Richard Dubois wrote:

ok now from the other side from the spectrum

a full nude not a frontal nude, a demure nude but not an implied nude

Herman van Gestel wrote:
how far is "imply"



H.

Bravo on doing everything right, your work is stellar, not to many people can can do different styles and nail it every time..
Bravo!

Aesthete Studios wrote:



--Thomas
AESTHETE STUDIOS photography
Aesthete Studios photography
Aesthete Studios Wedding photography
Like AESTHETE STUDIOS on Facebook!

Amazing Implied Nude!

Herman van Gestel wrote:
how far is "imply"



H.

Gorgeous Implied Nude!

Nelia wrote:
Amazing Implied Nude!

no a very nice topless

Crystal Perido wrote:

no a very nice topless

I really am hoping you have something to do later!  You have you opinion and I have mind.  I believe that I am right and you are wrong!  I can not change you mind and you most definitely can not change mine!  Oh well... life goes on.

If you are having fun trying to contradict what I am saying to other posters on their beautiful Implied Nude work... then have a Ball!

Nelia wrote:

Amazing Implied Nude!

+1

Inner Vision Images wrote:
I've always used the term "implied" nude in situations where the viewer of the images is unable to tell whether the model was nude or not during the shoot. A fabric wrap would be an example of this.

I use the term "concealed" nude where it's obvoious the model is nude but the nipples and crotch are "concealed" from the viewer.

that's a good way to describe it actually. Concealed is typically what I consider a Demure Nude

in both of these photos there's no way of telling whether or not the models were naked during the shoot and what my definition of Implied is:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/15792409
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/19363860

Inner Vision Images wrote:
I've always used the term "implied" nude in situations where the viewer of the images is unable to tell whether the model was nude or not during the shoot. A fabric wrap would be an example of this.

I use the term "concealed" nude where it's obvoious the model is nude but the nipples and crotch are "concealed" from the viewer.

Ashley En-fu  wrote:
that's a good way to describe it actually. Concealed is typically what I consider a Demure Nude

See another definition!  What ever works best for you and the model(s) that you are working with is right!

Aaron Downing wrote:
A few favorites from my portfolio...

1.

2.

3.

4.

Absolutely beautiful examples of Implied Nudes!  Well done!

Nelia wrote:

I really am hoping you have something to do later!  You have you opinion and I have mind.  I believe that I am right and you are wrong!  I can not change you mind and you most definitely can not change mine!  Oh well... life goes on.

If you are having fun trying to contradict what I am saying to other posters on their beautiful Implied Nude work... then have a Ball!

Don't let her trolling get to you...too many great images posted in direct response to the OP's original post. She's just on a mission to turn it into her own soapbox.

Nelia wrote:

See another definition!  What ever works best for you and the model(s) that you are working with is right!

That's why i always say that I completely understand what one person's definition of Implied may differ from the persons' they want to work with and that communication about it is key! When people are respectful about it it goes much smoother and compromise can happen on both sides if needed. It's just when people label it and say "this is implied, there is no other answer- you are wrong and no one will ever want to work with you!" is when things get scary here.

The right answer is whatever the photographer and model agree on as appropriate "implied nudity" for the shoot at hand.

Jennifer K Rose wrote:


It's all about the angle.

beautiful image.

Ashley En-fu  wrote:

That's why i always say that I completely understand what one person's definition of Implied may differ from the persons' they want to work with and that communication about it is key! When people are respectful about it it goes much smoother and compromise can happen on both sides if needed. It's just when people label it and say "this is implied, there is no other answer- you are wrong and no one will ever want to work with you!" is when things get scary here.

The right answer is whatever the photographer and model agree on as appropriate "implied nudity" for the shoot at hand.

There's a sensible statement. All that really matters.

Michael Gottlieb wrote:
beautiful image.

beautiful nude (demure) - nothing implied here and Imageshack seemed to agree with that

Michael Gottlieb wrote:

Don't let her trolling get to you...too many great images posted in direct response to the OP's original post. She's just on a mission to turn it into her own soapbox.

