WhiteBears Visions wrote:
I don't know this person or what they are trying to do but just finished the first in a series of erotic shoots for a book.  I'm in there and there was no sexual contact-depending on the angle of the camera nothing even has touch touch and by shifting bodies the sexual organs don't touch.   There was no sex in this, there will be no sex in this [because of an organ transplant sex can be extremely chancy for me-what you might need a shot for I might lose a kidney so I'll pass.]   That's one of the reasons I'm doing this so I don't have to worry about people getting it on in my work area plus I *wanted* to do this if for no other reason.   The model knows after three hours naked with me and me letting her lead in what she was comfortable with and not-she even made suggestions that were more than I would have asked to try- that I'm one of the good guys and has seen some of the final work and it rocks.

I'd say that 99% of anyone that tells you 'it's for the art' is full of shot but there are those that really do things like this for the art.

So yeah-it can be 'for the art' but you have to make that decision.

So is this a medical book?

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
I'm glad to see that a model can ask such a serious question and get such serious answers.

serious!
hardly

LMAO

jon mmmayhem wrote:
are the people suggesting "why simulate it, why not just go ahead and do it" serious??

Sure. Lets say she just simulates it. If grandma sees it, is she going to have any different reaction than if she's really doing it.

"Oh, Grandma. I'm not really getting slammed hard. It just looks like I am."

jon mmmayhem wrote:
so why bother faking anything in photography at all?
why use props instead of the real thing?
isn't part of the magic of photography (yeah, i groaned just writing that, but let's go with it for now) that it can make someone look like they're doing something they're not?

I tend to do whatever's the easiest way to get the shot. Sure, I could drag a 4 ton boulder into my studio and shoot the real thing. But If I chose to do a shot using a 4 ton boulder I'm more inclined to make a fake paper mache one instead.

I just think it would be much easier to do a simulated sex shoot by just having the actual sex than worrying about taping things down or worrying about the male appearing to be a pervert in case he gets a hard on.

That doesn't mean you have to take pictures of the penetration porno style.

The way I see it.. lets say she does a simulated sex shot. Now there's photos of her floating around that appear that she is getting banged. What's the difference if she actually was? Even if it doesn't actually show it.

UnSeenYou wrote:
but too many will not be able to attempt this because you are too close to the edge.

i'm try-in' not to lose my head

Electra T wrote:
u look a bit like bethany elyse..

What? Wait a minute....who does? 
*looks around for evil twin*