Legacys 7 wrote:
My 2 cents. As a photographer, when creating a image, you are trying to create a theme. The question is, what is that theme that you are trying to create. Once you know what you want, you have to know how to simplify it. what you want in the image and what you don't want in the image. This is very important because your goal is to give a universal theme to the viewers that you are trying to show it to.

My opinion about your image. When I look at your image, the first place that my eyes go to is your model's nipples that are peeking out of the image. Why? Well because that is the most dominant part of your image. When a photographer makes one part of his image the more dominant part, he or she wants that to be the part that gets the most attention. And even if it's not what you had in mind, that is going to happen because this is how the human mind and eyes work.

If you don't want the type of feedback that you are getting, make another part of the model's body the more dominant. When I look at the image, I don't see the connection between your title and the nature of the subject. 

Example, in my latest image of a model that I had recently photographed on a grafitti mural, I made sure that she just didn't blend in with the grafitti wall. what I did was made her more dominate by giving more exposure on her and the grafitti wall more subtle. This worked because the model is more towards the right of the wall. When you look at the image, you eyes go directly to to model. If I didn't give her more exposure, she would blend in and your eyes would go to the wall first, which would make the image unsucessful.

Which is just my point!! On the most basic level this is a simple photograph of a rather attractive person with an appealing smile. It is all the other associations that are clothed/cloaked in this photo that are interesting to me. Sure--you can say this is just a half tit picture, but I like to think it is more. But we digress--my original issue was how I think there is too much emphasis on the raw sex of many photographs here without delving deeper into what one is really thinking/seeing in the work!! Maybe I din't give enough obvious cues to lead people to my "scope" on this photograph, but that is JUST what I am investigating. I'm going to put up a photograph in my portfolio of my sweet little kitten and entitle it "Naked Pussy" in the forum and see what happens!!

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

That is just my point. Becasue I said nude I got a great number of hits. If I had said "is my photo Too red", do you think I would get a lot of hits?

I've got to dsagree with you. The pic with the most hits in my port is of a completely dressed model and has that many becase I used her image as an example of one way to shoot eyes to get a "come hither" look. It has twice the hits that the only nude in my port has, but only because of using it as an example in a thread and the fact that the nude shot is not erotic.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:
First--I think you looked at the wrong photograph. I was refererring not to my current avatar, but one in my portfolio. There is very, very minimal Photoshop in that photograph.

Secondly--is this a smoldering inferiority complex or just comedic sarcasm?

If this photo doesn't work for you as a "baby step" expansion of the normal T&A genre then--"you can't win 'em all". BTW--I can be arrogant, I can be Humble--but the real gist of this post was about people, probably like yourself, who are here for the main purpose on tittylation!

get over yourself I don't come here for tittylation, I go to other places for that. I come here to see the comedians and mock the infirm.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

Which is just my point!! On the most basic level this is a simple photograph of a rather attractive person with an appealing smile. It is all the other associations that are clothed/cloaked in this photo that are interesting to me. Sure--you can say this is just a half tit picture, but I like to think it is more. But we digress--my original issue was how I think there is too much emphasis on the raw sex of many photographs here without delving deeper into what one is really thinking/seeing in the work!! Maybe I din't give enough obvious cues to lead people to my "scope" on this photograph, but that is JUST what I am investigating. I'm going to put up a photograph in my portfolio of my sweet little kitten and entitle it "Naked Pussy" in the forum and see what happens!!

Long story short, you didn't convey your point in the image, which is my point. You pulled the viewers directly into the model's nipples. Almost like a tease type of image. You have to look at your image also from a techincal perspective along side the artistic. Technical, because you want to make sure that something isn't going to dominate the image that will take away from the theme that you are trying to display. This is what will make and break a image period. no matter how good that you are at exposures and taking pictures.

Lens N Light wrote:

I've got to dsagree with you. The pic with the most hits in my port is of a completely dressed model and has that many becase I used her image as an example of one way to shoot eyes to get a "come hither" look. It has twice the hits that the only nude in my port has, but only because of using it as an example in a thread and the fact that the nude shot is not erotic.

