J C ModeFotografie wrote:

Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Any modification of your body, from shaving your legs, to working out, to wearing make up, to getting a boob job, a face lift, or a tattoo, is an expression of improving oneself.

In extreme cases, exercise and dieting leads to self mutilation and anorexia.  Should we all stop exercising because some people can't modify their bodies and be healthy about it?

Heather LeStabbityDeath wrote:

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
Tattoos end up in the kidneys where they create a risk of hep c...
1: Tattoos do not migrate.  They stay where they are, unless your skin moves, in which case, the tattoo still doesn't move, the skin it's on does.
2: The dyes in tattoos are non-toxic. It's about as dangerous to have tattoo ink in your skin, as it is to get a washable non-toxic crayola marker, mural, down your back.  It just lasts longer.
3: Hepatitis is an disease that affects the liver.  It has nothing to do with your kidneys.

Perhaps that's why he studied medicine but doesn't (fortunately) practice it?

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Self-mutilation is a different issue from tattooing.

Speaking from my own experience, my ink was done in celebration of happy life events.

Working with tattooed models and learning their biography, I can tell you that much of their art was done to celebrate happiness. Even memorial tattoos, while born in grief, are meant to serve as joyful reminders of the person.

Heather LeStabbityDeath wrote:

Any modification of your body, from shaving your legs, to working out, to wearing make up, to getting a boob job, a face lift, or a tattoo, is an expression of improving oneself.

In extreme cases, exercise and dieting leads to self mutilation and anorexia.  Should we all stop exercising because some people can't modify their bodies and be healthy about it?

Yes.. I hate exercise. :-)

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Perhaps. Early on in my career I studied medicine. Do you know what tattoos do to the body (beside permanently scarring them)? They end up in the kidneys where the dye can wreak havoc besides the risk of Hep C.

And do models realize what these drawings will look like in years to come when their skin sags and wrinkles? It's a shame, really.

I've never seen any reports, credible or otherwise, that the INK (they're not dyes, they're ink) causes kidney problems. You also seem confused between Hepatitis B and C. The typical one seen from unsterilized needles is B. The C is an entirely different matter. And the infection issue is simply a matter of proper technique. Every tattoo artist I've seen lately uses gloves, autoclaves, disposable supplies, etc.

Rob Domaschuk wrote:

Perhaps that's why he studied medicine but doesn't (fortunately) practice it?

What he was referring to as to Hepatitis is a liver infection caused by unsterile needles. He made no connection between Hep and his specious notions of kidney damage.

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Don't models realize what they'll look like in a few years?

Of course I do!
I will be a fuckin' rockin' supercool old ma'am

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Ignorant statements tend to be an expression of ignorance. In the most extreme cases it leads to posts like this.

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Heather LeStabbityDeath wrote:
...Should we all stop exercising because some people can't modify their bodies and be healthy about it?

On one hand everyone would be fat compared to me, so that's cool. On the other hand...ew.

I got a 14 g put through my cartilage while my best friend got her lip pierced to celebrate a right of passage on our sixteenth birthday. And I plan to get a tattoo on my eighteenth. I am incredibly happy and comfortable with myself, I think probably more so than someone that would spend their time analyzing me for doing so. Sometimes what you said can be true about people, but plenty of folks with body mods think it's just as sad as you do.

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Ignorant statements tend to be an expression of ignorance. In the most extreme cases it leads to posts like this.

Kudos Michael. That made me giggle

Lindsay FitzGerald wrote:

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

On one hand everyone would be fat compared to me, so that's cool. On the other hand...ew.

I got a 14 g put through my cartilage while my best friend got her lip pierced to celebrate a right of passage on our sixteenth birthday. And I plan to get a tattoo on my eighteenth. I am incredibly happy and comfortable with myself, I think probably more so than someone that would spend their time analyzing me for doing so. Sometimes what you said can be true about people, but plenty of folks with body mods think it's just as sad as you do.

Oh, the rite of passage of the sixteenth birthday. Wait.. What's different about sixteen from fifteen? :-) Just wait till the rite of passage of your twenty fifth birthday. At least something cool happens, your car insurance goes down. :-)

J C ModeFotografie wrote:
Body modification (including tattoos) tends to be an expression of being unhappy with one's identity.  In the most extreme cases it leads to self-mutilation or "surgical addiction".

Your right! That is it! You have just told me the reason I got tattooed! I am unhappy with myself... And yet I have a great job, a loving husband, a whole bunch of fun hobbies, my health and a great self image... But you are right I am unhappy with myself.

glamour pics wrote:

What he was referring to as to Hepatitis is a liver infection caused by unsterile needles. He made no connection between Hep and his specious notions of kidney damage.

