What do you think about publishing of erotic photograph in photographic magazine?

Are you against publications of erotic art in photographic magazines?


Results are only viewable after voting.

Status
Not open for further replies.

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#1
i have read a few UK photography magazines, and was surprised that on many occasions, readers wrote in to protest against showing of nudes in the magazines, thinking it is tasteless and atrocious. some are against erotic art while others are against even fine art nudity. that is sort of interesting and bizarre. i supposed asian photographic magazines are less and thus perhaps with less of these kind of publications, but i think we are actually very much less likely to present with such strong reactions as compared to what i see from the feedbacks i see from the west, whether europe or the states.

out of curiosity, i would like to find out what the our community here (be it local or expatriates) think of it. if you like to identify your nationality or places with which you grew up with (which may influence your cultural background), feel free to do so while commenting.

i'm curious about the demographics and how it may affect the poll, but in order to keep it simple, i only break the options into male and female, and take the definition to be publications of aesthetically taken erotic art photography, without revealing the genitalia, and of which the subject can be either nude, semi-nude or erotic suggestions with both male and female models, with no pervercy, violence and ugly model physique.
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#2
by the way, i set it as a non-open poll. so your nick will not be identified.
 

raincool2005

Senior Member
Sep 10, 2005
1,808
0
0
Raffles Place
#3
it is okay, because it takes something special from a person to be erotic, not everyone can be erotic.
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#6
there is a very fine line between art and porn
so it depends on the image
one of the example shown in the mailbox part on the recent copy of practical photography have a blond dressed in lacy attire, showing quite some part of the butt with her leg towards photographer, face quarter to the background smoking, lying on a bed taken at relatively low angle, mid tele, guess it is along that line.
 

Sandman77

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
509
0
0
#7
Porn is also An ART ...

Correct ???? he ehee ..
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#8
Porn is also An ART ...

Correct ???? he ehee ..
to me, commerical art is an art. the idea is to make it enticing and to sell. so casting aside the moral issues temporarily, as an subject matter, porn is just like food, and lighting, exposure etc everything still comes into place. you still need a good photographer and a model of good sense of posturing and eye contact to produce good photographs. of cos, all these are common elements and can still be done as per normal studio model or normal portrait shoot. but then when it comes to the differential between pornography and clothed non-sensual portraits, that differential, whether it is of any artistic merit.... :think:... i truely have no answer or opinion about it.
 

#9
one of the example shown in the mailbox part on the recent copy of practical photography have a blond dressed in lacy attire, showing quite some part of the butt with her leg towards photographer, face quarter to the background smoking, lying on a bed taken at relatively low angle, mid tele, guess it is along that line.
Damn! Before I could rush to the newsagent to buy it you had bought the last copy. :bsmilie:
 

sk.images

New Member
Dec 9, 2005
1,244
0
0
www.pbase.com
#10
It's not just the content of the image but also the context within which the image is presented.

I have seen many images on renowned photography sites and galleries that is most definitely not art (smut would be more suitable a description, by anyone's standards). On the other hand if you really want to learn the art of creative lighting with multiple lights then take a look at American Playboy. The quality, both artistically and technically of the lighting is exceptional in many, many cases (the older editions at least, don't know about the ones from the past several years). The content in this case, in the context of the magazine is considered porn - take a single image however and place it in the context of a photographic forum or gallery and it automatically is perceived as art, even if there is graphic nudity...

The human body is no less worthy of being the subject of an artist than a fish, landscape or any other subject...
 

mattlock

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2004
1,871
0
0
www.superhyperreal.com
#11
I think the word porn has too many negative connotations in most people's minds
personally I was very influenced by soft core photography, I remember how beautiful alot of japanese softcore pictures were.some really good american ones too.
most "erotic" photography to me is not very interesting..it doesn't create a sense of desire within me.
different genres of photography have their own purposes. If landscape photography seeks to create a sense of desire for a location, and fashion photography desire for clothing, then what's wrong with pornography creating desire for sex? it's such a basic and wonderful instinct. and I'm sure most people have sex...

as photographers I think that there shouldn't be boundaries in what we do, aren't we supposed to be the ones who present the world in new lights.
 

ceecookie

Deregistered
May 22, 2007
364
0
0
27
#15
Im fine with it:thumbsup:

I read The Sun overseas and the nudity is acceptable to me.Same go for Playboy:bsmilie:
 

Klose

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2005
2,619
0
0
#19
Just cast away the porn mindset and think photographically for once. There was an article in popular photography july 2005 that featured a playboy photographer. The amount of planning, set-up, cost and manpower is amazing. It's not so simple to ask the playmate to strip and snap snap snap. All the fine details are looked at and scrutinised. Oh btw, the photographer they featured still used negatives and slides and not digital. :sweat:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom