Im talking about those beautiful, artsy, ... private parts not always neccisarily exposed kind of photos. If the person or people in them is or are 16 do you think it is perfectly fine?
2007-01-31 07:24:20 · 8 answers · asked by Male16 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
Im a very liberal minded, artsy photographer person who loves shooting nudes (especially the artsy kind), but this bothers me...and I think it's illegal in most states in the US.
I wouldnt recommend it....I understand the intent, but still...wouldnt recommend it.
2007-01-31 07:47:05 · answer #1 · answered by Stacey D 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If this is a legal question regarding fine art nudes and minors then no it is not bad so long as you follow within the boundaries of the law. As an example consider the legal case regarding the fine art photographer Jock Sturges or consider the works of Sally Mann. Aside from the legality of the photography, is it morally acceptable to photograph a nude minor? It honestly depends upon the culture, and person you speak to. However, in the United States where there are many violent crimes commited against minors, in particular sexual crimes, such photos will attract a lot of scrutiny from concerned citizens. Just as guns are not created with the explicit intent of being used by criminals, fine art photo's are typically not created with the intent of being viewed or purchased by perverts,but the fact is these things happen, intent doesnt define use,we don't live in an ideal society. Maybe you have good intentions, but there are others who don't.
2007-01-31 20:25:08 · answer #2 · answered by wackywallwalker 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They say beauty is in the mind of the beholder. I would never photograph an individual under the age of 18 nude. It's more of my own personal morals. I know of professionals that do photograph minors nude and produce stunning results and I'm hapy for them - all the power to them.
I don't believe it's right. At what point does artsy become vulgar or illegal? It's a fine line that I would never even want to come close to.
2007-01-31 08:38:42 · answer #3 · answered by Ipshwitz 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I would find it offensive. There's no difference, or very little difference, between a 16 year old body and an 18 year old body. So, why not just use people of legal age and make everyone happy? It would be nice if we were a society of open nudity. But, the truth is that there are way to many perverts out there. Keep the nudity to 18 and over.
2007-01-31 08:25:38 · answer #4 · answered by ☆skyblue 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would not shoot a 16 year old even if the parents were there
2007-01-31 11:17:16 · answer #5 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course it is! Get a grip...
2007-01-31 09:22:43 · answer #6 · answered by john_e_29212 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No that is bad!
2007-02-01 12:31:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
some might say "that's disgusting! it's pornography!"
but i say, no, no, no,
this is beautiful
this is art
2007-01-31 08:03:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