You're right.  He made a completely false statement about kidney damage from ink, and then added the risk of hepatitis.  I misread.


With that in mind, my statement about organ damage from ink stands, it is not going to happen, there have been no proven medical cases of it.

Hepatitis C is a disease caused by unsterilized equipment being used on more than one person, at least one of whom had hepatitis c at the time that they got tattooed.

A clean shop and good artist will entirely eliminate the risk of hepatitis c, and, I repeat, there is absolutely no link between tattoo inks and kidney damage.

Lauren WK wrote:

If you were the retoucher, why did you have to spend money?

Time = money.

Distorted PerfeKtion wrote:
I refuse to do tattoos... I like classy...not trashy...

Rob Domaschuk wrote:
+1

After all, the defining line between class and trash is the existence of tattoos.

:eyeroll:

All the ney-ber-hyood sluts is gettin themselves inked. Y'all ever seen the Beverly Hillbillies? That thur yung lady had herself one of them tattoos.

Thank you for informing us what you don't do. Next time I want to shoot with someone classy and rude I'll be sure to give you a ring.

Brooks Ayola wrote:

Oh, the rite of passage of the sixteenth birthday. Wait.. What's different about sixteen from fifteen? :-) Just wait till the rite of passage of your twenty fifth birthday. At least something cool happens, your car insurance goes down. :-)

badazz. Well, in this state it makes you legal to drive, and to give consent for...certain unspeakable things. haha.

Lindsay FitzGerald wrote:

badazz. Well, in this state it makes you legal to drive, and to give consent for...certain unspeakable things. haha.

Oh.. The driving thing... Did I mention that I think kids are too young to drive at sixteen? :-) Don't hate me, I just remember what I was like at sixteen.

Anyway... As stated a few times, this thread would have been a lot more positive towards the OP if it were about the model not informing him of the tattoos, instead of it being about tattoos.

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Perhaps. Early on in my career I studied medicine. Do you know what tattoos do to the body (beside permanently scarring them)? They end up in the kidneys where the dye can wreak havoc besides the risk of Hep C.

And do models realize what these drawings will look like in years to come when their skin sags and wrinkles? It's a shame, really.

When my skin is saggy and wrinkly I'll look like shit anyway so I don't think I'll be too worried about some ink.
I know older people who have tattoos that look pretty bad now and not a one of them had a bad thing to say about them.
It's a lifestyle. You don't like it, don't partake in it.
And don't bitch about models with tattoos, just shoot the ones that don't. There's plenty that don't. Just like all the topics about boob jobs on here. You don't like them, find a model that doesn't have them then.

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Perhaps. Early on in my career I studied medicine. Do you know what tattoos do to the body (beside permanently scarring them)? They end up in the kidneys where the dye can wreak havoc besides the risk of Hep C.

And do models realize what these drawings will look like in years to come when their skin sags and wrinkles? It's a shame, really.

Wend I get older I don't care. Wend I'm very old, memories are memories not only my tattoos but my face too. I don't regret never nothing. My first tattoo was age19y/o very small and after many year age 26y/o I do more 3 tattoos my kids symbol.
I'm happy  and I make my mother sad 2 times because my tattoos but life is life and don't regret NOTHING NEVER

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Perhaps. Early on in my career I studied medicine. Do you know what tattoos do to the body (beside permanently scarring them)? They end up in the kidneys where the dye can wreak havoc besides the risk of Hep C.

And do models realize what these drawings will look like in years to come when their skin sags and wrinkles? It's a shame, really.

if your skin is saggy and wrinkly, do you realy care if there's also some blob of ink on it? I don't know many 70 year-olds who care about what they look like...or are wearing tattoo-revealing clothing

safkjsdflkjsd wrote:
Thankfully i wasnt allowed to get any tattoos or piercings. I think its easier to add a tattoo then remove one.

Why would you get them removed in the first place?

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Keith says it's none of my business. Wrong. It is my business. If I didn't have to spend hours retouching skin I do more important things that earn money.

then yall can choose different models. DUH.
cast for non tattooed models from now on and quit bitching.

Stella Dean wrote:
I'm still gonna get naked when I'm old, wrinkly and tattooed.. And it will still be art.

Exactly.

I've put my tattoo plans on hold for now, but I eventually plan to have at least a leg that's fully colorful by the time I croak, and I'll proudly pull the wrinkled, aged, pruney skin aside to show each and ever single one off to my great grandchildren, and explain to them over and over again why and what each and every single image is.