+1,000

Ashley En-fu  wrote:
That's why i always say that I completely understand what one person's definition of Implied may differ from the persons' they want to work with and that communication about it is key! When people are respectful about it it goes much smoother and compromise can happen on both sides if needed. It's just when people label it and say "this is implied, there is no other answer- you are wrong and no one will ever want to work with you!" is when things get scary here.

The right answer is whatever the photographer and model agree on as appropriate "implied nudity" for the shoot at hand.

Michael Gottlieb wrote:
There's a sensible statement. All that really matters.

Of course it is - it's from a model ?

again : solve the problem by writing your view and definitions in your profile if you want to do implied/other nudiity

Jennifer K Rose wrote:


It's all about the angle.

Another absolutely amazing Implied Nude example!  Well done!

Crystal Perido wrote:

beautiful nude (demure) - nothing implied here and Imageshack seemed to agree with that

You're entitled to your own opinion...even if its wrong.

Michael Gottlieb wrote:
You're entitled to your own opinion...even if its wrong.

a big if of course:)

For those of you who disagree with me, you must remember one thing: I am never wrong.

ForealsPhotography wrote:
pretty simple guys, not sure why its taken 4 pages of discussion, or how there can be any argument, its pretty straight forward.

because Nelia won't get it:)

why is it so popular and such an issue though?

John Jebbia wrote:
The "Photographer" still gets to see something naked. And the models can charge for the privilege.

Implied nudity: It's a bigger scam than global warming.

ForealsPhotography wrote:
I am new here, but, i can't believe the op...if you can tell the model is nude...how is it implied? i think you need a dictionary! but i'll save you some time

Implied
–adjective
involved, indicated, or suggested without being directly or explicitly stated.

Demure
–adjective
characterized by shyness and modesty; reserved.

its pretty easy to tell, that a nude is only 'implied' when u can't tell explicitly that the model is nude, demure, is a nude, where u can be 100% sure the model is nude, but can't see any privates.

pretty simple guys, not sure why its taken 4 pages of discussion, or how there can be any argument, its pretty straight forward.

there's argument because overtime here on MM it's become very popular to categorize Demure Nudes as Implied Nudes and say "if the privates are not showing it's Implied" and it as now become a 'norm' representation to Implied photos.
Do i agree? no- but it's not gonna change.

Because of all these new definitions basically it's all in the eyes of the individual.

Ashley En-fu  wrote:
there's argument because overtime here on MM it's become very popular to categorize Demure Nudes as Implied Nudes and say "if the privates are not showing it's Implied" and it as now become a 'norm' representation to Implied photos.
Do i agree? no- but it's not gonna change.

Because of all these new definitions basically it's all in the eyes of the individual.

then i feel sad for the MM community

ForealsPhotography wrote:
pretty simple guys, not sure why its taken 4 pages of discussion, or how there can be any argument, its pretty straight forward.

John Jebbia wrote:
The "Photographer" still gets to see something naked. And the models can charge for the privilege.

Implied nudity: It's a bigger scam than global warming.

Crystal Perido wrote:
because Nelia won't get it:)

why is it so popular and such an issue though?

Because "I won't get it"  What am I suppose to get?  You have your definition of "Implied Nude" use it.  I do not see the definition the way you do, so I will use my definition.  I am not here for you to try to train nor educate me.  That has already been done quite well by a couple of really fine Universities.  Your wanting to have the last word and "prove" how right you are is incrediably inmature to say the least! I hope one day you "do get it", but to tell the truth I just simply do not care.  End of discussion with you!

Nelia wrote:

ForealsPhotography wrote:
pretty simple guys, not sure why its taken 4 pages of discussion, or how there can be any argument, its pretty straight forward.

John Jebbia wrote:
The "Photographer" still gets to see something naked. And the models can charge for the privilege.

Implied nudity: It's a bigger scam than global warming.

