Carlos Occidental wrote:
Sita does some nice AMAZING male work.

+100000

Stephen Markman wrote:
I don't look at the gender of the photographer and don't judge photos differently based on the gender of the model or the gender of the photographer. 

I judge an image on its merits (or lack thereof.)

As an artist, I know this thread is well-intentioned, but I think it is inadvertently very sexist in that it implies some difference between male and female photographers.  Tell that to Holly Randall, Sita Mae, Stacey Leigh, Viva Van Story, Renee Jacobs, Sylvie Blum, Mary Wano, Iris and the rest of the many very talented female photographers on this site.

If you have an interest in seeing male nude imagery, that's one thing.  I think any inquiry as to the gender of the artist is inappropriate.

(sorry if this seems condescending or, at all, a threadjack. I just felt it was worth noting.)

Its not sexist at all.. the same way you could say a right handed artist vs left handed artist... Everyone is working from a set of frameworks they are nurtured into, and we call all agree boys and girls are very different animals, artists or not...

Lets say, for instance, i were shooting a male figure model, I would look for power, very atlas stylings in how i am shooting and what i am looking for. Not to say there aren't some women who wouldn't shoot the same way, but I think they would go for something a little more appealing to them, and since i am not particularly into other guys, and it would come through in the shots... the same way shooting a building you find appealing to the eye comes through in a shot, vs being paid to shoot a building you dont think is all that remarkable...

Swank Photography wrote:
I've shot one nude model but it wasn't interesting at all...nor appealing.

He watched fishing on tv while asking me to take pics of him laying naked in bed.

Yeah...real fucking interesting!

Show me a real male model who wants to do nudes and be fully in the moment of the shoot and yeah I'd shoot.

But watch fishing while asking me to shoot your ass nude?

Bitch please.

Wazzat now???

===>  Danny

aquarelle wrote:
I've seen billions of female nudes shot by male photographers, millions of male nudes shot by male photographers, hundreds of female nudes by female photographers. 

But where are the male nudes by female photographers (and female artists).

Women photographers, I'd like to see your take on the male nude.  And why aren't you shooting more of them?

I am a female photographer and never had the interest in shooting male models nude. I just don't find men's bodies interesting or beautiful. I don't find the elegance and softness in a man's body like a do in a woman's body. And that is why I love about shooting women nude... Their softness, their grace and most of all their shape of their body..

I find a man's body is to structured and a woman's body flows better doesn't have such hard lines etc.... It just looks more innocent more vulnerable

Erlinda wrote:

I am a female photographer and never had the interest in shooting male models nude. I just don't find men's bodies interesting or beautiful. I don't find the elegance and softness in a man's body like a do in a woman's body. And that is why I love about shooting women nude... Their softness, their grace and most of all their shape of their body..

I find a man's body is to structured and a woman's body flows better doesn't have such hard lines etc.... It just looks more innocent more vulnerable

Oh yeah!?
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/21726353 18+

But ya know...different strokes for deifferent folks and all that

MLP wrote:
Oh yeah!?
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/21726353 18+

But ya know...different strokes for deifferent folks and all that

Nothing soft about that.... His arms are too muscular his body is more rectangular and very straight lines. A woman's body is so much softer and not so much hard lines not to mention the hour glass shape

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/20764946 +18

Looks fragile and just beautiful to me

Swank Photography wrote:

I've shot one nude model but it wasn't interesting at all...nor appealing.

He watched fishing on tv while asking me to take pics of him laying naked in bed.

Yeah...real fucking interesting!

Show me a real male model who wants to do nudes and be fully in the moment of the shoot and yeah I'd shoot.

But watch fishing while asking me to shoot your ass nude?

Bitch please.

OK, you are in Florida. I know 3 pro models here in NY/NJ/PA that would change your mind on photographing the male nude. Professional, creative, excellent at what they do, not only nudes but commercial and art modeling. Oh yea by the way actually show up when booked.

I am a strait, heterosexual male photographer.

FXT IMAGES wrote:
Interesting thread.

Perhaps men are better heard than seen, and women might just have the unenviable distinction of the opposite being true.

Perhaps not.

