:00 pm Link

Photographer

R L P

Posts: 1969

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

if it is well-commented and popular ... the people have spoken. many different styles, many different audiences.

Dec 31 12 04:13 pm Link

Body Painter

Monad Studios

Posts: 10036

Santa Rosa, California, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
lately i've been seeing images on modelmayhem that have hundreds of comments and show up in countless lists with everyone commenting "WOW! PERFECT!" or "oh so very sexy" but all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public. And i mean, i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line? Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

Yes, there's a line.  It's just that the line is in a different place for each person. 

Photography hasn't degraded from art into perverse eroticism and shock; it has expanded into perverse eroticism and shock.  The art continues unabated.

Dec 31 12 04:20 pm Link

Photographer

my_other_profile

Posts: 666

Ankeny, Iowa, US

Jeffrey M Fletcher wrote:
You find licking slightly unusual objects and mildly risque toplessness shocking?

You don't?

:p

Dec 31 12 04:54 pm Link

Photographer

Jeffrey M Fletcher

Posts: 4387

Asheville, North Carolina, US

my_other_profile wrote:

You don't?

:p

No, not at all.

Dec 31 12 05:25 pm Link

Photographer

my_other_profile

Posts: 666

Ankeny, Iowa, US

Choosing to assume you knew I was kidding.

Dec 31 12 05:52 pm Link

Photographer

Jeffrey M Fletcher

Posts: 4387

Asheville, North Carolina, US

my_other_profile wrote:
Choosing to assume you knew I was kidding.

I didn't refresh my memory by checking your port before answering, so no, I was playing it straight and stupid.

Dec 31 12 06:25 pm Link

Photographer

Select Models

Posts: 36284

Rancho Cucamonga, California, US

Has Sensationalism Gone Too Far?

Ben Hinman wrote:
And i mean, i'm all for shock value,

Well then didn't you just answer your own question?... roll... lol

Dec 31 12 06:37 pm Link

Photographer

salvatori.

Posts: 4021

Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public...

i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line?

Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

We see what we want to see.

Judge less, create more.

Make Art, not assumptions.

Dec 31 12 06:40 pm Link

Model

Alabaster Crowley

Posts: 8282

Tucson, Arizona, US

Sorry if this is bursting your nostalgic bubble, but there has always been shitty art.

Dec 31 12 07:06 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

Rays Fine Art

Posts: 6625

New Orleans, Louisiana, US

Ben Hinman wrote:

Not really. Actually, i would have preferred no comment from you at all.

This is less of a matter of what IS and more of a matter of what SHOULD BE. When i ask if sensationalism has gone too far, i am not asking how far it has gone, i am asking if you think that is too far. If i wanted to hear another cynic tell me to buckle up and deal with the big bad hard world, i would have posted in the 'serious critique' section.

Whether fortunately or unfortunately, most of us here are grounded in the here and now of what is.  We are really not qualified to discuss what should be.  If you want to discuss what should be, you'll probably be more satisfied with the results if you post in the forums of the Tea Party or possibly the religious right.

IMHO, as always.

Dec 31 12 08:03 pm Link

Photographer

SPRINGHEEL

Posts: 38210

Gibraltar, Michigan, US

Yeah, its terrible and they should all be burned at the stake

Dec 31 12 08:25 pm Link

Photographer

BTHPhoto

Posts: 6839

Fairbanks, Alaska, US

Ben Hinman wrote:

Not really. Actually, i would have preferred no comment from you at all.

This is less of a matter of what IS and more of a matter of what SHOULD BE. When i ask if sensationalism has gone too far, i am not asking how far it has gone, i am asking if you think that is too far. If i wanted to hear another cynic tell me to buckle up and deal with the big bad hard world, i would have posted in the 'serious critique' section.

When you start telling other people what SHOULD BE, you've crossed a much more important line than people giving positive comments to mediocre images have.  You've started attempting to dictate other peoples' behavior.  Now, let's talk about the definition of offensive ....

