Daniela V wrote:

Then you could always shoot models with fake ta-tas in the buff....then everyone can *imagine* what they would look like with real breatisis.

get it? cause you said...leave to the imagination? hahahahaha.

ok this thera-flu is kicking my a$$...

LMAO - good answer.

Amy  Leigh wrote:
You know, CHEERS to you for not shooting nudes. So many photographers DO want nudes, and not that i shun them for what they want in their ports, but i wonder what it is for... If not for money/commercial work or some sort of gain, do they have a bunch of nudey-photoshopped pictures lying around for fun?    although, some have "hobbies" i just don't trust certain people i guess...haha

If for nothing else, perhaps, to be a part of a grand historical artistic tradition/right of passage.

Why do people go to the middle east to walk the trail of tears of Jesus walk to the cross? 
Why do people go to China to walk the Great Wall?
Why do people take burrows down into the Grand Canyon?
Why do people come from all over to ride the trolleys in San Francisco? 
Why do people follow the Mississippi river to it's source?

Nudes have been done by the sketchers, the etchers, the painters, the chalkers, the inkers, the sculpters, the printers, the puzzle-makers, the beaters of metal, the makers of glass...ad infinitum.

If you need to ask you will never know.

Pat Thielen wrote:
I won't. Never! There's nothing more un-natural than the nude human form. It should be covered at all times and people should only have sex in the dark with a sheet between themselves. Nude photography is the gateway to other nude activities and so it should never be done under any circumstances. In fact, I think all animals should be forced to wear clothes as well. After all, if nudity is bad for humans it must be bad for other species as well.

  Yeah!!!!!