Well as I have nothing b3etter to do I will drop in a reply,well I have got better things to do but dont feel like doing them.It isnt difficult to take porno shots,anyone can switch on lights,switch on camera,spread thighs and fanny and off we go.Artistic nudes take a lot more thought regarding pose - lighting - compositon and expression and usually the object is to make the image more interesting and titillating to an extent.So I would say art nudes end and porn begins when the object of the photograph is to blatently show everything of the model with no consideration as to why the shot was to be taken in the first place.Does anyone ever read theses messages or am I alone in this world??????
I dont think so as you are defeating the object of your arguement.Fine art photography is in my mind something that is creative and where possible artistic in the composition of the female body,shapes - contours - lighting or if not as creative as that then at least showing the beauty of the female form without the explicit showing of the the vagina. Although the vagina is seen in art nudes it is more part of the overall subject rather than the focus of attention.Blatently explicit shots are exactly that.I will go on to say I photograph both styles so lets not get the idea we have a prude on line here,it is just that I feel that the two forms of photography are entirely in different categories,yes I like and shoot them both but they are different styles of photogrpahy.Anyway I am off for a weeks holiday so will pick up any replies when I return.Have a good weekend all.
I think that there is nothing more beautiful than the female form - either as a whole or in part. Depending on the viewpoint and the body section being photographed, erotic artwork HAS sometimes to be explicit - but does this make any less artistic
__________________
http://www.digitalmood.co.uk
Yorkshire's Premier Digital Imaging Site
When does fine art nude become pornography? -usually when I'm behind the camera! ha!
Seriously though, I've always said the only difference between "artistic nude" and "uk magazine" is the outlet it's being shot for. If the picture is shot with the intention of arousing sexual responses, then to my mind it has crossed over into the porn category, whereas if it was shot simply for the beauty of the image, (and that could be just as explicit), then it is still art.
Having said that, the world is full of really bad art, so I think you have to produce something really good to have any artistic merit taken seriously.
