Glamour Boulevard wrote:
Ok, I gotta watch this. This is where all the "GB doesn`t know what he is doing/talking about" crowd will hang out for a few days,lol. Should be some interesting reading soon.

hehehehe - without a doubt!

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
Ok, I gotta watch this. This is where all the "GB doesn`t know what he is doing/talking about" crowd will hang out for a few days,lol. Should be some interesting reading soon.

That was not my intent, and if that's what happens, I'll regret starting the thread.

I could have phrased my question more precisely rather than trying to form words after a 3 a.m. bout of insomnia:

Is this site geared predominantly, primarily, heavily, toward fashion/glamour photography? If so, is a primarily art photographer out of place as more of an oddity or novelty?

Justin wrote:
Is this site geared predominantly, primarily, heavily, toward fashion/glamour photography?

If you look around at the profiles, especially the more well known members, you will see that is mostly the case.

If so, is a primarily art photographer out of place as more of an oddity or novelty?

Not to me. I think we can all exist together here.

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Just as long as I don't see kids posing spread eagle in a bikini I'm just peachy ~

Someone has been a member of the other site and seen the teen showcases,lol.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
I mean.... I wish this site were also geared toward the art and fine art photography side of things but it has been my experience that it is not.

It is not.....as there are enough sites out there expressly for that. ALthough you can see some fine art photos here.

Show us that you can do more than take a picture of a nekkid chick. ;-D

DawnElizabeth Moderator wrote:

It is not.....as there are enough sites out there expressly for that. ALthough you can see some fine art photos here.

Show us that you can do more than take a picture of a nekkid chick. ;-D

wow, you edited your post like 2 times in less than a minute,lol. ill let you finish before I decide what my reply will be,lol.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

wow, you edited your post like 2 times in less than a minute,lol. ill let you finish before I decide what my reply will be,lol.

No, I edited it once. I hit the reply before I was done the first time.

DawnElizabeth Moderator wrote:

[qoute]It is not.....as there are enough sites out there expressly for that. ALthough you can see some fine art photos here.[/qoute] I concur

[quoteShow us that you can do more than take a picture of a nekkid chick. ;-D

I have plenty, but most of my art/fine art photography does not have human subjects at all, therefore really would not fit in here. A lot of it has been and is currently hanging at a few local showings as we speak.

DawnElizabeth Moderator wrote:
Dang. Something weird is happening. I hit the reply and my reply didn't send, but after refreshing the page...there it was.

ok, so the weirdness is not just me,lol. I was just sitting here and stuff went weird.

Experimental Artworks wrote:
hey your awake you have a msg hun

I replied. My apologies!

IDtenTANGO wrote:
MM is about...

I have an idea.  Maybe, just for a week or so, we could make MM be about me.  ('Cause I thought of it.)  I get first choice on all paid gigs and worthy TFP/CD.  And people have to be nice to me in posts.

After that, everybody can vote on who gets to be next.

Theda tried that at a MOD board meeting. It didn`t go over well.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
I would love to see more photographers and models who do more art photography here, and an additional forum category as well for the subject and critiquing of it. A lot of fashion/glamour/commercial photographers often just do not "get" fine art photography , and therefore if they do not like the image, instead of critiquing it they spend their time saying why they dont like it and why it would never work in the fashion/glamour/commercial industry, when it wasnt even aimed at that in the first place.

I am not sure of the original context of the original statement that MM is mostly fashion/glamour,   but it is.    Not set up that way but the way it turned out.

There are plenty of artists and artistic work here but that is not the majority.   I choose to show my fashion work here with a sprinkling of art once in a while.   

But I keep that work separate in the land based work for many reasons,   my art work is often very different than my fashion/commercial work.  I have separations upon separations.

Why show my still life jewelry work here also?   Not needed and wasting the space.

So I would agree with GB statement that you will likely get a critique based upon the experiences of the group.    This can be bad for you if you are seeking only a critique in an art context or you can use it to your advantage seeing how your art would be seen in other section of the business.   The art is great for a gallery but would someone hire me to do a commercial/portrait job with that style of art work?   

No one site can be everything to everyone.   I would be a mess.

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Just as long as I don't see kids posing spread eagle in a bikini I'm just peachy ~

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
Someone has been a member of the other site and seen the teen showcases,lol.

And one of the reasons I like this site.

Justin wrote:
This is not meant to be challenging.

I offered an offhand suggestion to Mr. Boulevard in response to his query in the Critique section. Part of his response:

"... good photography is not always about the subject looking right into the lens. But this site is geared more toward fashion/glamour." (Emphasis added by me.)

I didn't catch a "gearing" when I opened my portfolio. (Indeed, since it was free, I figured that, if anything, it was geared toward people who were limiting their spending on portfolios.) I realize that all are welcome, assuming some baseline competence is seen.

But is the main thrust really toward the fashion/glamour side? (That would explain a couple issues that I've felt, no doubt.) Is the artistic (however pretentiously or literally you define that) side of photography more of a novelty or oddity here? If I had seen that when I set up the portfolio, I probably would've done things differently.

Technically, from a Marketing standpoint, if you look at the name, one would think Model Mayhem would be about models. A bunch of crazy models running around, partyin, makin noise, bein catty.

Not about photographers/photography at all.

Justin wrote:
Is the artistic (however pretentiously or literally you define that) side of photography more of a novelty or oddity here?

That hasn't been my experience.  I model entirely in the art world, and I've met some great people here and made some amazing connections for future shoots with world class artists-with-cameras.  Don't be discouraged.  There's all kinds here.

Marksora wrote:

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
I would love to see more photographers and models who do more art photography here, and an additional forum category as well for the subject and critiquing of it. A lot of fashion/glamour/commercial photographers often just do not "get" fine art photography , and therefore if they do not like the image, instead of critiquing it they spend their time saying why they dont like it and why it would never work in the fashion/glamour/commercial industry, when it wasnt even aimed at that in the first place.

I am not sure of the original context of the original statement that MM is mostly fashion/glamour,   but it is.    Not set up that way but the way it turned out.

There are plenty of artists and artistic work here but that is not the majority.   I choose to show my fashion work here with a sprinkling of art once in a while.   

But I keep that work separate in the land based work for many reasons,   my art work is often very different than my fashion/commercial work.  I have separations upon separations.

Why show my still life jewelry work here also?   Not needed and wasting the space.

So I would agree with GB statement that you will likely get a critique based upon the experiences of the group.    This can be bad for you if you are seeking only a critique in an art context or you can use it to your advantage seeing how your art would be seen in other section of the business.   The art is great for a gallery but would someone hire me to do a commercial/portrait job with that style of art work?   

No one site can be everything to everyone.   I would be a mess.

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Just as long as I don't see kids posing spread eagle in a bikini I'm just peachy ~

And one of the reasons I like this site.

I agree, and I even have different business names/websites for my art and fetish work to make sure they stay seperate. as for the teens in bikinis on the other site, since this is mainly a fashion and glamour website, and that there are 16 and 17 year olds allowed, those types of shots are already here in the portfolios of some girls that age. Not really anything you can do until it is pornographic.