Felipe

Jeanette- after someone made a veiled death threat via a bible quote, nothing anyone could say about the model would bother me in the least.

It takes spine to snipe at penis, one o'pines!

I don't post here often , but check in once in a while...


Correct me if I am wrong , but you have posted this in responce to what Sanders has done by taking his nudes from his gallery in view of some comments that were made?

I think EarlyRiser said in that thread that by showing a fase of a nude it becomes an invasion of privacy on the public forum.

Even though some people have called this a portrait it has no identaty therefore it is not peorsonal ( rock,tree, etc.)

Ari has said that he was bored with landscapes , what about this, is this not boring ? Are you moved by this ?

Jeanette when you expressed your thoughts about Sanders portrait you had more to say than "juvenile behaviour"

I do not have answers ...I am simply making awarness of the facts...

It was in response to a whole series of events, Sanders' de-posting being one of them.

It is entirely possible to create a portrait of a thing - in this case a body part. No two body parts are the same on two different people, therefore it is a portrait of this particular body part.

I would disagree about the including of a face in a nude being an invasion of privacy. There exists an agreement between the photographer and the model that this display will occur, and the model gives the photographer permission to display it.

What including a face does is it personalizes and makes specific a nude- we literalize it and take it to mean that the photograph is about that specific person, but when there is no face, the image becomes abstract, and we are more free to see it as a study in light and form, or texture, or positive and negative space, etc. However, in this case, the specific subject matter has tended to bring out the literalist mentality in a lot of people. They refuse to abstract because it happens to be a specific piece of anatomy.

>>>>Mark- it was a contact print... but why would it make you puke? Far less repulsive than your avatar, IMHO.

Hi Flying Camera, just fooling around. I'm not judgmental about your image. It was just humorous to me picturing it through a grain magnifier!

I find it sad that there are not more people doing nudes of male bodies. The ones most frequently seen are done by gay males and reflect a sort of cheesy look about them.

On photonet occasionally there is a woman who displays her male nudes and they are great to see. It's too bad that more women don't take those kind of pictures.

Celebrating the human body seem like a pretty human thing to do.


Michael

What a nice little elephant I see! just joking!;--))
Do not like to see the knees, would prefer a bit more crop and see the main part (penis) a bit larger!
Would also prefer the lighting more from the side not so strong from top!
Here in EU the woman would say hey guys show us more from them!
Not all but many!

What, this is it?! This is what got a whole lotta APUGers all upset?

Some people have obviously been living in a bubble...

As for the shot, I like it. The DOF is perfect, as is the detail in the skin. I gives a depth to the image. I'd say it's not your best nude, but still very nice.