Thanks for your comments. I think your "Lonely Road" is by far the best photograph in your port. The photograph that got the 2nd higherst hits is a good example of what I speak of. It is the obvious "sexy" cues in the photograph that is attracting the hits. Why is that! Your "Lonely Road", in my opinion has much greater merit!! Your nude shot is so "otherwordly" that I think it negates the usual "MM Dog" attention.

Legacys 7 wrote:

Long story short, you didn't convey your point in the image, which is my point. You pulled the viewers directly into the model's nipples. Almost like a tease type of image. You have to look at your image also from a techincal perspective along side the artistic. Technical, because you want to make sure that something isn't going to dominate the image that will take away from the theme that you are trying to display. This is what will make and break a image period. no matter how good that you are at exposures and taking pictures.

Thanks Legacy--I'll work with that!!

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

Half and half. It was just a test, but is an issue that is perplexing. I am on another site which is quite enjoyable and they filter out most nudes--have a look:

http://www.solomodels.com/?referrer=xxxxxxx

Wow, you're attention whoring and spamming.  Nice.

gdsandy wrote:

get over yourself I don't come here for tittylation, I go to other places for that. I come here to see the comedians and mock the infirm.

Ordinarily I don't stop to low level innuedo, but you started it.

You need to get INTO yourself not OVER your self and figure out why you are spending your time shooting such BORING Photographs.
It that a joke, sarcasm, pointed criticism or an insular comment from the infirm?

Brian Diaz wrote:

Wow, you're attention whoring and spamming.  Nice.

Attention whoring, maybe--spamming--sorry, I will remove the possible Spam part. I was just showing an example of a site without T&A that is quite good.

gdsandy wrote:

Wow you must be great, all those photographers and artists T&A merchants and suddenly you move the genre forward.  I bow to your superior artistic integrity.  Get some humility man that's just T and A with photoshop.

I just got it!
You think the blue eyes are photoshopped!! That is just what the photograph is partly about. An African-Ameican women with genuine blue eyes. An evolutionarily unique anomaly.
Bye--I'm bored with this.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:
We gotta face it people--there is an exaggerated interest in sexually oriented photographs on MM. I placed a question about my nude avatar and got more looks at that photo in 2 hours than my other photos got in 5 months. I know--the jokers will say because the others are just bad, but I don't think so. Because I had "nude" in the title the "hawks of sex" zooomed in. Now, I enjoy a beautiful photograph of a beautiful woman. But the photos need to go beyond just showing a nice smile and some T&A. In the shot I am referring to in my port, I think I took the T&A shot to a different place. I don't even think it is in the T&A genre that most of the photos I see on MM.  I was testing the limits of exposure/nudity. Mental sensuality as opposed to "here it is, let me sock it to you".

What does everyone else think?

I think people want what they want....and wagging a finger at them to want (do) something else is just silly as hell.

Why is it that someone is always judging someone for what they simply innocently want.

As long as it isn't victimizing anyone, what the heck does it really matter.

America is sex obsessed-because it is sex repressed.

I don't care for the general levels of T&A and female objectification many ports have-I find it as boring as you perhaps. As Oscar Wilde commented (very loosely paraphrased here) regarding pornography-'it's tiresome'. Ya!

But admonishing people for it in a PC way....is more tiresome still.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

People looked at the image because you asked for help.  You might have got a lot of hits even if you asked if the photo was "Too red"  I think you drew the wrong conclusion.

Well I think you're being naive. He's 100% right about the people on this site flocking to the nude pictures. I don't shoot nude and if I did I wouldn't post them on this site. I know that when I ask for feedback on an image I maybe get 1 to 5 responses. I know it's not because my work is low grade because ass all of us know that's simply not the case. Everyone has eyes for different types of work but the fact of the matter is that most photographers are horny men that like naked chicks. Don't try and make up some lame excuse for it. Except that this is a reality and know that there are allot of photographer on this site that pull out there dick and double click.

