Forums > General Industry > What is Full Frontal?

Model

CML

Posts: 279

Richmond, Virginia, US

Ive had a lot of photographers  decide to not work with me because I do not do full frontal.  I dont do open leg or spreads either.
   But do people know what I mean when I say No full frontal ?   Ive even had to send sample shots to some photographers saying.. ' full frontal'   'not full frontal'
I thought that full frontal meant showing the front part of the vagina, ie hood, and where the lips start, etc.   Is this correct?    Some models tell me that I can do full frontal but if I arch my back and make it to where you can't see 'below'  that is still considered full frontal as well.   
  Help ?

Mar 03 06 05:16 pm Link

Photographer

American Glamour

Posts: 38813

Detroit, Michigan, US

There is no absolute definition but "Full Frontal" is a picture taken from the front, in the nude, where the genitals are exposed in their natural state.  In other words, if you are facing the camera, pubic hair and the genital region could nominally be seen.

If you step up to "Explicit" nudity, that is generally where the genitals are fully exposed, such as you have described in your post.

"Spreads" are where the legs are wide open and the genitals are fully and graphically exposed. 

I know, the nuances are small.  It gets worse.

Playboy style used to be regarded as full frontal but not explicit.  However, Playboy now does tasteful, open leg.  So it is an artistic form of "Explicit."

So the problem is, when someone asks you if you do full-frontal nudity, in your case, you will do so, so long as it is relatively tasteful.  What you need to do is to ask the shooter what the term means to him.  Depending on what he is looking for, it may be within your comfort level.

Mar 03 06 05:34 pm Link

Model

spyro2122

Posts: 760

Orlando, Florida, US

alan is right about that one.

Mar 03 06 05:37 pm Link

Photographer

Jay Bowman

Posts: 6511

Los Angeles, California, US

Chanti wrote:
Help ?

Full frontal?


Twice a Full Nelson divided by a Half Windsor...


Seriously, I always thought that full-frontal showed all private areas when facing the camera.

Mar 03 06 05:44 pm Link

Model

CML

Posts: 279

Richmond, Virginia, US

Thats what I thought.  Thanks for the replies!

Mar 03 06 05:48 pm Link

Photographer

DeBoer Photography

Posts: 782

Melbourne, Florida, US

It sound like you are willing to do full nudity...

Just no SPREAD shots or explicit.

smile

BTW, can you send me a pic?  wink

- Denoy

Mar 03 06 06:11 pm Link

Model

CML

Posts: 279

Richmond, Virginia, US

DeBoer Photography wrote:
It sound like you are willing to do full nudity...

Just no SPREAD shots or explicit.

smile

BTW, can you send me a pic?  wink

- Denoy

Im willing to do full nudity, artistic, implied, and semi.
But not to where ANY part of my vagina shows.  So Im guessing I was right on the NO full frontal part.  Happy I know for sure now. smile

Mar 03 06 06:48 pm Link

Photographer

UnoMundo

Posts: 47532

Olympia, Washington, US

"But do people know what I mean when I say No full frontal ? "

are we talking sex or photography?

Mar 03 06 06:51 pm Link

Photographer

D. Brian Nelson

Posts: 5477

Rapid City, South Dakota, US

"Full frontal" is the opposite of "full backal."

See this thread.

-D

Mar 03 06 06:53 pm Link

Photographer

Glamour Boulevard

Posts: 8628

Sacramento, California, US

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Playboy style used to be regarded as full frontal but not explicit.  However, Playboy now does tasteful, open leg.  So it is an artistic form of "Explicit."

Exactly right. This is why I chuckle each time I see a model say the only style of nude she will do is artistic playboy style.I am guessing they are thinking of Daddys Playboy collection from the early 80s and before, because Playboy nudes are nothing like they used to be.

Mar 03 06 06:54 pm Link

Photographer

Christopher Wright

Posts: 11854

Lansing, Michigan, US

D. Brian Nelson wrote:
"Full frontal" is the opposite of "full backal."

-D

Dammit I was just going to post this.

Mar 03 06 06:54 pm Link

Model

Vladimir Londono

Posts: 62

Somerset, Kentucky, US

D. Brian Nelson wrote:
"Full frontal" is the opposite of "full backal."

See this thread.

-D

lol

Mar 03 06 06:55 pm Link

Model

CML

Posts: 279

Richmond, Virginia, US

haha.. saw that one.. at first i thought it was someone mocking this thread! =x  wink

Mar 03 06 07:39 pm Link

Photographer

studio36uk

Posts: 22898

Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna

Chanti,

IF you didn't have the bikini on in your avatar shot that would be classed as a full-frontal nude. But... because you shave that may also go beyond where you want to go with what is exposed. That's for you to decide.

Studio36

Mar 04 06 07:34 am Link

Photographer

S W I N S K E Y

Posts: 24376

Saint Petersburg, Florida, US

Chanti wrote:
haha.. saw that one.. at first i thought it was someone mocking this thread! =x  wink

mocking threads?...who would sdo something like that?

Mar 04 06 08:13 am Link

Photographer

NightShadows

Posts: 27

Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Chanti wrote:
Ive had a lot of photographers  decide to not work with me because I do not do full frontal.  I dont do open leg or spreads either.
   But do people know what I mean when I say No full frontal ?   Ive even had to send sample shots to some photographers saying.. ' full frontal'   'not full frontal'
I thought that full frontal meant showing the front part of the vagina, ie hood, and where the lips start, etc.   Is this correct?    Some models tell me that I can do full frontal but if I arch my back and make it to where you can't see 'below'  that is still considered full frontal as well.   
  Help ?

Maybe what you need to post is that you Do full frontal not explcit, then when contacted by the photographer you can define your terms of comfort.
My model in the avatar was willing to show as much cleavage as needed, as long as she wasn't popping out. Those were her terms.

Mar 04 06 08:25 am Link