MeganGardner wrote:

When my skin is saggy and wrinkly I'll look like shit anyway so I don't think I'll be too worried about some ink.
I know older people who have tattoos that look pretty bad now and not a one of them had a bad thing to say about them.

My grandfather (rest his soul) had three tattoos, one for each war he fought for our freedom in. My grandfather loved his tattoos, and they meant the world to him because they reminded him everyday of the things he did for my family and families all over the world.

Engel Schrei wrote:

Exactly.

I've put my tattoo plans on hold for now, but I eventually plan to have at least a leg that's fully colorful by the time I croak, and I'll proudly pull the wrinkled, aged, pruney skin aside to show each and ever single one off to my great grandchildren, and explain to them over and over again why and what each and every single image is.

That made me smile.

Distorted PerfeKtion wrote:
I refuse to do tattoos... I like classy...not trashy...

There are plenty of tattoos that are not trashy.

Keith Allen Phillips wrote:
What's a shame is you making it your business when it clearly isn't.

Seems to me that something which makes it harder for him to do his job for clients is his business.  What he can do about it's another matter.  I suppose he could cast for models who don't have tattoos that will show in whatever pictures he's taking.  They can't be *that* hard to find.

Robert Stedman  wrote:
I know it's about choice. My client wanted a specific model for a clothing shot. She had tats. Nothing I could do but post it out. Model's port didn't say she had tattoos and she never mentioned them to my AE. Surprise when the clothes came off!

Elisabeth West wrote:
See, what I don't like about that is the not mentioning them. You're supposed to. All jobs I get through my agency and without them, the client and photographer are fully aware that I have two small tattoos. It's something that does need to be mentioned.

Sounds very professional to me. 

Not mentioning tattoos is like not mentioning drastic changes in your hair.  Might be fine either way, but it should be disclosed.

Distorted PerfeKtion wrote:
I refuse to do tattoos... I like classy...not trashy...

You know what else is trashy? People who have narrow closed minds and who are unable to accept people for who they are. (tattoos and all).

BritWoollardPhotography wrote:

There are plenty of tattoos that are not trashy.

And plenty of trashy people who don't have tattoos

Robert Stedman  wrote:

Thanks Keith. I was just venting my frustration after spending hours retouching a model. True, it's none of my business. It just doesn't seem logical to me.

Why not just choose a model that doesn't have any?
You'll be happy, and so will your client.

Robert Stedman  wrote:
Perhaps. Early on in my career I studied medicine. Do you know what tattoos do to the body (beside permanently scarring them)? They end up in the kidneys where the dye can wreak havoc besides the risk of Hep C.

And do models realize what these drawings will look like in years to come when their skin sags and wrinkles? It's a shame, really.

I told the story in another thread, but my Dad got the required tattoos in the Navy in WWII. When he died years later you could not read anything on them. Years from now I picture 40+ models with large globs of pigment on their skin that you can't even make out.

Certainly to each their own, but I agree with you.

Sara Cobalt wrote:

My grandfather (rest his soul) had three tattoos, one for each war he fought for our freedom in. My grandfather loved his tattoos, and they meant the world to him because they reminded him everyday of the things he did for my family and families all over the world.

OK, that is fine but do all the little butterflies and bunnies that are tattooed on today have that kind of meaning? Will they mean as much when they are blobs in years to come? For their owners' sake I hope so. Actually I expect tattoo removel to be a growth indistry in 10-20 years.

Mountain Image wrote:

I told the story in another thread, but my Dad got the required tattoos in the Navy in WWII. When he died years later you could not read anything on them. Years from now I picture 40+ models with large globs of pigment on their skin that you can't even make out.

Certainly to each their own, but I agree with you.

Tattooing has come a long way since then.

With proper care of your tattoo (and by that, I mean..of your skin), barring drastic weight changes, a tattoo will still look good 20 or 30 years from now.  A touch up or two, and in 40 or 50 years, it will still look good, until your skin doesn't.

Should I remove my skin now for fear of it getting wrinkled and liver spotted when I'm old?

Mountain Image wrote:

OK, that is fine but do all the little butterflies and bunnies that are tattooed on today have that kind of meaning? Will they mean as much when they are blobs in years to come? For their owners' sake I hope so. Actually I expect tattoo removel to be a growth indistry in 10-20 years.

It's growing now...
My endocrinologist purchased a laser because she was seeing such a market, and having business go elsewhere!