Jeff Marsh wrote:
Come on folks, you can figure out what he's doing, right?

Yes I do its called Shock Advertising. You cause a scene so that people will look at your work. Don't be a hater.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

I just got it!
You think the blue eyes are photoshopped!! That is just what the photograph is partly about. An African-Ameican women with genuine blue eyes. An evolutionarily unique anomaly.
Bye--I'm bored with this.

More common than what you think. We do have blue, grey, green and hazel eyes. I'm one of them. And if you go to Milwaukee, Wis. you'll see that it is very common to see light eyes on blacks from the darkest to the lightest skin.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

I just got it!
You think the blue eyes are photoshopped!! That is just what the photograph is partly about. An African-Ameican women with genuine blue eyes. An evolutionarily unique anomaly.
Bye--I'm bored with this.

Hi
You are a great photographer. I liked the unique sense that you give to your pics. You have a good eye.
Take care

Thomasio wrote:
I'd love to see a rating system for photographers here.

~T~

Based on whose subjective standard.

One person's trash is another person's treasure.

Sort of like beauty.

We gotta face it people--there is an exaggerated interest in sexually oriented photographs on MM.

Even I'm not naive enough to think it's something only MM is afflicted with.  I mean, hell, the internet itself is basically built around porn.  At least this site tries to keep the gratuitous content down.

Marie Spring wrote:

Hi
You are a great photographer. I liked the unique sense that you give to your pics. You have a good eye.
Take care

Thank You very much!  I do seek a different way of seeing!!

Lexi Evans wrote:
ohh yea...i also forgot....

people are attracted to nakie women. its not suprising, or twisted. we are perverted.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:
I know--the jokers will say because the others are just bad, but I don't think so.
What does everyone else think?

Did anyone say THAT one was good? But seriously folks..moving on. You asked for help/opinion and the generious people here at MM took their time and gave it to you and now you are trying to throw some generalization back at all of us?
Mike

Mike Walker wrote:

Did anyone say THAT one was good? But seriously folks..moving on. You asked for help/opinion and the generious people here at MM took their time and gave it to you and now you are trying to throw some generalization back at all of us?
Mike

I have asked for help before, but not with a nude photograph involved. Almost got no response. I know I teased and goaded and entraped, but I think any honest person on this site would say it is drowning in booty shots and gratuitous nudity. Of course this doesn't apply to my photo--it is ABOUT nudity

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

I have asked for help before, but not with a nude photograph involved. Almost got no response. I know I teased and goaded and entraped, but I think any honest person on this site would say it is drowning in booty shots and gratuitous nudity. Of course this doesn't apply to my photo--it is ABOUT nudity

to entrap and goad is a contradiction to your writings about photography. It's as if you are just writing to look like you are important. why goad and entrap? just let your work speak for itself. if it doesn't, then it means that you have to redo. your work to get your point across.

Legacys 7 wrote:

to entrap and goad is a contradiction to your writings about photography. It's as if you are just writing to look like you are important. why goad and entrap? just let your work speak for itself. if it doesn't, then it means that you have to redo. your work to get your point across.

Hey Legacy-- I AM important!! It is not my writing nor my photographs that do that though. The mere fact of existence (objective reality) is what makes EVERYTHING important. My "admission" of "goading" etc. was an attempt to relate to what I was accused of and squash it so that the semantics would not obscure the oringal idea of the forum post. BTW--I am constantly re-doing my work. The ideas for all my photographs are works in progress. The only point I wish to make in my photos is for the viewer to think/feel/learn something about the world/themselves and for a fleeting moment to be transported to a different place than where they were before they viewed my photograph.

