Tape Her Up wrote:
Kevin, it's as I've said: methinks Garry doth protest too much.  I have never known a so-called High Fashion Photographer to be so ....


My response

Cuz you dont know  any period ... and what if anything I am obsessed with is values and debate

Garry k wrote:
My response

Cuz you dont know  any period ... and what if anything I am obsessed with is values and debate

On this board, Garry, you are the only so-called High Fashion Photographer who obsesses on the issues of bondage photography and underage nudity.  No one else.  Hell, the moderators don't obsess on these issues. 

Now...what do you have to say about that?

Tape Her Up wrote:
I try my best to amuse, Carelyn.

BTW, Garry, I just posted a pic of plus sized model Reyna in my port.  While there, I remembered that I had a photo of 45 year old Paige Turner in my port as well.

Again, you looked like a raging idiot.  But that's normal for you by now.

Sorry I just couldnt fine the lady you mention on your MM site - So ( with trepedation ) I ventured to your " official " site - the arcade /pay site .....

So is this model  the one you label as being " captured by the mad thug " ( your words not mine ) ..... Further if that is how you view yourself -you are sadly mistaken as you are no thug in fact a real thug would feel that with you there would be no rapport

Garry k wrote:
Sorry I just couldnt fine the lady you mention on your MM site - So ( with trepedation ) I ventured to your " official " site - the arcade /pay site .....

So is this model  the one you label as being " captured by the mad thug " ( your words not mine ) ..... Further if that is how you view yourself -you are sadly mistaken as you are no thug in fact a real thug would feel that with you there would be no rapport

Well, then your blind as well as stupid.  Let's see...Reyna's pic is labeled Reyna and Paige Turner's pic is labeled Paige Turner.  Right there in the portfolio for all to see.

Tape Her Up wrote:

Well, then your blind as well as stupid.  Let's see...Reyna's pic is labeled Reyna and Paige Turner's pic is labeled Paige Turner.  Right there in the portfolio for all to see.

The Mad THug ( Lol ) thats what Im calling you from now on .... thanks for the laugh....

Tape Her Up wrote:
I try my best to amuse, Carelyn.

There are some that are amused by your portfolio, to be sure. To me, bondage isn't slapping tape over someone's gob. But then strokes for folks.

And feck, I completely forgot to do that pic that I said I would. Hey ho, I'll get it sorted for the next shoot. I'd be interested to get your feedback, dude.

Tape Her Up wrote:
Notice Garry dance around the issue once more.

BTW, I'm surprised I missed your idiotic comment that I don't know any High Fashion Photographers.  How do you know who I know and who I don't know?  Man like me gets to meet all sorts of people from all walks of life.

Maybe even some real thugs ?

Tape Her Up wrote:
Notice Garry dance around the issue once more.

BTW, I'm surprised I missed your idiotic comment that I don't know any High Fashion Photographers.  How do you know who I know and who I don't know?  Man like me gets to meet all sorts of people from all walks of life.

Maybe even some real thugs ?

pw-gii photographics wrote:
The original post was an intriguing question and led to some intriguing answers.  But the thread got co-opted by personalities and egos.

Could we just let it go back to the original idea of listening to models either list or describe which type of modeling appeals to them?

As OP that sounds good to me . I did state that this forum was for models to respond to

Garry k wrote:
My response

Tell me professor  , how is a thread really ever "completed " ...( and some of mine have had hundreds of posting with out anything being "resolved")

Given that most of them have no valid questions behind them, that's not surprising. (Starting a thread with "I don't understand [something]. Isn't it just [some totally unrelated but negative statement]" isn't a real question: it's a polemic posed as a question.

As for being 'complete', it's based on your statement that you don't consider your threads complete unless Tape or I post. You've started how many hundreds of threads? How many have we commented on? I couldn't be the dozens or more that nobody responded to--the ones left to die on the vine from sheer lack of interest, and I daresay it's a tiny fraction of the remainder. (But as I've said before; I typically try to avoid your threads unless I'm seriously bored.)

