|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Nude modeling?
I just realized I have not done implied nude and would love to. When I first started modeling I was so not for it, hearing so much negative on implied nude but now I truly feel like its art. What do you think? Tips? Checkout my website www.modelkyra.com Sep 11 13 11:06 am Link Implied nude (or demure nude as others sometimes call it) is the only type of "nudity" I shoot. I think it is so much more alluring, beautiful, and sexy than full nudity. I like the poses to be creative. No one likes "hand bras" or "hand panties." It is much more effective as a relaxed pose, almost looking "incidental" as if the photo was captured right when everything was convieniently concealed. I am no model, so I have no idea how nerve-racking the decision to try it can be. I can only suggest finding a photographer that appreciates and respects it as an art form, and starting slowly. Sep 11 13 11:23 am Link It really is just a matter of fractions of a inch or a turn of a couple of degrees, the trick is finding a pose where it looks natural and you feel comfortable. Find the right photographer, you will be nude and he will see you nude, and start to work on poses. In some cases, lighting can do the job of hiding the bits you don't want shown. You may feel a bit uncomfortable at first, but soon it will be second nature and you will love the freedom. Sep 11 13 11:40 am Link I think if you're 100% comfortable, do it! implied/nude modeling is completely different than other types of modeling. so pull photos/poses you like and practice posing. If you are afraid of your lady bits being posted online, make sure that it stipulates that in the model release and you have a copy; it's no guarantee photos you don't want to be posted won't, but it helps. https://www.modelmayhem.com/list/171770 Sep 11 13 12:13 pm Link Name a supermodel that hasn't done nude work...hard to find. Sep 11 13 12:24 pm Link check out miley's wrecking ball video. depending on your point of view that is implied (no visible nipples or hooha). the trick with implied is to find some other way to cover the nipples than a breast self-exam. and bare side-bottom seems to be acceptable to some models on an implied shoot. implieds are actually more work than nudes but i enjoy doing them. just make sure you are in sync with your photographer about what implied means (and doesn't mean). could implieds kill your career if you want to be a teacher? you see them in US fashion magazines but i suppose if you ever want to work with kids caution is in order. Sep 11 13 12:38 pm Link Implied / Nude photo shoots can be very artistic or they can be trashy, it all depends on how the photographer sets up the shot. Coco doesn't shoot nudes so it's not like you have to but, if you are comfortable with it then find a photographer who will tastefully and tactfully set up a shoot. I'd be happy to work with you and you live in the city where there are a lot of really good photographers so, do what you are comfortable with doing and you will be fine. The key is, don't do anything you don't feel comfortable doing. Then the pictures wont come out natural and everyone involved just waisted their time  Good luck.Sep 11 13 01:21 pm Link Square Jaw Photography wrote: For me, the above is key. Obscured as opposed to covered. Sep 11 13 01:31 pm Link I started out doing full nudes because I was already modelling nude for art classes, and it seemed natural to do that with photographers as well. But I have to agree with the others, if you want certain things not to show find a great photographer that you are comfortable with, and learn the tricks and techniques to use so those don't show. An important point was made, that is the photographer is going to see you completely nude for long periods of time while shooting. You need to be able to relax in that situation, knowing that the poses and lighting will be done so those parts don't show in the final pictures. Sep 11 13 02:14 pm Link It must be Wednesday. I think tomorrow is Escorts. Sep 11 13 02:19 pm Link I refuse to work with "implied only" models. If a model isn't 100% comfortable shooting nude then she shouldn't be wasting her own and other people's time trying to shoot "implied". It seldom works as a model nervous of her bits being seen/photographed is bound to be limited in the way she poses and will probably look uncomfortable in the pictures too. And added to that, if she's uncomfortable and I know it then I will be uncomfortable too. The best images always happen when there is a solid level of comfort and trust between model and photographer but the "implied only" scenario seems almost deliberately designed to destroy that. Just my $0.02 Ciao Stefano www.stefanobrunesci.com Sep 11 13 02:25 pm Link Can't wait to see the results. Sep 11 13 02:31 pm Link That Italian Guy wrote: probably the only thing i've ever read on these forums i can 100% agree with Sep 11 13 02:43 pm Link That Italian Guy wrote: Isn't it about just not publishing the "target areas"? I mean as a photographer if something that gets out that shouldn't get out, I the photographer in good faith would not publish to the public. I agree that if it is a matter of exposing herself to the photographer is an issue, it doesn't work. Exposing the target areas to the world is another matter. Maybe if that is settled up front, all is avoided. I have a few bloopers in which I promise will never see the light of day. Sep 11 13 03:10 pm Link I think "implied nude" is absolute horse manure. It's nude. Period. The model is obviously nude. Whether you can see her nipples or pubic area or not, she's nude. Implied nude is a cop out. I can't stand avatars that show the entire nude model except for her nipples, but apparently that's "Okay" or something--that she isn't really Nude. Yeah, right...whatever. Sep 12 13 07:19 am Link Antediluvian Design wrote: Good point! Sep 12 13 07:19 am Link That Italian Guy wrote: +1000% Sep 12 13 07:27 am Link Go big or go home. Tasteful nudes with lighting that enhances your shape, gives you a little cover is fine. Hand bras, no!.... Sep 12 13 07:40 am Link Eugenya wrote: I think you have got this all wrong along with many posters here. Implied nude means that the implication in the photograph is that the model is nude when she is actually not nude. Being nude and hiding various "naughty bits" is actually a nude shot, although not all that revealing. Sep 12 13 07:58 am Link That Italian Guy wrote: Yah, that's pretty much my perspective these days. Frankly, it's not a matter of some deeply held principle that I stand on rooftops to shout about, but simply a matter of logistics and expediency in the studio. Sure, I shoot "implied" nudes--it's good practice for my boudoir portrait business--but the only models I work with on this type of "non-explicit" imagery are perfectly comfortable with nudity in the studio. Sorry, I'm not going to turn around and face the wall every time the model shifts position. I trust you, you trust me, and that's how we get productive, efficient work done. Sep 12 13 01:31 pm Link there's another term called covered nudes that might more accurately capture some of what's happening where the model is at least partially nude but certain things (like nipples) are being strategically covered. i've seem implied/covered nudes that showed more than some full nudes. i think with all of these things it's helpful to show the model some examples of what you have in mind. for my part i rarely do the kind of implied nude where the model is actually clothed but by judicious cropping (or having the model roll down her tube top a bit) you make it seem like they are nude on set. i'd be more inclined to do that with a paying boudoir customer who is on the shy side but usually they are willing to get topless by the end of the shoot. The Aperture Studio wrote: Sep 12 13 01:34 pm Link That Italian Guy wrote: Won't even try to say it better than this. Sep 12 13 01:36 pm Link i think it's the fashion world and society in general making that decision about what's OK. i was surprised to see covered nudes on fashion magazine covers but apparently in some stores there has been a backlash and those now have to covered (so it becomes a covered covered nude i guess). really i think it comes down to how many people complain about their kids seeing stuff they're not supposed to (although i have this suspicion that kids have seen a lot already on the internet or from sexting and the parents may be in denial), etc. Eugenya wrote: Sep 12 13 01:39 pm Link your title is 'nude modeling' not 'implied nude modeling'. i think if you want to put out implied nude work, then you would have to first be comfortable being pretty much nude for the shooting itself, because otherwise everyone is going to be very self conscious and tightly wound concerning the naughty bits at that time. Sep 12 13 01:45 pm Link That Italian Guy wrote: I like that! It's the same like if a woman visiting her gynecologist would be obsessively and exclusively concerned with nothing else than striking the most innocent and artistically pleasing poses. Sep 12 13 01:46 pm Link Just how many different people have different interpretations of the word "implied"? That one of the reason I (myself) stay away from anyone who only does "implied". My "implied" might not be the same as their "implied". Sep 12 13 01:51 pm Link for our part usually the whole implied/covered thing is at the model's request in order to make her feel comfortable about doing the shoot. she may be at least partially naked on set but the final photos aren't supposed to show hooha or nipples (buttocks, at least side ones, seems to be more allowed). our paying boudoir customers often wind up doing implieds and i do my best not to look at times when things may be visible or in one case the customer was shy and i wound up in the bathroom while the wife shot the topless scene. but i agree with those who argue that it's a lot easier to just have a nude model and then you don't have to hide in the bathroom! nyk fury wrote: Sep 12 13 01:55 pm Link Implied is naked with the good parts covered up. Sep 12 13 01:57 pm Link In the "Tips" category. 1- Remember that you will be nude for the photographer but implied for the camera. 1-A-We as a society equate nudity with sex, so there will be a certain amount of titillation, whether you or the the photographer or both are interested in each other sexually or not. Best thing is to just enjoy the sensation while it lasts because it will go away of its own accord as the shoot progresses. 1-B-Since you will actually be nude be aware that even with the best of intentions there will be slips where you show more than you intend. Make sure that you and your photographer come to an agreement as to how you will handle them as well as all other details of the shoot before the shoot. 1-C-One of the points of nude photography, whether full or implied is the freedom it gives both the photographer and the model, so if you can't embrace that freedom, if you have to keep all the "goodies" hidden from the photographer, then your work will come across as stiff and disapproving of the whole project, and you're probably better off not doing it at all. 2-It's not for everyone but (and this is just my opinion) every model should try it at least once because most (not all but most) enjoy the experience even if they never do it again. It's important that you have complete trust in your photographer and if possible, have an agreement to restrict from publication any pictures that you think go too far, even up to and including restricting the entire shoot from publication. Most won't go that far, but some will, so just to be on the safe side, it may be worth your while to seek them out for your first shoot. 