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:
We gotta face it people--there is an exaggerated interest in sexually oriented photographs on MM. I placed a question about my nude avatar and got more looks at that photo in 2 hours than my other photos got in 5 months. I know--the jokers will say because the others are just bad, but I don't think so. Because I had "nude" in the title the "hawks of sex" zooomed in. Now, I enjoy a beautiful photograph of a beautiful woman. But the photos need to go beyond just showing a nice smile and some T&A. In the shot I am referring to in my port, I think I took the T&A shot to a different place. I don't even think it is in the T&A genre that most of the photos I see on MM.  I was testing the limits of exposure/nudity. Mental sensuality as opposed to "here it is, let me sock it to you".

What does everyone else think?

Well, art is art, but sometimes T&A is more aesthetically pleasing than looking at some model with a bizarre make up job, or showing off the latest corporate wear.  I admit I am enamored with the female form, and tend to enjoy nudes more than most other pictures.  In my own port, I feature one or two (well, one now, but a second is coming soon), but I also have sunsets, and other model shots and will be putting a macro shot in there soon too.  At the end of the day, you should just put what you feel is a good expression of your artistic self in your port, and stop worrying about how many people are slobbering over naked chicks..

MainFragger/Brian

Brian Egendorf wrote:
Well, art is art, but sometimes T&A is more aesthetically pleasing than looking at some model with a bizarre make up job, or showing off the latest corporate wear.  I admit I am enamored with the female form, and tend to enjoy nudes more than most other pictures.  In my own port, I feature one or two (well, one now, but a second is coming soon), but I also have sunsets, and other model shots and will be putting a macro shot in there soon too.  At the end of the day, you should just put what you feel is a good expression of your artistic self in your port, and stop worrying about how many people are slobbering over naked chicks..

MainFragger/Brian

I-I-I know. I just wanted to stimulate some thoughts using words and not my photographs. It was a slow afternoon. It has been a fun conversation! My comments are true and heart felt though--I'm not just BSing. Of course I may sound like I am so full of myself that I can't get my head out of my own ass, but that is the consequence of self exploration I guess.

Oh-oh--have I dropped another bomb?

Studio Yeah-Yeah wrote:

Hey Legacy-- I AM important!! It is not my writing nor my photographs that do that though. The mere fact of existence (objective reality) is what makes EVERYTHING important. My "admission" of "goading" etc. was an attempt to relate to what I was accused of and squash it so that the semantics would not obscure the oringal idea of the forum post. BTW--I am constantly re-doing my work. The ideas for all my photographs are works in progress. The only point I wish to make in my photos is for the viewer to think/feel/learn something about the world/themselves and for a fleeting moment to be transported to a different place than where they were before they viewed my photograph.

No need to convince me that you are important because I never even addressed that.

But when you have to try to pull a person in by goading it just shows that there is a lack of.

you also have to address the fact that your writings and your images are apart of you, no matter how much you try to seperate them. Your writings express what you feel.

Brian Diaz wrote:
Is this thread designed to attract more attention to your critique thread and your portfolio in general?

I thought thats what the Site Related Discussion post was for? Oh well...

Legacy,

Everything I do is an expression of me. Of course some is sarcasm, humor, goading, inflammatory, etc. My main purpose of all of this was to use my meager image which "skirted the edge" to stimulate thought and conversation.
This has been the most fun I ever had on this slow-ass site!!

Lens N Light wrote:

I've got to dsagree with you. The pic with the most hits in my port is of a completely dressed model and has that many becase I used her image as an example of one way to shoot eyes to get a "come hither" look. It has twice the hits that the only nude in my port has, but only because of using it as an example in a thread and the fact that the nude shot is not erotic.

Yeah, I agree too, the picture with clothes on in my port generates more views than ANY of my nudes and implied nudes.

UdoR wrote:

Yeah, I agree too, the picture with clothes on in my port generates more views than ANY of my nudes and implied nudes.

UdoR,
I admire your photograhy, but you don't HAVE any nude or any really implied nudes in your port here. If you did--with your eye and ability--the MMers I speak of would be frothing at their mouths. I challenge you to put up a nude you shot and see. Not a trash shot--something you like (if you have any)--YOU would shut the server down!!