But then, I'm one of those mouthy female types who likes to photograph men, so of course I'd think that...

Sita Mae wrote:

Perhaps not.

But then, I'm one of those mouthy female types who likes to photograph men, so of course I'd think that...

.. and on behalf of all men, we thank you for being so.

Stephen Markman wrote:
I don't look at the gender of the photographer and don't judge photos differently based on the gender of the model or the gender of the photographer. 

I judge an image on its merits (or lack thereof.)

As an artist, I know this thread is well-intentioned, but I think it is inadvertently very sexist in that it implies some difference between male and female photographers.  Tell that to Holly Randall, Sita Mae, Stacey Leigh, Viva Van Story, Renee Jacobs, Sylvie Blum, Mary Wano, Iris and the rest of the many very talented female photographers on this site.

If you have an interest in seeing male nude imagery, that's one thing.  I think any inquiry as to the gender of the artist is inappropriate.

(sorry if this seems condescending or, at all, a threadjack. I just felt it was worth noting.)

I happen to agree with you, but the sad thing is this thread is about a real issue.  Statistically, most male nudes are shot by males and few are shot by females.  The OP's observation is accurate.

Some of it goes to different attitudes.  I hear a lot of women photographers tell me that they prefer the female form in art.  Some of it goes to the fact that there are a lot of male models that simply make female photographers uncomfortable.  As I said in a previous post, modeling nude for female photographers and artists has become a sub-fetish for exhibitionists.  There are guys who actively seek ways to act inappropriate in those situations.

Then again, women photographers complain about the lack of male nude models.  I know many guys who have stopped because the male photographers who do shoot them drive them away.  There are inappropriate male photographers shooting guys just like there are inappropriate male photographers shooting women.  The difference is that, to some degree, women are conditioned to handle men.  Male models are simply not prepared to handle inappropriate homosexual advances.

Then there was my former studio partner, a woman.  When I first started sharing a studio with her in the Bay, six years ago, I knew she was shooting male nudes.  I had no problem with that.  I didn't realize that what she was doing was running a business where she had sex with the men and did self-portraits.  She was also recruiting models to perform sex acts that she would photograph or video tape.  She advertised for clients on craigslist and other similar sites.  That certainly feeds the fantasy that a male shooting nude with a female has sexual possibilities.  She is not the only one doing what she does.

This is a real, but complicated issue.  It speaks a lot to our society and what the Internet has done to the art of photography.  In an ideal world, the gender of the photographer and the gender of the model shouldn't make a difference.  Who ever said this was a perfect world?

There is a gender gap in photography, particularly when it comes to shooting male nudes.  I am not sure it will ever change, but the OP has an accurate perception of the issue.

corey higgins wrote:

lol i

Jules K Photography wrote:

That, unfortunately, has happened to me also. Some men think you want to just sleep with them, not photograph them. Funny, eh? Not really.

Or they want erection shots, something I am not interested in shooting.

ei Total Productions wrote:
You do know there are websites for guys where they share their thought how to "exhibit themselves" the most while modeling?  They talk about their fantasies, and you are quite right, the older ones are the worst.  Male modeling nude for female artists has become a regular fetish in itself.

Please note that this, "the older the guy is, the weirder he seems to act," is not my quote.  I was quoting a woman artist who actually made the remark after her own experiences.

ei Total Productions wrote:
You do know there are websites for guys where they share their thought how to "exhibit themselves" the most while modeling?  They talk about their fantasies, and you are quite right, the older ones are the worst.  Male modeling nude for female artists has become a regular fetish in itself.

aquarelle wrote:
Please note that this, "the older the guy is, the weirder he seems to act," is not my quote.  I was quoting a woman artist who actually made the remark after her own experiences.

Noted, but I am not sure she was wrong, at least in some situations.  I would say that it isn't always true, but it clearly is, at least some of the time.

London Modtog wrote:
I have a female friend who shoots male nudes, her complaint has always been that when she approaches a man to ask him to work with her, so many seem to take it as a come on. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragically true and a sad reflection on men.

