I find it interesting that nudity still seems to have the power to draw people in. In this age of pornography everywhere, internet, videos etc why does an image that has simple nudity still draw more viewers?
I notice that when I place a photograph for critique on a site like APUG or on EBay for sale that the photos that get the most hits (every time) are the ones that have nudity in them, it does not matter if it is male or female, nudity draws the hits. I can have the same subject with the same lighting, camera etc with a clothed subject but it will not get as many hits as the nude version.
Are people just so concerned with seeing others naked? Curiosity? Is it a sexual thing? Or does including nudity make a image more visually strong?
In my pbase galleries the nudes get waaaay more hits than the other stuff. I think it might just be because we are animals that think only of eating sleeping and fornicating. Art comes just after that. OR perhaps it is a testament to the nature of people who look at pictures on the internet all time.
Dennis
PS the difference in hit counts on ebay print sales is huge. Like nudes will get 500 hits and a still life 1.
In my pbase galleries the nudes get waaaay more hits than the other stuff. I think it might just be because we are animals that think only of eating sleeping and fornicating. Art comes just after that. OR perhaps it is a testament to the nature of people who look at pictures on the internet all time.
1.
haha..yes your probably right...maybe it is a animal lust sort of thing...I agree with you on ebay, you get more hits if you put up nudes, but who are the people that are opening the page? potential collectors? or the eating sleeping fornicating crowd!
Most of the "eating sleeping fornicating crowd" probably doesn't fantasize about bowls of fruit or arrangements of antique glass bottles on a table in a study.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
I too agree about nudity and watching other people being nude is a primal curiosity. I'll admit that even though I'm adding a few years to the tally (I'm 37 this November) the primal urge of thinking about nudity and sex is an extremely prevalent activity. I cannot walk by a woman that I find attractive without wondering lots of things about her, one of them what she looks like without her clothes on. It's my opinion that most people's minds work this way, it's just that they don't like to admit it. To me it's the most natural of things.
Then comes the flip side of the coin, usually once the secrets are revealed, it's not really that interesting to fantasize about anymore. But the initial curiosity is what makes me click on the nude image links. Then after a while I study the beauty and grace of the human form, or the lack thereof - you know, things that make a photograph interesting beyond the initial wow. I find that very few nudes have real depth and meaning to them, or even beauty or good form.
It would be interesting to compare numbers of hits and numbers of sales. Is there any correlation there with nudity vs 'anything that lacks the presence of a nude human being'?
Interesting thread!
- Thomas
I actually do not really consider them nudes, more like realistic portraits. It is sort of a honesty thing in my eyes. If I photograph a baseball player I might include his bat or his glove or his uniform or all of the above. If you photograph a sex worker, the product they sell is their body so to not show the body seems somehow like your not taking an honest portrait or that you might be limiting the reality of what the portrait could be. What I tend to do is shoot clothed and unclothed but it seems that most times the best pictures involve partial or total nudity, not sure why but it does, maybe it fits into the visually strong thing from the original post.
Photographing a lover would have a more sexual emotional feel to it for the photographer but lover photos can also be rather coldish (Robert Mapplethorpe, Edward Weston). I just look at the nudity in my photography as functional and honest to the reality of the subjects.
I too agree about nudity and watching other people being nude is a primal curiosity. I'll admit that even though I'm adding a few years to the tally (I'm 37 this November) the primal urge of thinking about nudity and sex is an extremely prevalent activity. I cannot walk by a woman that I find attractive without wondering lots of things about her, one of them what she looks like without her clothes on. It's my opinion that most people's minds work this way, it's just that they don't like to admit it. To me it's the most natural of things.
Then comes the flip side of the coin, usually once the secrets are revealed, it's not really that interesting to fantasize about anymore. But the initial curiosity is what makes me click on the nude image links. Then after a while I study the beauty and grace of the human form, or the lack thereof - you know, things that make a photograph interesting beyond the initial wow. I find that very few nudes have real depth and meaning to them, or even beauty or good form.
It would be interesting to compare numbers of hits and numbers of sales. Is there any correlation there with nudity vs 'anything that lacks the presence of a nude human being'?
Interesting thread!
- Thomas
Very well put, you gave me lots to think about. I think your right it is a primal curiosity thing.
I also agree on your nude comments, most are stylized and lacking in depth/meaning. If I see another nude lady reclining on a rock I think I might lose my lunch!
Not sure if they sell or not, certainly not as much as they are viewed. You would think thou that the more people who look at the work the better chance you have at sales.
The Power of Nudity?? 
Linear Mode
