Printable View
As people have vastly different standards and perspectives, when does an image cross the line between erotic and pornographic? I don’t know the answer to that question, although it was once suggested to me, that it is when it could be considered as masturbatory material. What do others think?
Clive: it' sfine by me to have this discussion, but don't make references to my images please (I am about to remove them anyway)
Please don't remove them, you've done nothing wrong...Quote:
Originally Posted by gandolfi
Emil- Please don't remove them. They're wonderful images. If we succumb to those that don't like our images, why share them at all? You have far more supporters for your work than critics...
Having seen gandolfi's image in the gallery, I really don't think it merits the descriptor of porn.
The art world has long since moved on from defining such photographs as pornography, hell, go look at Ed Templeton's photographs...you won't find that in a porn shop, but you will find him exhibited in galleries and I make a point to check out his new zines at Dashwood Books in NYC everytime I stop in.
Pornography is material that is made with intent of arousal and...shall we say "consumption". I've seen more tawdry imagery in middle-school art classrooms, much less the greater world of art in general. I myself have made photographs that are blatantly sexual in nature, with absolutely no apologetic or veiling characteristics. Do I see those photographs as porn? Absolutely not, they are records of experiences and events that I have either witnessed or been involved in myself.
If Charles Bukowski can be found in nearly any library, or book store, it's very difficult for me to accept the censorship of what is, in reality, a fairly tame erotic photograph on a website devoted to photography.
Additionally, I don't see the point in taking issue with the content in the gallery. As far as I'm aware, the vast majority of members here are 18 or (much) older, and to see the gallery you have to be a subscriber, and I'm not aware of any sub-18 subscribers. Regardless, I was poring over HR Giger's work when I was 13 years old, which hits far heavier than basically any other "erotica" I've ever seen.
It is so typical that a few narrow minds impose their view on the rest of us. I would have thought this was a more enlightened community.
I know Eddie, but I do not want my images to be the focus of this kind of attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie
It would be a long debate about porn or not, and not about the image it self.
So I removed them. Havn't destroyed them :p and maybe I'll just put them somewhere else...
Thanks for your support.
I'm not sure why it should matter how someone classifies an image. Only time it matters for me is if I am trying to locate more of the same. Otherwise, if it appeals to me, not much else matters. I'd pay good money for one of Gandolfi acetone prints and hang it in my house. If someone else doesn't like it they can leave.
Now, if you are talking about apug community standards, don't we have private groups for this to be sensitive to the uptight?
I seen the two images in the gallery and they were both clearly pornographic of a women masturbating but im not offended by them in anyway.. I dont think they should be removed or even have a thread posted to discuss them.. If you dont like an image, move on to the next one.
The poster who complained willingly clicked on a thumbnail titled 'Erotic Bromoil', then complained about the eroticisim. :D:D:D. It's a funny old world...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim17x