3-Carefully weigh any potential adverse consequences to your relati0nships and/or employment. It's a real concern, one that I feel is overstated, but real nonetheless. You might want to adopt the attitude of one model I know "It's a question of mind over matter. Those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't matter. Enjoy the experience and post pictures! We'll all want to see them. All IMHO, as always. Sep 13 13 07:17 am Link Oh Jesus ^^^^ ...yes you could go to the trouble of taking each and every one of these finite details into account and possibly wind up with some very stiff, awkward and posed looking shots, or simply go find a photographer who's work you love and who you can trust. Discuss the brief, then have some fun. All the best! Sep 13 13 07:50 am Link Fat-free dairy ... Non-dairy creamer ... Decaffeinated coffee ... Vegetarian burgers ... Non-alcoholic wine ... Light beer ... Carob chip cookies ... Butter flavored popcorn ... Imitation crab ... Cheese food ... Zirconia diamonds ... Atlas pearls ... Astro turf ... Engineered wood ... Natural silk flowers ... Faux leather ... Art silk ... Synthetic cannabis ... Natural look bra ... Girl friend experience ... Implied nudes ... Eviscerated luxuries and advertising lies. Sep 13 13 08:41 am Link That Italian Guy wrote: When a wise man speaks, I listen. Sep 13 13 09:26 am Link Well, I'll add one personal experience that has been mentioned. Even in an Implied shoot - you are going to be nude around the photographer and anybody else on set. You need to find your comfort level with that. I had a model that wanted "implied" - and when it came down to it - she had never considered that she might need to be nude around me. It was kinda comical watching her try to "Hide the goods" while trying to project the bold and confident mood. The results were - stiff - forced - and uninspiring My advice to the OP is that being nude on set, is that it is no big deal - as long as nobody makes it into a big deal. Find a photographer that you like and can trust - knowing that the only finished images will be "Implied". Then drop trou - relax - and have fun shooting. Sep 13 13 09:41 am Link modelkyra wrote: Ignore the photographers who are all "I won't shoot with people who limit to implied nude," they obviously forgot to read the OP. If you want to try it, go for it. I'd recommend when you are discussing details with whichever photographer you choose you know exactly what s/he is expecting. I've done demure shots where I was 100% naked with the promise none of my "bits" would be in the final piece (or I'd get to preview said picture to make sure I'm okay with how my bits look Sep 13 13 11:10 am Link I will add that the best practice for a nude modeling shoot would be to pose nude for art classes. (I know all about it...) In a life modeling class, everyone there really, REALLY doesn't care about possibly catching a glimpse of your lady bits nearly as much as they care that you come up with some dynamic/artistic poses and then hold those poses. Most of them have been drawing naked people forever and will be patient with you if you are nervous. Your nerves will fade after a while and your poses will be better for it. Sep 13 13 03:17 pm Link If you are wanting to shoot implieds but not full nudes, be very cautious of who you work with. One of the problems is that, if you're going to have a good and productive shoot, things ARE going to show, so make sure you are working with someone who won't take and post that shot. Look at implied nudes online, study poses, and look in the mirror. Find what angles your body looks good at. Or interesting. Or sexy. Or not sexy. You're going to be focusing a lot on your body, clearly, so don't forget your face, because that's important, too.  Sep 13 13 05:24 pm Link Eugenya wrote: You know that, I know that, we all know that. But the general public, especially family, SOs, neighbors, employers, often see a distinction, however unreal that distinction may be. Consequently it is often in the model's best interests to cater to that distinction, whether she agrees with it or not. Sep 13 13 05:27 pm Link modelkyra wrote: What do I think? Find a photographer whose work you like, and who you trust. Implied nude is a challenge at times, although it can work out very nicely. It is a major nusiance to shoot implied nudes with a model who is worried about what might show "on set." Very few photographers who are even mildly accomplished will bother. Sep 13 13 05:36 pm Link That Italian Guy wrote: Nearly every model has limits, and ideally, the model can trust each photographer they work with to honor those limits. "no nipples or labia" isn't all that different than various other conditions a model might insist upon. Sep 13 13 05:39 pm Link Eugenya wrote: The Aperture Studio wrote: The bolded parts are highly ironic, since that's exactly what you're doing. The Aperture Studio wrote: This, however, is VERY accurate, and really one of the only two things that matter from this thread. Sep 13 13 07:01 pm Link |
), and I've done the whole try-not-to-flash-my-boobs-at-photographer-awkward-dance. For me, personally, it's easiest to just be naked and pose in ways I think I'm covered with direction from the photographer. The first 15 minutes are the most vulnerable, IMO. It's like "OMG I'M NAKED AND S/HE CAN SEE AND OMG WHAT IF I LOOK SUPER AWKWARD" ... but if you find an awesome photographer, like I did the first time I went all nude, s/he won't even notice and the shoot will go on like you are completely clothed. 