I've had a lot of that too. I've also worked with several male clients who wanted artistic or erotic nudes for their own purposes (usually to put on swingers websites). Some have been really awesome and it's been a shoot like any other, but one or two have been super creepy.

Erlinda wrote:
Nothing soft about that.... His arms are too muscular his body is more rectangular and very straight lines. A woman's body is so much softer and not so much hard lines not to mention the hour glass shape

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/20764946 +18

Looks fragile and just beautiful to me

lol...you and I must have a different interpretation of geometry.
The only rectangles and straight lines I see are on the mirror and door. The funny thing is that when I add some of my male photos to deviantART or flickr...they are sometimes mistakingly added to collections and groups featuring females. I shoot in a way that accents the curvature of the body though. And I have a bit of an androgynous mind.

That photo you posted is very very nice....I am not about to argue that women aren't beautiful. But I see all genders as being capable of exhibiting beauty..as well as being "soft". Women work out and have muscles too...and there are a lot of men that don't work out and are soft.

But we all have our own opinions, perceptions and preferences.

Here is another male nude I find to be very soft...it even has curves
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/21756444 18+

Erlinda wrote:
A woman's body is so much softer and not so much hard lines not to mention the hour glass shape

male
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/21878833 18+

Natural_Designs wrote:
I'm gonna try out some "pretend" logic and math here, without bothering to check actual statistics.  Just for fun.

Let's say 90% of the photographers on MM are male (10% female), and 95% of the models are female (5% male).  While I'm unsure of exact #'s, the skew is certainly in those directions.

If we randomly allocated models to photographers, here's what we'd get:

Male photographer shoots female model: .90 x .95 = 85.5%
Female photographer shoots female model: .10 x .95 =  9.5%
Male photographer shoots male model: .90 x .05 = 4.5%
Female photographer shoots male model: .10 x .05 = 0.5%

So, naturally, we'll see a lot more of "male photographer shoots female model" than anything else, especially "female photographer shoots male model", since the #'s are really stacked against them. 

Of course, that ignores personal preference, artistic considerations, and all that... but is one possible reason we don't see more of those types of shots.

makes sense to me...fortunately, there is more to the universe than just MM.

thefurman wrote:
Neoromantika, a Moscow-based art photographer, takes AWESOME male nudes. All in all, she's one of the very few erotic photographers who truly inspire me.

(18+, naturally)

http://www.neoromantika.com/nude/1.html
http://neoromantika.livejournal.com/

These are phenomenal

Sita Mae wrote:
I'd do it all the time, but men tend to be self-conscious about their genitalia, so it's difficult to find subjects who are willing to actually be nude.

There is, however, an entire magazine devoted to female photographers shooting male subjects, if you want to check it out:  Filament Magazine

Unfortunately, it looks like their December issue is going to be the last.

Virgil wrote:

Unfortunately, it looks like their December issue is going to be the last.

Yep. I'm happy I got to be part of it while it lasted!

Natural_Designs wrote:
I'm gonna try out some "pretend" logic and math here, without bothering to check actual statistics.  Just for fun.

Let's say 90% of the photographers on MM are male (10% female), and 95% of the models are female (5% male).  While I'm unsure of exact #'s, the skew is certainly in those directions.

If we randomly allocated models to photographers, here's what we'd get:

Male photographer shoots female model: .90 x .95 = 85.5%
Female photographer shoots female model: .10 x .95 =  9.5%
Male photographer shoots male model: .90 x .05 = 4.5%
Female photographer shoots male model: .10 x .05 = 0.5%

So, naturally, we'll see a lot more of "male photographer shoots female model" than anything else, especially "female photographer shoots male model", since the #'s are really stacked against them. 

Of course, that ignores personal preference, artistic considerations, and all that... but is one possible reason we don't see more of those types of shots.

I think your numbers are skewed more than reality. However, even if they are correct, that still begs the question... or perhaps raises 2 more... Why so few female photographers? and Why so few male models? Don't those numbers in themselves raise gender bias questionsl?

Sita Mae wrote:

Yep. I'm happy I got to be part of it while it lasted!

BTW, you do wonderful work! I've seen several of your pics on "favorites" lists before, and it is obvious why!