I am a photographer. It is one of my biggest hobbies. there is a difference between nude art and porn. This is definetly not innapropriate or pornographic. These pictures show the elegance and beauty of a women. They are all in natural environments and naturally portrayed. They are not sexual, but elegant. It shows a nude female body can capture more than just sex. It shows freedom. You agree, not porn?? I love this art.
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/5742/89947amandabeardadultswig7.jpg
http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/3397/89958amandabeardadultswjk3.jpg
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/7508/89944amandabeardadultswag3.jpg
http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/1446/pb200105350001copygs5.jpg
2007-06-10 14:42:19 · 33 answers · asked by The P 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
THE LAST ONE IS DEFINITELY THE MOST DRASTIC, BUT IT SHOWS COMPLETE FREEDOM. IM SURE YOU WOMEN OUT THERE HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE. JUST RELAX FREELY.
2007-06-10 14:43:13 · update #1
i think that you should be ashamed of yourself...there are young childern on here...and yes, i think that those revealing pictures of naked women are forms of porn, and if you dont think so...go grab a playboy magizine and look at some of their pictures...look familiar??
2007-06-10 14:49:34 · answer #1 · answered by White Rose 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are quite talented. I am surprised that it is merely a hobby for you. The lighting, composition, idea are all quite well done. My only negative is that the pose is essentially the same in the first three, though I assume that is just a coincidence. The lighting, composition and idea of the fourth aren't to the level of the first three. I think you know that.
Even the Supreme Court acknowledges "obscenity" is subjective. but go into any museum anywhere and there will be many masterpieces that are nudes. If people choose to be offended by them, then that must be their own burden to bear. It's not your fault! Good job. Keep it up.
2007-06-10 14:56:04 · answer #2 · answered by writealready 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes they are are very beautiful, the poses should have been a bit exaggerated but the third one reminds me of some bondage art i once saw, very good work! and to that lady WHO said you should be ashamed, shes obviously an idiot because there are complete differences, these woman are not suggesting sex, why is it the first thing that pops in peoples heads when they see a nude, I'm sure of it that nudists would be pissssssssed of at that woman & anyone else who agrees with her for sayng that, and another thing, if your a good parent your kids should know better than to be calling it porn and seeing it in an imautre way, when you think bad, that refelts poor on you!!!!! by the way the third is beatuiful,but it sort of does remind me of playboy, the pubir hair probally did it, well keep on doing your thing and skrew the haters!!!
2007-06-10 15:03:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This isn't porn. This is tasteful nude art photography. There is no sex, no sexual acts, and nothing inappropriate going on. It's the natural human body, in a natural setting. These pictures are not made to arouse, it's simply pleasing to the eyes of artistic people. But I wouldn't recommend posting these in the view of children.
2007-06-10 14:46:57 · answer #4 · answered by Maikau 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would classify the last one as porn and the 3rd one a close second. To me, to be art there has to be a reason for the picture, not just a naked body. The genitals should not be your first thing noticed in the photo if it is then it is porn.
2007-06-10 14:46:12 · answer #5 · answered by I got 2 points for this answer 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I looked at the first two and I think they are portrayed as art not porn. I think it's sad that men can't look at them as art either. The first thing they think when they see an artistic picture like that is sex which isn't fair because I think it is art.
2007-06-10 14:48:48 · answer #6 · answered by Blondie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they are actually pretty. The first one is my favorite. The last one is the most sultry. As long as they are of age I dont see the problem. The first one is the best because it is the least sexual and you really see the beauty of a womans body. It is the most artistic. The contrast of the water and her skin is interesting. But every guy is probably going to masterbate to these pics. I mean after all they are naked women. Try to make all of your pics like the first so it looks less pornographic.
2016-05-17 05:09:18 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really like the first two pictures, they show imagination and artistic ability. The second are less artsy, but not pornography, however they could be pictures that are preludes to more sexual pictures, if they were in a run.
2007-06-10 14:46:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
they are truly art, nothing pornographic about them at all, except maybe a hint of bondage in the 508 pic because of the chain type jewelry she has.
it puts in my mind a couple of nude painting at the nelson.
i'd love to do some of this sort of work i think it is quite beautiful.
2007-06-10 14:49:38 · answer #9 · answered by captsnuf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it's not porn!!! Women or men posed nude is art not xxx porn. Porn involves a sexual act on film.
2007-06-10 14:47:44 · answer #10 · answered by Fat Boy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sheesh hot women undress for you to take their picture.... maybe I need to take up that hobby too...
As you admitted, the last one might be a little borderline, but the rest are not porn, and quite nice.
2007-06-10 14:46:34 · answer #11 · answered by Mike 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