Because "I won't get it"  What am I suppose to get?  You have your definition of "Implied Nude" use it.  I do not see the definition the way you do, so I will use my definition.  I am not here for you to try to train nor educate me.  That has already been done quite well by a couple of really fine Universities.  Your wanting to have the last word and "prove" how right you are is incrediably inmature to say the least! I hope one day you "do get it", but to tell the truth I just simply do not care.  End of discussion with you!

how can there be contradicting 'definition's' of a word? you're wrong, its plain and simple, don't take that the wrong way, I'm not saying you can't call it what you like, but don't argue that you're right, when its a proven fact you're not.

ForealsPhotography wrote:
how can there be contradicting 'definition's' of a word? you're wrong, its plain and simple, don't take that the wrong way, I'm not saying you can't call it what you like, but don't argue that you're right, when its a proven fact you're not.

Don't take it wrong, but nothing is a proven fact!  I think if you go back thru the post you will see that an overwhelming number bof people use the same definition that I do of "Implied Nude" here at Model Mayhem.  Don't get mad or anything, you just happen to be incorrect this time!

ForealsPhotography wrote:

how can there be contradicting 'definition's' of a word? you're wrong, its plain and simple, don't take that the wrong way, I'm not saying you can't call it what you like, but don't argue that you're right, when its a proven fact you're not.

oh jeez...
okay for the record i did say that no one's opinions about this are technically 'wrong.'

basically what is *right* is whatever the photographer and model decide and agree on *together* for what is appropriate as Implied nudity for the shoot at hand!

Nelia wrote:

Don't take it wrong, but nothing is a proven fact!  I think if you go back thru the post you will see that an overwhelming number bof people use the same definition that I do of "Implied Nude" here at Model Mayhem.  Don't get mad or anything, you just happen to be incorrect this time!

so your now arguing with a dictionary, i applaud you, maybe u could send the people at the oxford dictionary an email telling them they're wrong too?

i think this image sums you up perfectly atm

ForealsPhotography wrote:

so your now arguing with a dictionary, i applaud you, maybe u could send the people at the oxford dictionary an email telling them they're wrong too?

i think this image sums you up perfectly atm

I am assuming that is a picture of you doing waht you do best!  Congrats and carry on Sir!!!!!!!

XenaDyne Photography wrote:
this sort of thing?

no, that is a demure nude, because we can tell 100% that she is not wearing a bra

Nelia wrote:
Don't take it wrong, but nothing is a proven fact!  I think if you go back thru the post you will see that an overwhelming number bof people use the same definition that I do of "Implied Nude" here at Model Mayhem.  Don't get mad or anything, you just happen to be incorrect this time!

Nelia
you would even argue about the definition of wrong as in " not right"

nude = naked = no clothes and "pasties" implied or not don't count

Ashley En-fu  wrote:
:-(
sigh, always with the fighting here on the forums.

really, I think my statement about compromise and communication about definitions between people working together being right is reasonable enough...

can't we all just get along?

either way, we all like pictures of seemingly nude people! right?!

The problem is that people come up with all these explanations for what things mean, and very often the real meanings get lost along the way.

There is no meaning for "implied nude" in the real world.  It is an internet term, so I suppose it doesn't matter what meaning we apply to the phrase.  But, well, what with pasties and demure nudes and everything else that's gone on in this and the other threads, it seems the phrase doesn't have any meaning on the internet either, since it now apparently covers everything from fully clothed to nearly full frontal nude.

In the old days, words like "glamour", "erotic", etc., had fixed meanings, and everyone knew what they meant.  I suppose old school professional photographers still know what they mean, and they must be laughing out loud at topics like this.  Of course, they must also get very annoyed with models who claim they will do erotic poses, but won't take their clothes off (for example).

It's much easier to get models these days, thanks to the internet, and photographers don't even have to pay them now, so I suppose I ought to be slightly grateful.  But it is sad to see threads like this where some so-called professional photographers and models make fools of themselves.