291 wrote:

i would determine if one didn't know the difference then one doesn't understand the craft.  it certainly doesn't take a long diatribe to explain it.

I did it....and mine was shorter!

Photographer Elle wrote:
I always thought of what I shot as nudes...I guess I do shoot Erotica, dont I? lol

based on your avatar, yes. It looks more erotic anyways because of what shes doing...teasing..."fuck me" eyes...It can turn someone on without it being porn.


but hey! Thats just my opinion and I;ll leave it at that!

theda wrote:
There's actually a lot I disagree with here.

Nude is without clothing. In an implied nude shot, the model appears to be nude but may not be (pasties, C-strings, tube tops, etc. often come into play).  In a covered nude shot, the model is nude but the model's nipples, areola, pubic hair or genitalia are not obstructed from view. Ideally, the casual observer should not be able to tell the difference.

If a model's nipples, areola, pubic hair or genitalia are uncovered and visible, it is at least partial nudity. If in most jurisdictions, she'd be in violation of indecent exposure laws, we can safely say that community standards considers that nudity.  Most people would still also consider bare asses to be at least partial nudity.

By the OP's definition, Playboy is not altogether nude because oftentimes, despite a complete lack of clothing, the models genitalia is obscured by pubic hair. By that definition, I only have one nude shot in my portfolio. This is I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who shares the view that I am not a nude model.

I would also disagree that erotica requires nudity. However, the line between pornography and erotica is an extremely suggestive one. If you ask 10 different people you'll get 12 different answers. My personal definition is that pornography's primary intent is to elicit sexual arousal while in erotica that response is a secondary goal or entirely incidental. Both are about sex and both can be equally explicit. But I've seen many people label very simple figure nudes "erotic," so I just assume the terms is meaningless and ask for an explicit definition.

The OP's comments notwithstanding, this is definitely nude.  (18+) and REALLY cool.
https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid … up_id=&ua=

RTE Photography wrote:
One thing I do know is that I wish girls hadn't started shaving their crotches. It makes it MUCH more difficult to shoot a even semi-frontal shot without showing "too much". Come on girls, leave something to the imagination.
Tommy

ick. personally I dont like hairy crotch.

Inner Vision Images wrote:
I think there's a difference between "implied" nude and "concealed" nude.

In "implied" nude, the model may or may not be nude but is posed and or lit in such a way as to "imply" that she is. 

In "concealed" nude, the model IS nude but is posed or lit in such a way as to "conceal" the nipples and pubic region from view.

"Topless" is, well "topless" the model is not wearing a top and the breasts, including the nipples will be visible in the final image.

It just erks me when people think topless shots with a hand bra are implied nudes...

/facepalm

Inner Vision Images wrote:
In "concealed" nude,

no dude. no.

DRG Creations wrote:

My wife totally supports me capturing nude models and solo erotica and I will be getting into couples erotica. She regularly comes home after work to find a nude model sitting around the house. She actually finds it interesting how these models are comfortable with being nude and it's in fact very inspirational.

The truth is that any individual in a relationship that feels threatened by their partner being around nude people is demonstrating a weak relationship, not a strong relationship.

Strong relationships don't end because people spend time around nude people. Weak relationships and weak-minded people end those relationships.

No, that's cool that she trusts you, supports you and is comfortable with it. I simply meant that it's intriguing that she's okay with you doing everything short of porn.

Stevie Lynn wrote:
You're either naked or you're not. Done.

What if no one but the photographer and model know?

This is, to me, a "concealed nude" (maybe 18+, maybe not)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2427/375 … cdfe11.jpg

This is an "implied nude."  She could easily have some sort of bra on.
(at least on top.  The bottom is more like "covered nude.")


To some, my avatar is "implied."  To me, it's "wearing a scarf."

There are many models who are comfortable with one or all of those, but not this, which is indisputably nude (well, the OP would apparently dispute it,  but . . . .. )
https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid … =15365&ua=

Nicole Noir wrote:
I've gotta say, I find it interesting that your fiancee is (seemingly) okay with you shooting anything short of pornography, lol.

Why is that interesting? My wife has no problem with what I shoot.

I think the OP is pretty accurate with my interpretation of the subject. Each situation is a bit different, but that's where planning and good communication comes in.

Stevie Lynn wrote:
You're either naked or you're not. Done.

Not really. You might be nude in either case, but how and what we do depends on the intention of the pictures.

Vito wrote:
That would be YOUR opinion on what implied is. It is not everyone's' opinion, however. Some believe the model can have some coverings/clothing on but the photo may make it look like they don't.

and thats the problem, isn't it? A photographer says he wants to do an implied topless shoot with a model. she agrees. During the shoot he tells her she has to take her top completely off. why? If it will never been seen in the photograph, and it can be shot with the top on, why would she have to take it completely off?

Bella Apryl wrote:
ok...so nude is only Vag shots?

That's almost rude to all the "nude" models who are damn good at what they do but don't spread eagle for the viewer to see taint and your love making hole.

I just don't classify nudes as only vag shots. Vag shots are porn to me.

just my 0.02

A model does not have to be spread eagle in a photo for me to consider it a nude photo. I think these are nude photos.
http://bunaphoto.com/images/models/nudity.jpg
http://modelmayhm-8.vo.llnwd.net/d1/pho … 6eeee1.jpg
http://modelmayhm-9.vo.llnwd.net/d1/pho … 3a4eee.jpg

VyL8 - Aubrey wrote:
I don't understand by your definition how you aren't completely nude unless your legs are completely open. I have several pictures where I am standing and my external genitals are visible, but since it isn't open-leg vag cam, your definition says I am not nude.

Where does it say that?
What I am saying is that if a model tells me she shoots nudes, that is saying to me that she will shoot without anything covering any part of her body, including other parts of her body. If her idea of nude involves covering some part of her body so that it is not visible in a photo then that needs to be clearly addressed.

