|
Forums >
General Industry >
When does Photography become Porngraphy?
Okay I've been rolling this over in my mind because I've seen sevreal portfilios that seemed more Porn directed then artistic/fashion/fetish/ect. directed. Now now before you jump the gun on me, the reason I think this is because in sevreal ports I've seen images I would call fashion, artisitc or anything close. I have some exsamples and you tell me.. everyone sees things diffrently so I'm throwing it up for debate. I won't outright name the profiles, I'm not slandering anyone, just wondering if working at a bar is changing the way I view things. Exsample one: the model is wearing a thong and squating,its a from beind shot so her bottom is spred from the squat. If not for the thong [which is nearly see through] we'd see it all! Exsample two: A photog's port is filled with nothing but shots of a women bent over so we see her pantie covered bottom, and in one of them he's poking at her with something! Exsample three: A model is leaning over on a bed, one leg hiked up on the bed and she is nude, everything exsposed. But the shot is from the side. Now is it just unsettled thinking of my newly screwed up schedual afflicking my mind, or am I just not seeing what the photographers see? Jul 16 05 04:44 pm Link This is a debate that cannot be won, because it deals with people's individual, subjective moralities. What one person is aroused by, another may see as commonplace, and pornography is defined by its intent, not its content. The best we can do is rely on the rules of MM, specifically: [4] NO PORNOGRAPHY! We would like to keep ModelMayhem.com a "work-safe" environment. No pornographic, sexually offensive, sexually explicit, or objectifying material. This includes linking to such material. Moderator's judgment applies here. Let the moderators be the judges. Jul 16 05 05:01 pm Link How about this. #19156 Is looking for girls to do adult movies. While I have no problem with adult movies,actors,models ect. But As stated in the rule 'work-safe' enviroment. The images she has in her port are a little on the exsplicit side. I'm not condioning them, or slandering them, but they would be the best exsample I could use of what I honestly consider something pornagraphic. The girls are exsposed in a sprawled fashion. Jul 16 05 05:13 pm Link when the INTENT is to sell SEX Jul 16 05 05:18 pm Link Posted by Lexi Lithium: If you thought those pics were a little explicit you haven't looked much around MM lately. Jul 16 05 05:22 pm Link pronography is simple in my definition... when you have male or female sexual organs, actually being put to use... thats pornography. example... well, examples are not necessary now are they LOL ClevelandSlim Jul 16 05 05:30 pm Link I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you see something questionable, send it to one of the moderators. There's no need to draw mass attention to them. Jul 16 05 05:30 pm Link I don't always go port surfing very much. Thats why I just threw the topic up for debate. I try to view the images with a open mind, and sometimes [ in my view] they come off with the intent to sell sex. I'm curious to see what others think. Jul 16 05 05:32 pm Link Posted by Brian Diaz: [4] NO PORNOGRAPHY! We would like to keep ModelMayhem.com a "work-safe" environment. No pornographic, sexually offensive, sexually explicit, or objectifying material. This includes linking to such material. Moderator's judgment applies here. Let the moderators be the judges. It just goes to show you how subjective this whole issue can be. My own work has been accused of everything the "No Pornography" rule addresses on other sites, and I'm still here. Jul 16 05 05:32 pm Link Yikes have we nothing better to do? Jul 16 05 05:38 pm Link Boiling the federal definition of "pornography" down to a level that can be understood in this forum, "porn" would be anything that is suitable to "self indulge" to. In some areas of the Pacific rim, photos of the female pudendum are/were forbidden. So, illustrations of fruits, or quite often, walnuts, are used as proxies for the Delta of Venus. So, I guess whatever floats your boat is "porn." And, given some of the proclivities of the folks here in Model Mayhem, that definition is probably wide ranging. Jul 16 05 05:42 pm Link All of our houses have glass windows. The discussion is fine but why publicly out them? Jul 16 05 05:52 pm Link Posted by Louis Braga: Just about any ad for Victoria's Secret somehow manages to capture women having orgasms because they are wearing sexy underwear. The intent of whitening toothpaste is really what Louis Braga says. You will get more sex if you have white teeth. It would seem that even house mortgage ads, "If you can buy this nice house you will be happy because you will get more and better sex in it." Jul 16 05 05:56 pm Link Posted by alexwh: that is because you can't tell what the woman is doing here in your avatar... for real. she could simply be having a bad dream. Jul 16 05 06:02 pm Link That's because many are trained to respond to the blatant and the obvious. And of course, the blatant and the obvious could be a definition of pornography. Can pornography be subtle? Jul 16 05 06:04 pm Link Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: Posted by Lexi Lithium: If you thought those pics were a little explicit you haven't looked much around MM lately. No kidding ! Jul 16 05 06:06 pm Link Posted by Louis Braga: then just abut everything is porn this statement is stupid when you look at it... Jul 16 05 09:02 pm Link Posted by Ian Powell: Posted by Louis Braga: then just abut everything is porn this statement is stupid when you look at it... Everything is porn, Welcome to the Pleasure Dome. Jul 16 05 09:08 pm Link I think the problem with porn vs art is you can have really well shot good looking glamour shots that happen to be hard core porn, same thing can be said for artistic shots. In photography class we were made to look at a few of those types. But at the same time a lot of Porn involves bad photography, bad situations, a cheap look etc. But i have friends who i've talked to about this, models that is... And to them it's not Quality it's content. But one pro shot that happens to be borderline porn and one that is joe blow with a cell phone the one thats going to look more pornographic is the joe blow cell phone shot... Photographers who have work indicitive of their cheep equipment (nothing wrong with cheep it's how you work it) end up looking more on the porn side then the art side. Jul 16 05 09:09 pm Link It's PORN if I don't like it. It's EROTICA if it turns me on. It's PORN if YOU like it and it doesn't turn me on. It's FINE ART if it's in black and white. I can't believe I gotta explain these basic things to you people any more. GWC Jul 16 05 09:09 pm Link Posted by GWC: you can do fine art in color... erotica and porn are very fine border Jul 16 05 09:19 pm Link I loved the art showing when Jeff Koons married Chicalina. Sorry Chica if I spell you name wrong, I was too busy looking at your..... Jul 16 05 09:20 pm Link Ya gotta wonder why there is nude allowed at all on the site since people under 18 are allowed on the site also. Showing minors such material is a crime in most states i thought. Yahoo is currently being sued over such issues of allowing minors to be exposed to such adult content. Jul 16 05 09:32 pm Link If any guy or female even on this site showed some minor a nude female/male form, porn or not, they could go to jail over it. Jul 16 05 09:35 pm Link Posted by Peter Dattolo: you should Hfjd+sdsakh. Jul 16 05 09:43 pm Link Posted by Lexi Lithium: Once you see boobies or muff shots, it becomes soft porn. Jul 16 05 09:49 pm Link Posted by GWC: You're rapidly turning out to be the only sane man on this island, Mr. Hooper. Jul 16 05 09:49 pm Link Posted by Peter Dattolo: That's why you have to register as an adult in order to see those images. Jul 16 05 09:50 pm Link I will shut up i just wanted to mention that point. There is alot of posts that involve porn, nude and issues of kids 16-18 on the site. It just seems that nobody really looked at the fact that showing these nude (porn or not) to kids under 18 is a crime in itself in the states. Just having these type of photos in areas where the under 18 crowd can see them is sufficient enough for the law. Model or not they are still under 18 and on the site. Just wanted to bring it up because it dont seem to be a issue that was discussed. Jul 16 05 09:56 pm Link Posted by alexwh: When I'm doing it, sometimes it is. Jul 16 05 09:58 pm Link Posted by Brian Diaz: Posted by Peter Dattolo: That's why you have to register as an adult in order to see those images. Oh i never paid any attention to this fact, i am not a monir so i never saw this. Sorry if that stops them from seeing the photos, my mistake. Jul 16 05 09:59 pm Link Posted by Peter Dattolo: Someone needs spell check and get a clue check. Jul 16 05 10:01 pm Link Posted by * Visual Mindscapes *: Posted by Lexi Lithium: Once you see boobies or muff shots, it becomes soft porn. I hope Visual Mindscapes that you don't mind me using you and a picture as example(I will generate some action to your port). Look a the calendar photo Sydney/October. This pose in b+w and or colour, minus the bikini bottom would be close to soft porn (no penetration or touching?). The coment that b+w makes something an artistic nude is suspect. While Visual Landscape advertises himself as one of the youngest photographers in the business, there is a huge generation of younger people who have never seen a b+w movie and rarely look at b+w photos. From their camera phones to their plasma TVs everything is in colour. The difference in making something art or porn can no longer be decided purely if it is in colour or b+w. Sydney in October may be a standard glamour pose but if anybody's wife, sister or aunt posed like that you would run her out of town. I am not writing this to offend anybody in general or in particular. I am pointing out that enough of you have seen these poses to become insensitive to their effect. A young person's reaction to Michelangelo's David would probably not be sexual while Sydney in October would probably would heat up the young person's works. Jul 16 05 10:07 pm Link Posted by Peter Dattolo: Posted by Brian Diaz: Posted by Peter Dattolo: That's why you have to register as an adult in order to see those images. Oh i never paid any attention to this fact, i am not a monir so i never saw this. Sorry if that stops them from seeing the photos, my mistake. Yeah, I found out when I tried to see an image, and the system had logged me out, so I couldn't see it. Also, the moderators watch out for nudes being posted on the forums. Jul 16 05 10:10 pm Link People talk about porn, but if you have seen what my human has seen by mistake you would lose your lunch. Jul 16 05 10:10 pm Link Pooch you would object to be tied up, wouldn't you? So why do so many humans in MM tie up women? Can you explain? Jul 16 05 10:13 pm Link I see dogs tied up every day. On the sidewalk, in broad daylight. Jul 16 05 10:16 pm Link You assed. Think 42 st when it was bad. A new student who wanted to see it all. Step into the wrong booth with the wrong, really really wrong movies. That still confuses my human about the nature and legality of these actions. do I need to go on. What we see here is not porn. Well maybe a little. Jul 16 05 10:19 pm Link Posted by BarryH: not talking about tieing them up. Jul 16 05 10:20 pm Link Barry your answer is absolutely correct. In some cases the city bylaw makes this mandatory as well as having to pick up the dog's stuff with a pooper scooper. But the statement says nothing to the topic at hand which is about pornography. My point is that within the classification of glamour photography there seem to be a couple of accepted subdivisions. One is the goth and gore and the second is bondage. In our effort to classify everything we have invented such terms as lite beer and soft porn. It would seem that well lit bondage must be soft bondage. As long as these photographs follow the rules of classification they are accepted as glamour and are okay. But we don't want people under 15 to either be represented in this site or to view it. Jul 16 05 10:23 pm Link |
