Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > People Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 26, 2005, 1:51 PM   #1
Member
 
ThreeTikis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 32
Default

It seems to me it might be a good idea to start a "Glamour" or "Figure Studies" forum for the posts of that nature and keep the "People Photos" for the character studies type of pictures. Some people seem to be uncomfortable with the nudity in some posts. That way the whole forum could have the nudity warning instead of individual topics.

This is just a thought and I'm not trying to start any battles here. Personally, I don't mind nudity at all and will be happy either way.


ThreeTikis is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 26, 2005, 2:40 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

I'm curious if you've requested a new forum for nudes before now or are you uncomfortable with male nudes?

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 3:33 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

ThreeTikis wrote:
Quote:
It seems to me it might be a good idea to start a "Glamour" or "Figure Studies" forum for the posts of that nature and keep the "People Photos" for the character studies type of pictures. Some people seem to be uncomfortable with the nudity in some posts. That way the whole forum could have the nudity warning instead of individual topics.

This is just a thought and I'm not trying to start any battles here. Personally, I don't mind nudity at all and will be happy either way.

I think this is a great idea. I believe some nudes have the potential to be interpreted both as art, and as some sort of sexual statement as well. Pornography would fit the latter discription, but of course the interpretation one individual has, may vary widely from that of another viewing the same subject. A category which separates F U L L frontal nudity from the more general "people" category I think would fit the bill. I have stated that I see no value in displaying genitals in photography, and here I will clarify... I do not consider "breasts" (male or female) to be genitalia.If there are redeeming aspects that I'm not aware of, and if there are photographers who see this as an interesting and aesthetic subject, then let'em have at it. But Give them a space and let them have their own topicaccompanied by suitable warning. Best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 3:46 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

It's a bit slow on here to be splitting it up. Interestingly, hundreds of people look at the images and read the messages here, but only a few participate.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 3:58 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
It's a bit slow on here to be splitting it up. Interestingly, hundreds of people look at the images and read the messages here, but only a few participate.

Rodney
I see the numbers of viewers as more significant than the numbers who actually voice an opinion. Those numbers get the word out as to the nature of this site. Oddly, when the controversy includes any of the more venerable photographers on this site, the silent majority roar to life in droves! (wander thru the back pages) So, I wouldn't lend too much credibility to the numbers who have posted so far. Thus far the giant sleeps. Best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 4:06 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

This is a moderated site and the owners are free to run it as they like. It really doesn't matter what you and I think.

Photographers who share their work here is why we all come back so I'm sure all material in good taste is very much welcome.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 4:28 PM   #7
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

We won't be needing another forum because we will not allow this forum to deteriorate. Images posted strictly for "shock value" will not be tolerated. Any nude photos must be tasteful and within Playboy style limits. They must also be labled as nude by having "nude" in the title.

The forums have generally run themselves and I expect them to continue to do so. If necessary, we will step in (but we would really rather not).
  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 4:38 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

Uh oh...I't been at least 20 years since I've seen an issue of Playboy. I'd better run out and get one. :blah:

Sounds like very good content rules though. Would an off forum link be better for nudity?

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 4:53 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
Uh oh...I't been at least 20 years since I've seen an issue of Playboy. I'd better run out and get one. :blah:

Sounds like very good content rules though. Would an off forum link be better for nudity?

Rodney
My guess is the request for a new forum was generated by a post that followed your entry, under male nude. If you haven't seen it, then you might assume the general drift of this is aimed at your posts. The post was IMHO nothing more than a display of male genitals. As you can see, it was edited...removed...by a moderator. I've not seen full frontal nudity, (my definition of...)here in this forum, that I can recall, until recently, with your posts. Thats not to say the issue hasn't been brought up and debated. I don't sense that you've been specifically (or negatively) targeted. Do you? Best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2005, 5:05 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
My guess is the request for a new forum was generated by a post that followed your entry, under male nude. If you haven't seen it, then you might assume the general drift of this is aimed at your posts. The post was IMHO nothing more than a display of male genitals. As you can see, it was edited...removed...by a moderator. I've not seen full frontal nudity, (my definition of...)here in this forum, that I can recall, until recently, with your posts. Thats not to say the issue hasn't been brought up and debated. I don't sense that you've been specifically (or negatively) targeted. Do you? Best regards,

KennethD
No, I didn't feel I had been targeted. I was just being silly.

I'm not in complete agreement with you on the genital issue. I think intent has a lot to do with it too. Below is a link to a shot I did not too long ago and I think it is very tatesful. It's a nude if you care to look at it.

**Warning--Link Contains Nudity**

I've enjoyed the discussions.

Rodney

RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:52 PM.