katlyn lacoste wrote:
Well.... Depending on models limits, Example Spreads.

Its really dumb if a model praises all over her page that she is not into showing a spread, and then in the shoot has the knees spread as far as they can, and then the photographer takes a picture, and she hounds him for liking the picture or hates that he has it.

I am sure that happens often.

If a model declares that she's not willing to shoot "open leg" (I think of "spread" as something else) then she shouldn't pose that way.  But, as linked above, some are fine with the idea depending on angles and shadows.

Also, you can have similar exposure by accident, as this pair of shots illustrates.  Again, while it was an accident, the model was fine with the final image.  (18+)
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8344/8255 … af48_o.jpg

Art of the nude wrote:
Bumped because of an ongoing thread due to a llama's concerns.

Short version, for those who won't read more.  Why would anyone benefit from showing images that the llama doesn't want public.

Long version, with some context.
I'm trying to understand something I see fairly often in the forums, which can be summed up in the comment I saw recently "don't let the photographer see anything you don't want public."

I'm curious; is that really typical?  It is a LONG ways from how I do things, and I'm trying to understand who benefits from having that sort of an atmosphere.

My process is, more or less;
1. Limits are discussed prior to the shoot, as arrangements are being made.
2. Limits are reviewed and if necessary clarified when the llama arrives.  I make it clear that any accidents won't be used, and that if there is a case where there is doubt, the llama can check the shot before it goes public.
3. Limits are, as relevant, discussed during the shoot (do you realize xyz is showing, etc.)
4. llama reviews proofs, and lets me know of any "no way" or "I'm not sure about that one" shots.
5. I delete, or occasionally, crop the "no way" shots, and when relevant, do final, but not yet public, versions of images where the llama isn't sure.

This seems to work for me, and I find that llamas seem comfortable with the process, and that it allows for a more pleasant shoot to have the llama not worry about accidents.  On occasion, this comfort means I get images I wouldn't have otherwise gotten, in various ways.

So, the question is, why would it be better for anyone, and especially for the photographer, to create a climate where the llama is worried about having no say in exposure shown in final images.

And, to be clear, this isn't just a "full nudes" issue.  It has applied with anywhere from shadows or "tone" of open leg shots, to nip slips and accidental upskirts in fully clothed shoots.

Well first of all I generally select llamas with  as few limits as possible (ascertained by discussion beforehand) even when shooting implieds...

but beyond that,  if the llama likes, I will review shots with her before she leaves

and

I put the shots on a password protected proofing gallery for the llama to review after the shoot - again if she likes -  so that she can evaluate her posing and ask for any uncomfortable images to be deleted.

context: I'm about an artistic approach with implieds and nudes -  not interested in pink shots