Dec 31 12 08:37 pm Link

Photographer

GER Photography

Posts: 8387

Imperial, California, US

Of it bothers you OP, don't look at it! TROLL!

Dec 31 12 08:43 pm Link

Model

Mischa Marie

Posts: 7892

Sacramento, California, US

lol

Dec 31 12 08:49 pm Link

Photographer

GoldRoseMedia

Posts: 2938

NORTH BRUNSWICK, New Jersey, US

You know, at first I thought this was just a clumsy attempt at trolling, but then I read the OP's profile text.

roll roll roll

Dec 31 12 09:05 pm Link

Photographer

Peach Jones

Posts: 6646

Champaign, Illinois, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
lately i've been seeing images on modelmayhem that have hundreds of comments and show up in countless lists with everyone commenting "WOW! PERFECT!" or "oh so very sexy" but all i see is naked women licking things normal people wouldn't lick, or taking their tits out in public. And i mean, i'm all for shock value, but isn't there a line? Has photography really degraded from an artistic form with countless standards of excellence to a complete joke, with only one standard--the amount of perverts it turns on or the amount of people it shocks?

I think sensationalism has gone to far in every aspect of life, and not just on MM. I almost always hate movie sequels, because the story line in almost always horrid, yet the sensationalism goes up by 400%. Everything has to be brighter, quicker, stronger, faster, louder......you get the idea. No, by saying "just deal with it" is probably not the way to go. However, I doubt you can change all of society, so instead of just "dealing with it", I have learned to appreciate the things that don't go for the louder, faster, brighter crowd.

Now, on to your point of MM. I think many different methods of art affect people differently. There are probably works on MM that 95% of the people will say "OH MY" when they see them. And the other 5% says......."boring". But there are some works that only a few people really appreciate. I have listed some works on here that some people would probably regard as total crap. But I say a glimmer of beauty, creativity and openness in the work. Therefore to me it is amazing. And I am sure there are works on here that you think the same of that I may not care for.

I could easily go on for pages, but I don't think that is what you want (you should have seen my papers in Fine Art Appreciation.....other people had just a few  paragraphs, and I had  a novel).

Dec 31 12 09:12 pm Link

Photographer

Garry k

Posts: 27808

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

model emily  wrote:
This is MM, pretty much anyone can pick up a camera, take a few photos of their friends, and start an account.

Many may be on here to do little more than gawk and comment at the things you mention. 

Just ignore it and move on if it's not to your taste. 
The world is full of creeps, and MM is full of porn disguised as art.

I tend to agree

Dec 31 12 09:17 pm Link

Photographer

Kevin Connery

Posts: 17297

El Segundo, California, US

Ben Hinman wrote:
This is less of a matter of what IS and more of a matter of what SHOULD BE.

"SHOULD BE" according to whom? Vivid Entertainment? The Taliban? Wendy Hleta, who wants to ban miniskirts and low-rise jeans as causing rape? Westboro Baptist Church? Porn stars?

Ben Hinman wrote:
When i ask if sensationalism has gone too far, i am not asking how far it has gone, i am asking if you think that is too far.

By definition, sensationalism is at or near the 'too far' limit; if it's not there, it's not sensationalism.

But it goes back to your belief in what "SHOULD BE", and how that belief relates to what the cultural mores of the larger communities you belong to--and how you express your belief in your definition over that of the community.

Jan 01 13 03:06 am Link

Photographer

Solas

Posts: 10214

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

wow. just wow..

Jan 01 13 03:12 am Link

Photographer

kitty_empire

Posts: 864

Brighton, England, United Kingdom

I opened this thread because I thought the title of "Has Sensationalism Gone Too Far?" was pretty sensationalist.

