MC lays on her back in a waist cincher, boy short, thigh highs, and heels. She is beautifully framed by an arch and uses her hands to maintain her modesty.
Hmm..sacrifice, the willing victim on a sacrificial altar. I wonder did you see the arch shape as erect phallus? The model's face is out of focus - deliberate or not? The coy holding of the breasts but yet black stockings and basque of a stereotypical "slut", tatoos...How much of yourself are you revealing here? What did you want to achieve?
Thanks for posting.
Regards,
John
Hmm..sacrifice, the willing victim on a sacrificial altar. I wonder did you see the arch shape as erect phallus? The model's face is out of focus - deliberate or not? The coy holding of the breasts but yet black stockings and basque of a stereotypical "slut", tatoos...How much of yourself are you revealing here? What did you want to achieve?
Thanks for posting.
Regards,
John
John Roberts,
I guess where you see an altar I see more of an alcove or grotto. After all, altars are usually designed so a person can perform an act in front of an audience, not up against a wall. I intended to portray her as a living installment of beauty with a pinup twist. No I didn't see the arch as an erect phallus, but I guess you can do that with anything upright that's longer than it is wide. I saw the arch as a dramatic architectural detail and a frame. In fact my choice of lens and framing was in part to capture the whole arch while not diminishing her in the final image.
Yes the model's face isn't the sharpest thing but I was switching back and forth between digital and film bodies at a busy group event, we had one hour to work together, blah, blah no one wants to hear excuses. I effed that up, but hey, if you're going to mess up on focus, do it with a wide lens! -Edit- what probably happened is that I focused on her leg, and upright, figuring it was on the same plane-ish with her face. That would work normally in straight on portrait, but with as much as I was tilting back, her face is significantly closer to the lens. DoF saved this image enough in my book, perhaps not yours. In a 5x7 you have to use a loop to tell really.
The holding of her breasts was her call and I'm fine with that, and the same goes for the tattoos for that matter. Basques typically involve cups, this is more commonly called a waist cincher. Seriously, don't call any of the women I shoot with "sluts." You don't know what her sexual practices are. Even if you did it's none of your business and it's certainly inappropriate to judge your assumptions of her behavior in a semi-public forum. I know you didn't directly call her a slut, just that her attire was that of a stereotypical slut, but that's like me saying your comment was that of a stereotypical asshole.
Hopefully this photo reveals I like shooting pinup, and I try to create images that are simultaneously alluring and respectful (no easy task). The desired outcome was to engage and entertain an audience. If you want to get all pop-psych, I'd say your assessment of the image contains more of your own projections than it does of mine.
Hmm..sacrifice, the willing victim on a sacrificial altar. I wonder did you see the arch shape as erect phallus? The model's face is out of focus - deliberate or not? The coy holding of the breasts but yet black stockings and basque of a stereotypical "slut", tatoos...How much of yourself are you revealing here? What did you want to achieve?
Thanks for posting.
Regards,
John
John Roberts,
I guess where you see an altar I see more of an alcove or grotto. After all, altars are usually designed so a person can perform an act in front of an audience, not up against a wall. I intended to portray her as a living installment of beauty with a pinup twist. No I didn't see the arch as an erect phallus, but I guess you can do that with anything upright that's longer than it is wide. I saw the arch as a dramatic architectural detail and a frame. In fact my choice of lens and framing was in part to capture the whole arch while not diminishing her in the final image.
Yes the model's face isn't the sharpest thing but I was switching back and forth between digital and film bodies at a busy group event, we had one hour to work together, blah, blah no one wants to hear excuses. I effed that up, but hey, if you're going to mess up on focus, do it with a wide lens! -Edit- what probably happened is that I focused on her leg, and upright, figuring it was on the same plane-ish with her face. That would work normally in straight on portrait, but with as much as I was tilting back, her face is significantly closer to the lens. DoF saved this image enough in my book, perhaps not yours. In a 5x7 you have to use a loop to tell really.
The holding of her breasts was her call and I'm fine with that, and the same goes for the tattoos for that matter. Basques typically involve cups, this is more commonly called a waist cincher. Seriously, don't call any of the women I shoot with "sluts." You don't know what her sexual practices are. Even if you did it's none of your business and it's certainly inappropriate to judge your assumptions of her behavior in a semi-public forum. I know you didn't directly call her a slut, just that her attire was that of a stereotypical slut, but that's like me saying your comment was that of a stereotypical asshole.
Hopefully this photo reveals I like shooting pinup, and I try to create images that are simultaneously alluring and respectful (no easy task). The desired outcome was to engage and entertain an audience. If you want to get all pop-psych, I'd say your assessment of the image contains more of your own projections than it does of mine.
John Roberts,
If you look through my images I've thanked people even for criticisms. Everyone has limits and you went too far on two accounts. First you personally attacked a model I've worked with, essentially for working with me. I met her, we talked, shot for an hour, I'd like to work with her again. You're just some name on the internet. Who side do you think I'm going to take? Second, I took a light hearted pinup picture of a pretty woman in an arch. You somehow manage to see a slut, an erect phallus, and ritual human sacrifice. To me this shows a negative attitude towards women. You're completely free to harbor to this negative attitude as much as I find it despicable. To turn around and claim that I too have similar sentiments is an appalling distortion I won't stand for. Opinions are welcomed on my work, positive or negative. Comments that are personally disparaging towards myself and the people I work with are not welcome. It's that simple.
