Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,290   Posts: 1,535,384   Online: 773
      
Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 610111213141516171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 234
  1. #151
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,311
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    scott
    i wasn't offended or upset by your photograph at all.
    i am remembering the conversation in the chatroom when posted it.
    you said you were posting an image that you knew would cause controversy in the apug community
    now, a few years later, most of the people who were outraged are gone, including the people who were in the chatroom with us
    on that night. you also suggested another time that someone purposefully post "controversial" ( i put it in quotes because it was a male nude
    like yours, and not really that controversial ) images in the gallery so he would gain a following and be held in esteem.

    i am not saying your work is anything different than a male nude, i don't think it is pornographic.
    you told us in the chatroom just before you posted it, you wanted to cause controversy within the community, and it did, just as you predicted ... as i said, different intent.
    I don't recall the specifics of the chat - I don't have a transcript so I won't argue the accuracy or inaccuracy of other people's recall of a conversation over four years ago. But I did NOT advocate someone else post what he thought would be a controversial image for the sake of stirring controversy. In fact, I was talking with said individual because he approached me and said he wanted fame through controversy, and did I think it would be a good way. I told him to post the image if he wanted to post the image, wanted feedback, and was prepared for whatever reaction it generated.

    I've never said I was unaware of the potential for controversy of my image. I knew it would probably tweak a few folks - the same folks who had been previously posting hateful comments on other male nudes that I had posted and should have never been controversial. But why do you consider my response of posting that image to be either meritous of the outrage, or disproportionate as a response to the contemporaneous conversation about nudes and censorship? In case you didn't notice, I sat there and took my lumps when the image caused controversy, and I took them with grace. You could say the image itself was disrespectful (I'd disagree with that), but you can't say I handled any of the responses with anything other than respect.

  2. #152
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,651
    Images
    14
    What happens in the Chat room should stay in the Chat room..


    wtf is the Chat room btw?

  3. #153
    Toffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Point Pelee, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,796
    Images
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Carnie View Post
    wtf is the Chat room btw?
    A very lonely place.
    Tom, on Point Pelee, Canada

    Ansel Adams had the Zone System... I'm working on the points system. First I points it here, and then I points it there...

    http://tom-overton-images.weebly.com


  4. #154
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,627
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Just to be clear, the OP is not the person who called "porn". The porn accusation was in the gallery.
    Thanks for that. Now it makes sense.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  5. #155
    Stephanie Brim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,607
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    I don't recall the specifics of the chat - I don't have a transcript so I won't argue the accuracy or inaccuracy of other people's recall of a conversation over four years ago. But I did NOT advocate someone else post what he thought would be a controversial image for the sake of stirring controversy. In fact, I was talking with said individual because he approached me and said he wanted fame through controversy, and did I think it would be a good way. I told him to post the image if he wanted to post the image, wanted feedback, and was prepared for whatever reaction it generated.

    I've never said I was unaware of the potential for controversy of my image. I knew it would probably tweak a few folks - the same folks who had been previously posting hateful comments on other male nudes that I had posted and should have never been controversial. But why do you consider my response of posting that image to be either meritous of the outrage, or disproportionate as a response to the contemporaneous conversation about nudes and censorship? In case you didn't notice, I sat there and took my lumps when the image caused controversy, and I took them with grace. You could say the image itself was disrespectful (I'd disagree with that), but you can't say I handled any of the responses with anything other than respect.
    I can't remember whether or not I was there. I probably have logs on the other computer, but it's heavy and I'm NOT lugging it up from the basement. I do remember the image, though, and I'm glad you left it up.

    I think that shaming, whether body shaming or sexuality shaming, is horrendous. I think that sometimes women are objectified in photographs, but that Sanders and Emil are not the ones doing it. I think that a portrait of an erect penis is not pornographic because it's just a penis, but there are some poses that photographers put women in that could definitely be considered as such. I think that the image was a *perfect* response to the conversation, and proved admirably that there is an obvious bias against male sexuality in photography that simply isn't there when it comes to female sexuality. I also think that it is vitally important to keep encouraging people who make a statement with their photography to continue doing the work. Controversy tends to breed discussion, and discussion can, at times, bring changes in thinking.
    No idea what's going to happen next, but I'm hoping it involves being wrist deep in chemicals come the weekend.

  6. #156
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,311
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Brim View Post
    I can't remember whether or not I was there. I probably have logs on the other computer, but it's heavy and I'm NOT lugging it up from the basement. I do remember the image, though, and I'm glad you left it up.

    I think that shaming, whether body shaming or sexuality shaming, is horrendous. I think that sometimes women are objectified in photographs, but that Sanders and Emil are not the ones doing it. I think that a portrait of an erect penis is not pornographic because it's just a penis, but there are some poses that photographers put women in that could definitely be considered as such. I think that the image was a *perfect* response to the conversation, and proved admirably that there is an obvious bias against male sexuality in photography that simply isn't there when it comes to female sexuality. I also think that it is vitally important to keep encouraging people who make a statement with their photography to continue doing the work. Controversy tends to breed discussion, and discussion can, at times, bring changes in thinking.
    Thank you Stephanie for your support. And for the record, it was NOT erect. Just uncircumcised and substantial.

  7. #157
    Stephanie Brim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,607
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    Thank you Stephanie for your support. And for the record, it was NOT erect. Just uncircumcised and substantial.
    I...er...stand corrected. I'm facepalming posting that as a reply, but...
    No idea what's going to happen next, but I'm hoping it involves being wrist deep in chemicals come the weekend.

  8. #158
    Ian David's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,079
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    Not to get off on a tangent...
    Yeah, I used to feel pretty satisfied in technical drawing class when I produced a really nice tangent, but I cannot say that the feeling was ever sexually charged. But hey, it takes all sorts...

  9. #159
    winger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Page County, IA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,405
    Images
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Brim View Post
    I can't remember whether or not I was there. I probably have logs on the other computer, but it's heavy and I'm NOT lugging it up from the basement. I do remember the image, though, and I'm glad you left it up.

    I think that shaming, whether body shaming or sexuality shaming, is horrendous. I think that sometimes women are objectified in photographs, but that Sanders and Emil are not the ones doing it. I think that a portrait of an erect penis is not pornographic because it's just a penis, but there are some poses that photographers put women in that could definitely be considered as such. I think that the image was a *perfect* response to the conversation, and proved admirably that there is an obvious bias against male sexuality in photography that simply isn't there when it comes to female sexuality. I also think that it is vitally important to keep encouraging people who make a statement with their photography to continue doing the work. Controversy tends to breed discussion, and discussion can, at times, bring changes in thinking.
    I'd like to write something along these lines, but I think Stephanie wrote it better than I would.
    I'm also glad that you left that image up, Scott (I'd bet it got a bunch more views today, too, if anyone knew where to look). I have nothing but respect for Emil's photos as well. If I ever shoot any nudes, they'd be more likely to be women and I hope I can do it a quarter as well.
    As an American, I think that this country has a tendency to fly off the handle about body parts way quicker than any other (just look for discussions about breastfeeding - geez).

  10. #160

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225

    Erotic or Pornographic?

    Why don't we all just start posting nudes in this forum


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin