this thread has unfortunately been hijacked into something other than the content of your article.
that's a pity, as there are many things to discuss.
I have two small "issues" (I am not so fluent in english, so bear with my simple wordings..)
"Personally, I believe there is sufficient ugliness in the world without me adding to it.."
can't an image of a Challenger be beautiful? does it have to be ugly?
I have moved from being a Celebrationist (I still celebrate the female form) into being more of a challenger.
However, I doesn't seem to be able to make "ugly" images.. (or so I am told).
where does that leave me?
I don't like the horndog/robot labels... mostly because I have no idea what a horndog is.....
"Nudes and the Model
How should photographers work with models in the studio? Many, if not most, people have an opinion on this. I don’t know whether there’s a “correct” way of working.....
First: having had numerous discussions about this with models, I "always" miss the point of view of the model!
as a photographer, we assume, we do it right. which doesn't mean we do it right.
you continue: "as both of them are comfortable with it and they trust each other."
that's true of course. I think the "correct" way of working with a model is simply (not easily done) to be honest.
If you're honest, you can do about anything with the model, because there is no hidden agenda.
which makes it easier for the model to be comfortable.....
when I finally make my book on nude photography (if ever), then I have promised my self a whole chapter in that book on how it looks from the models perspective..
does this make sense?
Emil- the "horndog" label was an attempt at putting a bit of a humorous spin on the label. A "horndog" is a (usually) man who allows his sexual response to a subject to overpower all other responses. Perhaps then the better label pairing is "sexual/clinical". Does that make the continuum I spoke of make more sense?