VyL8 - Aubrey wrote:
I am also confused how a girl who is only comfortable with implied topless can't keep her bra on.  If done right, the only person who would know are you and the model. It isn't like the people can use their six sense and determine her nipples are covered.

Sure it is possible for some poses, but how would you keep your bra on for this Implied topless shot?
http://modelmayhm-2.vo.llnwd.net/d1/pho … 197ba0.jpg

Stefano Brunesci wrote:
I'm sure this thread will become an invaluable reference for models wishing to know your thoughts on these matters


Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

nods

Vasilisa-nudes wrote:
So...since I don't do spread shots and a photographer's never photographed my anus I'm not a nude model?

ive done nudes! lol

Vasilisa-nudes wrote:
So...since I don't do spread shots and a photographer's never photographed my anus I'm not a nude model?

Better go tell my mum I'm not doing nudes any more...and never did.

Yep.  When I read this thread I found out that of the 10,000 or so shots I've taken that I thought were nudes, it's actually more like 30.

MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:

Yep.  When I read this thread I found out that of the 10,000 or so shots I've taken that I thought were nudes, it's actually more like 30.

taken to its logical extreme, images taken during a colonscopy are nudes?????

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

taken to its logical extreme, images taken during a colonscopy are nudes?????

My photographer told me those weren't going to be on the 'net

Leroy Dickson wrote:

My photographer told me those weren't going to be on the 'net

the stuff they get you to sign when the IV is already hooked up and they are about to wheel you into the procedure room...it's mind-boggling!!!!!

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

taken to its logical extreme, images taken during a colonscopy are nudes?????

Nah, that's only implied - to get nudes you gotta have the taint/vulva in there.

VasilisaK wrote:

Nah, that's only implied - to get nudes you gotta have the taint/vulva in there.

I defy you to endure an implied colonoscopy

Krystal Chandelier wrote:
I thought I would ask since we are talking about erotic photography.

        I've been model since 2008 and I was doing my first erotic photo shoot in South Carolina over the weekend. I worked with a female model and gay male model for the shoot. The photographer also shoot with both the female model and I. He was grinding on us as if he was being filmed and shoving his face into our crotches, and rubbing his nose on our vagina's back and forth as if he was being filmed. He had me take the photos of him and the other female model because their wasn't anybody else too and he filmed me and him telling me he would take still shots from the film. With both female model and I he had an erection. The female model and I did not do that with each other neither the male model and I.

           In the end the photos with the female model and I as well as the male model turned out awesome. The photographer said the photos with him didn't come out the way he wanted and wanted a redo. 

         My question is, is that what your suppose to do during an erotic photo shoot and is it okay for him to get a hard on? Should I have expected that from the photographer? Or should I have expected something else?

Why would an erotic shoot be any different than any other professional shoot?

No, that is not normal.

Krystal Chandelier wrote:
I thought I would ask since we are talking about erotic photography.

        I've been model since 2008 and I was doing my first erotic photo shoot in South Carolina over the weekend. I worked with a female model and gay male model for the shoot. The photographer also shoot with both the female model and I. He was grinding on us as if he was being filmed and shoving his face into our crotches, and rubbing his nose on our vagina's back and forth as if he was being filmed. He had me take the photos of him and the other female model because their wasn't anybody else too and he filmed me and him telling me he would take still shots from the film. With both female model and I he had an erection. The female model and I did not do that with each other neither the male model and I.

           In the end the photos with the female model and I as well as the male model turned out awesome. The photographer said the photos with him didn't come out the way he wanted and wanted a redo. 

         My question is, is that what your suppose to do during an erotic photo shoot and is it okay for him to get a hard on? Should I have expected that from the photographer? Or should I have expected something else?

absolutely you should have expected this.

if you go to your erotic nude modeling handbook, on page 38, 4th paragraph, it clearly states, " the photographer will be rubbing his nose on your vagina's back and forth."

then, furthermore, on page 43, 2nd paragraph, it states, " when filming 2 female models, with both female models he is required to have an erection."

next, on page 53, paragraphs 1-11, " He will be grinding on the models as if he was being filmed and shoving his face into our crotches. This is an integral part of the creative process."

however, from the handbook, he did break the rule in page 23, 5th paragraph,"You may not pair a female model and gay male model for the shoot."

But he recovered very quickly using the explanation on Page 24, paragraph 3, " The photographer will also shoot naked with both the female models if more than 1 is present on the set."

so, all in all, a textbook case of how these shoots work.

i read your profile, and I'm glad you don't shoot porn or adult stuff. if you did, this could have gotten much more severe.

Krystal Chandelier wrote:
I thought I would ask since we are talking about erotic photography.

        I've been model since 2008 and I was doing my first erotic photo shoot in South Carolina over the weekend. I worked with a female model and gay male model for the shoot. The photographer also shoot with both the female model and I. He was grinding on us as if he was being filmed and shoving his face into our crotches, and rubbing his nose on our vagina's back and forth as if he was being filmed. He had me take the photos of him and the other female model because their wasn't anybody else too and he filmed me and him telling me he would take still shots from the film. With both female model and I he had an erection. The female model and I did not do that with each other neither the male model and I.

           In the end the photos with the female model and I as well as the male model turned out awesome. The photographer said the photos with him didn't come out the way he wanted and wanted a redo. 

         My question is, is that what your suppose to do during an erotic photo shoot and is it okay for him to get a hard on? Should I have expected that from the photographer? Or should I have expected something else?

That guy was just getting his jollies off, you need to come see me next time you do erotic work in SC 

Any type of interaction between the model and photographer should always be discussed before hand. If you agree to take it further then that's something you will have time to think about before the shoot begins.