OP - people like tits and weirdness.
Get over it.
Or take up needlepoint.
Or form a pressure group called "PAWNO" ("Photographers Against Weird Naked Objectification") and try and change the world. big_smile

Jan 01 13 03:14 am Link

Photographer

DavidCoward Photography

Posts: 629

Sandy Springs, Georgia, US

Rays Fine Art wrote:
If you want to discuss what should be, you'll probably be more satisfied with the results if you post in the forums of the Tea Party or possibly the religious right.

IMHO, as always.

Why, oh why, does someone always have to make it about politics and religion?

Jan 01 13 03:26 am Link

Photographer

Drew Smith Photography

Posts: 5210

Nottingham, England, United Kingdom

Of course it's gone too far. For those people that choose to be bothered by it.

There's a difference between 'crappy' photography going to far and anti-social behaviour, for example, going to far. I'm not concerned about the former but will actively get involved to help combat the latter.

So, what is the question you are really asking?

I console myself in the knowledge that the number of people creating beautiful, inspiring art has not diminished and has probably increased too.

Try fixating on the positive and not the negative where it doesn't really matter.

Jan 01 13 04:11 am Link

Photographer

Coogan Photo

Posts: 821

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Just so you know, the model is not actually licking the wall here:
http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/071221/00/476b528918e27_m.jpg

Jan 01 13 04:19 am Link

Photographer

Amul La La

Posts: 875

Saint Austell, England, United Kingdom

Um, rain check....

Jan 01 13 04:35 am Link

Photographer

SPRINGHEEL

Posts: 38210

Gibraltar, Michigan, US

They get rid of all the tits and naked women licking things yet?

Jan 01 13 06:39 am Link

Photographer

Moonlight Romance Photo

Posts: 18

Fort Wayne, Indiana, US

The sad thing is that only positive comments are given when some critique might help these photographers and models to improve their craft. I am constantly amazed at the crap that gets praised.

Jan 01 13 06:48 am Link

Photographer

salvatori.

Posts: 4021

Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, US

I actually couldn't agree with the OP less if I tried (okay, I could try a little...), but isn't actually against site rules to leave a random negative comment on a photo?

Only sensational answers accepted...

smile

Jan 01 13 06:59 am Link

Photographer

KonstantKarma

Posts: 2513

Greenville, South Carolina, US

I never can decide if I'm amused or full of pity when I see models do silly things in the attempt to look 'sexy', and just...look silly.

Jan 01 13 07:05 am Link

Model

angel emily

Posts: 1020

Boston, Massachusetts, US

salvatori. wrote:
I actually couldn't agree with the OP less if I tried (okay, I could try a little...), but isn't actually against site rules to leave a random negative comment on a photo?

Only sensational answers accepted...

smile

From the rule book:

- No unsolicited critiques. If someone has not asked for your critical opinion of their work, please do not give one.

- Do not post anything on the Site that degrades or insults other users or their work.

So, you are correct - unless asked, it would be considered against the rules here to post a random unsolicited critique, and it would appear that any negative comment is forbidden.

And it's little surprise that many of the most highly commented photos are nude, suggestive, or glamorous -- yet state little more than "NICE ASS!" -- as I stated above, and as the OP clearly already seems to understand......

But, who places so much importance on comments...?   If want real opinions, I ask in Critique.  Or, you know, the real world - where such "play nice" rules don't exist.

smile

Jan 01 13 07:06 am Link

Photographer

MN camera

Posts: 1861

Saint Paul, Minnesota, US

Rays Fine Art wrote:
If you want to discuss what should be, you'll probably be more satisfied with the results if you post in the forums of the Tea Party or possibly the religious right.

IMHO, as always.

DavidCoward Photography wrote:
Why, oh why, does someone always have to make it about politics and religion?

Generally speaking, those are representative examples of how "the way it should be" tends toward the dictatorial.

If I don't like something, depending on what it is, I (a) don't engage in it, or (b) leave it alone, presuming (c) that it is not directly and immediately harmful to someone, or illegal, either of which would likely prompt a different response.

Jan 01 13 07:19 am Link