Michael Barian wrote:
This simply urks me....I'm seeing 90 percent of your goddamn breast!

Either be conservative...or let loose, but if you do....do it right and all the way.

Simply annoying to look at.

it is a clue to what models I would never want to work with-

That's nor fair Michael. A LOT of photographers specify that pose during shoots so I don't think it's fair to base whether or not you'd shoot with that model on one photo that may or may not have been her choice. It's considered glamour and very common in non nude men's mags. Doesn't make it original but shouldn't automatically be considered a fault on the model's behalf.

StarlaMeris wrote:
It's the Suicide Girls generation.  All the girls want to prove they're naughty and rebellious but somehow they've picked up the notion that if you don't show nipples, it's not as slutty.  I'm guessing that's growing out of the legal ambiguity about nudity in media.  You have FHM and Stuff type magazine covers that can show basically anything but "naughty bits" and nipples  You have internet guidelines on sites like myspace that draw the line at nipples.  Network TV can even show pretty much anything so long as there are no genitals or nipples.

Go hang out on livejournal and myspace for a few weeks and you'll notice that half the underaged/barely legal girls have photos of themselves topless but hands over breasts or--so much worse--electrical tape over nipples and if you ask what they're thinking they'll give you the argument that "It's not illegal/immoral because you can't see nipple."  (I've had this argument many many times and it's always incredibly frustrating.)

I'm definitely in the camp that says if you're gonna get naked, get naked.  (If you're over 18.)

Katherine Phoenix wrote:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid=1368123
check this one out.

The model in the shot is beautiful,,, the hands over the breasts is a been there done that ! and I know,,, its been done millions of times before and is new to millions of people but I'd rather see clever use of a prop or body position. Why feign coyness? Lets make it a true Venus de Milo and see the breasts or as another thread writer said "reinvent it" ? Have you ever seen or experienced a topless female who is completely natural about her state of partial undress and not have a care in the world as to who's looking? Its a totally beautiful moment. The more natural and confident they are the more the true beauty of being a woman reveals itself. It's rarely captured in film.Most stuff on the web and in print portrays a captured orchestrated look. Even Playboy falls victim to this,,,yeah and I know they're intent is to make everything as perfect as possible but it also lacks authenticity. A few modelmayhem ports that featire topless or semi topless pictures of Elizabeth Ashley and Tavia Spizer have some really great great images .Hands on the breasts ,,,, nahhhh !!!!

Jphoto wrote:
Topless girl wearing angel wings sitting on the railroad track with her hands on her breasts, while wearing a school girl uniform, in black and white.

But done with a distinctive style.

Victorias Secrets and the never ending phalanx of angel winged models who emulate them gives me a royal headache. One sitting on railroad tracks in a school uniform a double headache!  Or maybe sucking on a lollipop! Pass me the aspirin! And give me a shot of Jack Daniels too. Years ago there was great website called "Spawn Valley" that had some remarkable images created by japanese photographers. Stunning colors, themes and execution of the art of photography. Inspiration was high viewing those images. But somebody had to pull the plug on it. And at last glance it became a hardcore porno site. Maybe they lost the domain name or something but that site and its former images always stand out in my mind .

Curt Burgess wrote:
I've been on MM for awhile (10 days longer than you ) and have noticed that. 

My main point was that when people bring up the "cliched photograph" issue, it's 1) inevitably hypocritical, 2) indicates some kind of superior attitude over other classes of images or photographers, and 3) reflects a lack of creativity.

.... I have to disagree. Its not about being superior. Its an opportunity to force another way of doing something.

RGK Photography wrote:

sorry, this one says she has more hair on her arms than I do

And more nipples than you ...haha

Christopher Ambler wrote:
Please, take a step back and stop being so snobbish.

The pose draws the distinction between what is allowed in mainstream American publications that are not considered nude, and what is not.

It's the difference between Maxim, which any pimply-faced 15 year-old can buy on the newsstand and Playboy, which he, for better or worse, can not.

Nipple and areola are considered nude. Covered, any amount of breast showing is considered non-nude for publication standards (note that I'm not making a legal distinction or even a codified distinction).

If you don't personally like the pose, fantastic. I, personally, hate clowns. But they seem to be popular at the circus. My problem, I suspect.

Thanks for this. I have some photos of myself completely topless, and covering myself. Some of it for me is to be seductive...but at the same time keep some mystery, and keep someone wanting more! Who cares about  a pose, we all have our poses we like, faces we like, expressions we like, does it matter that one person doesnt like the hand over the boob? No! I'll still have photos like that taken because it can be done creative, it can look beautiful TO ME! IF you like it or dont like it...well, tomatoes..tomatos....

Glamour Makeover Studio wrote:
who started this form of art, or is this art?

I like it when I see this...what is art?...you tell us and we'll follow.

Cherry Blossoms wrote:
Although I do agree that your traditional Maxim boob grip is over done;)

Again I ask: What ISN'T over done nowadays? Seriously?

Ransom J wrote:

Again I ask: What ISN'T over done nowadays? Seriously?

.. lol.. I know that I inspire the works of Gil Elvgren. And alot of people feel thats over done. So I guess most people are in the over done boat;)

Glamour Makeover Studio wrote:
have been a photographer for many years

"for many years" is vague ...

Glamour Makeover Studio wrote:
have noticed in many portfolios pictures of female models with their hands over one or more of their bare breast. I am trying to understand what type of nude art this is

... but some of us think too much, myself included; maybe we can focus on the fact that ours is a visual art & leave off the words, narrations, and explanations for what has been done over & over?

CL Photography wrote:
Hand over your breast, it's so over done.

and yet we look, don't we?!?

FML

Jenn Rayne wrote:

Thanks for this. I have some photos of myself completely topless, and covering myself. Some of it for me is to be seductive...but at the same time keep some mystery, and keep someone wanting more! Who cares about  a pose, we all have our poses we like, faces we like, expressions we like, does it matter that one person doesnt like the hand over the boob? No! I'll still have photos like that taken because it can be done creative, it can look beautiful TO ME! IF you like it or dont like it...well, tomatoes..tomatos....

Amen sister!

Jay Bowman wrote:
I know that I should be shot for bumping this thread but I find this amusing.


We may bitch and whine about how things are sooooo overdone but are they really?  I was looking at the 2007 Sports Illustrated calenday in Borders today and there are no less that three hand over breast shots in there.  3 out of 12 shots.  The certainly wouldn't shoot it if the common guy didn't like to see it. 


So we might say it's so passe and whatnot, but what do we know?

Right on the money! The market dictates what is "hot" and what is "not".

Ransom J wrote:
It's glamour.

Text book tease.

yup, they teach it to you the first day of stripper school

JvR wrote:
Since when does one pose stand for a style? It's a pose, that's all.

Exactly!!

https://img4.modelmayhem.com/061014/13/ … 32dd7e.jpg

BTW...the other three shots in the series show the breast - not teasing, just a pose.

S