|
Would appreciate coments on this. I've been told numerous times my work not yet to required quality to collaberate with. And I have no issues with that. (I know where I rank on the totem pole of quality and its nearer bottom than top - for now :-) ). But I'm hurt by the one off 'porn' claim. ;-) Please tell me if I should be concerned by this girl's view Jun 12 13 12:25 am Link Natural Means wrote: And you believe everything you're told? Jun 12 13 12:41 am Link hahahahaha, 1st thing i`d do is check out the "porn" poster`s profile for any trace of levels beyond burkha lol, checked out your nudes section and there`s nothing I would consider goes close. Dismiss it as a crank and move on lol. Jun 12 13 12:50 am Link I agree with previous posts that the level of explicity is low and generally not in the porn range. However, some of the shots could be seen as porn. Simply because they lack attention to detail. No discernable concept, poor focus, poor exposure and lighting and lack lustre posing. They look like an amateur snap of a naked chick. Nudity doesn't necessarily equal porn, but shots with no other redeeming quality other than a naked chick, do tend to be interpreted that way by a lot of people. Edit: It will help to have a clear idea in your mind of what you want to achieve, if you shoot with no plan other than shoot a naked chick it will show in the final result. Jun 12 13 01:04 am Link Natural Means wrote: I agree that it's porn. Jun 12 13 01:16 am Link Natural Means wrote: No, don't be concerned. Jun 12 13 01:18 am Link Thanks for thoughts - been a real help - I had no idea 'porn' was considered so diversely. Will sleep better. And note the comment on work needed with respect to lighting and posing etc - happening - baby steps.  Jun 12 13 03:58 am Link Ask her how a Puritan got on the internet. Your stuff isn't porn. Jun 12 13 04:25 am Link I'm sorry, but I would consider some (not all!) of your stuff porn (soft porn) things like this... https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/30856619 kind of look like stills from a porno. Jun 12 13 04:42 am Link Natural Means wrote: "For now" is key, when you have self-improvement goals. Jun 12 13 04:48 am Link MnPhoto wrote: Def-I-Nightly Jun 12 13 05:00 am Link MnPhoto wrote: To add to this previous post, I think you have moments in your portfolio where you come close or really do achieve what photographers starting out would love to achieve. From your nude section I looked at this and thought it was lovely and a good direction for you: Jun 12 13 05:01 am Link Ericarose wrote: Don't be sorry I asked for thoughts and appreciate them. Jun 12 13 05:02 am Link That model doesn't know WTF she's talking about. I didn't see any porn in your port. Maybe the porny stuff got deleted. All I know is there's none there now. Jun 13 13 07:21 pm Link Hmmmmm. What is porn? By who's definition. Then I guess I would be considered doing "por" too. Jun 13 13 07:31 pm Link I looked in there and I'm disappointed, I didn't find any porn at all! I think you just started this thread to get free views of your port and bring up your stats! Nice trickery!~  Jun 13 13 07:32 pm Link The quality of your nudes could definitely be improved, but I don't see anything close to porn. No spread-legged shots, no girl/girl stuff, nothing really even close to questionable, in my opinion. The model you were corresponding with must think nude=porn. She was probably just a bit of a prude, don't let it get you down.  Jun 13 13 07:35 pm Link Your model is a DUMBASS and you can print this out and give it to her!! Any other votes for DUMBASS out there??:-))) Jun 13 13 07:37 pm Link GER Photography wrote: You got my vote! Jun 13 13 07:39 pm Link Marin Photography wrote: I was hoping to see porn... very disappointed. Jun 13 13 07:41 pm Link GER Photography wrote: Dumbass being the euphemism. Jun 13 13 07:42 pm Link I have to say I'm disappointed by how safe your stuff is - there's plenty of porn on here masquerading as 'art'. There are far too many 'models' here with all their own 'rules' - half of them couldn't get arrested with stolen diamonds between their thighs. Do your work and let the critics do theirs. If she thinks you're shooting porn I'm fkng Larry Flynt over here! Keep shooting, keep shooting and when you don't know what else to do - shoot some more. Till you wear the color off a camera grip you probably haven't shot enough yet! At least you're getting her attention. Jun 13 13 07:46 pm Link To the OP. There are plenty of good books out there you can buy to help you shoot nudes. Try Amazon. I have a few, will get you some names if you need them, PM me if you like.... Jun 13 13 07:46 pm Link Westdahl Studio wrote: ---bump--- Jun 13 13 07:46 pm Link Damn, and here I checked out your portfolio for nothing. Nice pics but not porn. At least not by anyone but Billy Graham's standards. Jun 13 13 07:56 pm Link According to MM standards, your images are not considered porn. There will be times when others might consider your images as porn, but many do not, nor care not know what differentiates non-porn from porn. They just view all images containing nudity as porn.  Jun 13 13 08:47 pm Link m_s_photo wrote: Or Jim Baker's!!:-))) Jun 13 13 08:52 pm Link Marin Photography wrote: Pm sent thanks Rueben appreciate the offer. Jun 13 13 08:57 pm Link Aussie girls can be a bit more conservative in this regard! Jun 13 13 09:21 pm Link Natural Means wrote: who, your mum? Jun 13 13 09:28 pm Link nyk fury wrote: Yeah yeah, I hear what you're sayin' Jun 13 13 09:49 pm Link Yep , pure porn ... time to box up all your gear and sell it to me $ 50 ! Think how well you will sleep knowing your out of the porn business :-) F A Jun 13 13 09:58 pm Link like everything else, people have different viewpoints on what constitutes porn. I do not see any porn in your portfolio. Jun 13 13 10:15 pm Link Natural Means wrote: There are many un-enlightened individuals who consider any form of nudity to be porn -often by way of influence of misguided fundamentalist religious zealots. Jun 13 13 10:30 pm Link When I think porn, I think of work that stimulates lust and sexual arousal. In that department, your work should cause you no worries. Jun 13 13 10:48 pm Link As most have already said - no it's not porn. [By the way, if you haven't had any of your photos blocked by MM yet you're really not in the porn club lol] But she may have seen some as too amateur and that can translate into whatever you like. You might consider pruning the nudes a little and really just keeping the quality ones. If you do want the more fun 'snaps' - stick them in a folder called 'candid' or 'just fun stuff'. You might also consider making your folder photo for your nude album - less nude (MM now lets you crop) - so it's less in-your-face. But either way - it sounds like you and this model are on different pages - so shrug it off and keep shooting what you want to shoot. Jun 13 13 10:59 pm Link The first time I got that put on me it was a bit of a shock. By standards of 50 years ago...SOME of your photos might qualify. By todays standards in the developed world? No. Jun 13 13 11:01 pm Link Your work is far from "porn".. its pretty tame stuff in there.. Jun 19 13 06:21 am Link I'd say you've nothing to fear. Grow a thicker skin. In the end, it's up to you to define your work and how you feel about it. You'll know when you're doing great work and you'll know when you're doing porn... Jun 19 13 06:36 am Link Quit trying to recruit the ladies at the local church or Sunday school and you'll be fine!! Jun 19 13 03:45 pm Link |