John Roberts,
If you look through my images I've thanked people even for criticisms. Everyone has limits and you went too far on two accounts. First you personally attacked a model I've worked with, essentially for working with me. I met her, we talked, shot for an hour, I'd like to work with her again. You're just some name on the internet. Who side do you think I'm going to take? Second, I took a light hearted pinup picture of a pretty woman in an arch. You somehow manage to see a slut, an erect phallus, and ritual human sacrifice. To me this shows a negative attitude towards women. You're completely free to harbor to this negative attitude as much as I find it despicable. To turn around and claim that I too have similar sentiments is an appalling distortion I won't stand for. Opinions are welcomed on my work, positive or negative. Comments that are personally disparaging towards myself and the people I work with are not welcome. It's that simple.
Well in deciding to show women in this way, as a "Pinup", you clearly show your opinion of the female sex, and you accuse me of having a "negative attitude" towards women? Odd. I think you find that a lot of people would say that there is no such thing as a "light hearted pinup picture". But I did not make any personal remarks whatever but objective comment on the image you posted. I only commented on the role the model seemed to be playing here but you cannot understand the distinction between talking about her and discussing the image. It obviously seems that I struck a nerve with you and you cannot handle it. You may find my comment or me "dispicable" but you don't even know me. I am entitled to an opinion and to voice it. You did, after all decide to portray the model in this way and publish the image in a public place. I may have been completely wrong in which case why are you so aggressive and insulting?
Yes I did, and you don't get it. You can start by calling them women, no one talks about the male sex, just men. Female is depersonalizing, plants can be female. Ask a woman: a good sign you're dealing with a chauvinist is when they start saying "females" when they mean "women." Smart, educated women in leadership positions have purchased my pinup work because they find it empowering. I'm guessing that's concept that's foreign to you.
John Roberts said:
I think you find that a lot of people would say that there is no such thing as a "light hearted pinup picture"."
Yes, if you can't see this woman as sexy and not a slut that needs to be ceremonially murdered by a giant erection, then you most certainly have a negative attitude towards women.
At this point I'm not really interested in knowing you. The mental gymnastics you have to do to make this image negative don't interest me. It's like listening to Glen Beck. After 5min I don't care where the crazy comes from, I just want to turn it off.
I understood precisely what you were doing and made that clear in my reply. You were blurring the line between discussing my picture and discussing the model enough to make the personal attack while being able to claim you were only discussing the image. Imagine the model read your comment, would she think you're talking about her or the image? Like how I didn't call you an asshole, I just said you comment like one. Apparently you cannot understand the distinction between discussing you and discussing your comment.
There's a not so fine line between opining and trolling and you were quick to establish yourself as a troll. I'm done with this, but if you feel the need to troll on, by all means brother, continue.
Yes I did, and you don't get it. You can start by calling them women, no one talks about the male sex, just men. Female is depersonalizing, plants can be female. Ask a woman: a good sign you're dealing with a chauvinist is when they start saying "females" when they mean "women." Smart, educated women in leadership positions have purchased my pinup work because they find it empowering. I'm guessing that's concept that's foreign to you.
John Roberts said:
I think you find that a lot of people would say that there is no such thing as a "light hearted pinup picture"."
Yes, if you can't see this woman as sexy and not a slut that needs to be ceremonially murdered by a giant erection, then you most certainly have a negative attitude towards women.
At this point I'm not really interested in knowing you. The mental gymnastics you have to do to make this image negative don't interest me. It's like listening to Glen Beck. After 5min I don't care where the crazy comes from, I just want to turn it off.
I understood precisely what you were doing and made that clear in my reply. You were blurring the line between discussing my picture and discussing the model enough to make the personal attack while being able to claim you were only discussing the image. Imagine the model read your comment, would she think you're talking about her or the image? Like how I didn't call you an asshole, I just said you comment like one. Apparently you cannot understand the distinction between discussing you and discussing your comment.
There's a not so fine line between opining and trolling and you were quick to establish yourself as a troll. I'm done with this, but if you feel the need to troll on, by all means brother, continue.
I am not your brother.
" Like how I didn't call you an asshole, I just said you comment like one." So you called me an asshole, you have a problem with english language. I am also "despicable" and a "troll" . Just insults to hide your position of trying to defend your action of posting the image. I have not made any moral judgements about the image claiming it to be one thing or another, just gave opinions about it. You are clearly unversed in analysis and ignorant of gender problems, using "female" carries no adverse connotations.
An apology from you would be the mature thing to do but I doubt that this is likely to be forthcoming.
Oh, this is too good to pass up, I know I said I'm done, but one more.
If you believe I called you an asshole by claiming you comment like one, then you must concede that you called my model a slut by claiming she dresses like one. Commenting that my model is a slut in a semi-public forum establishes your assholiness as a fact and cements your position as a troll. Believe it or not, the word "slut" is a moral judgment and for that matter one that seeks to castigate women for behaviors celebrated in men.
I'll give you the last words seeing as to how you always seem to prove my point. And with that I must bid you adieu.