Since your post didn't address any of the questions posed, calling it a response is silly.

Garry k wrote:
Instead of completing  my threads Kev , what I would really really really like to see is YOU come up w your own thread that is interesting ( then I can join in )

I understand you want me to ask some questions; it that so you can feel validated in asking question whose answers you don't care about? Sorry; I ask questions about things I'm genuinely curious, rather than out of boredom. I've told you that at least twice before, when you made your earlier "requests".

Garry k wrote:
... and what if anything I am obsessed with is values and debate

I'll go with "If Anything" for the block. Generally it's more of an attempt to push your values via a badly spun "question", followed-up with statement diminishing those holding a different view. But that's merely my interpretation of your words; you may have meant something other than what you wrote.

pw-gii photographics wrote:
Could we just let it go back to the original idea of listening to models either list or describe which type of modeling appeals to them?

FWIW, the current 'count' is N:14, B:16, with that total coming from 24 accounts listed as models. Photographer responses were excluded. Indication of 'both, but prefer X' were listed only as the preference. The one 'neither', and six 'both' responses were included.

pw-gii photographics wrote:
The original post was an intriguing question and led to some intriguing answers.  But the thread got co-opted by personalities and egos.

Could we just let it go back to the original idea of listening to models either list or describe which type of modeling appeals to them?

Respectfully, the original post was a loaded question with no qualifiers to judge on coming from a photographer with a known agenda in asking this question.  The OP also has had a history of belittling those whose opinion he finds deviate from his in this topic, so I sincerely doubt he's looking for anything but to stir the pot.

And now, if you don't mind, I have three shoots to edit up for my site.

DannyBourne wrote:

There are some that are amused by your portfolio, to be sure. To me, bondage isn't slapping tape over someone's gob. But then strokes for folks.

And feck, I completely forgot to do that pic that I said I would. Hey ho, I'll get it sorted for the next shoot. I'd be interested to get your feedback, dude.

Nor is bondage simply "slapping tape over someone's gob" to me, either.  And if you had taken the time to actually look at a full set at my site, you might have seen that.  Obviously, you're speaking out of ignorance.

You and Garry seem made for each other.

Garry k wrote:
And you know that I shoot the type of models that you only dream about ( and Ive had 2 photo shoots and a fashion show  in the past week -)So ?????

Time out....no offense Gary, but your "fashion" models are all the same- boring with no depth. I think you could probably do much better fashion with models that (yeah- tell me how they are all agency represented- frankly, I think they are all flat and boring) have something to offer. I don't think any of them could even handle bondage...because bondage can be interesting, and while your shots are good, there's nothing interesting about the girls in them. You seem to be doing all of the work...so to say to a bondage photographer that he wishes he could shoot your girls is silly because they look bored stiff in your photos, and I don't think that's what the bondage photographer is looking for.

I could be wrong though- why don't you shoot bondage with one of your fashion girls? I'd be curious to see if they can pull it off.

Daniela V wrote:

Time out....no offense Gary, but your "fashion" models are all the same- boring with no depth. I think you could probably do much better fashion with models that (yeah- tell me how they are all agency represented- frankly, I think they are all flat and boring) have something to offer. I don't think any of them could even handle bondage...because bondage can be interesting, and while your shots are good, there's nothing interesting about the girls in them. You seem to be doing all of the work...so to say to a bondage photographer that he wishes he could shoot your girls is silly because they look bored stiff in your photos, and I don't think that's what the bondage photographer is looking for.

I could be wrong though- why don't you shoot bondage with one of your fashion girls? I'd be curious to see if they can pull it off.

As they say...BITCHSLAP!

Thank you, Daniela.  You are far wiser than many others.  I, too, noticed the otherly bored look on most of those models' faces.  The other thing that absolutely gets me is how many of them just plain out look anorexic.  Most of them look like they could stand to eat a sandwich.

I had two very fun shoots on Saturday.  Nobody was bored and hell, I have yet to do a shoot with a model who was bored.  My models tend to be actresses as well in their own right, which helps a great deal.

Tape Her Up wrote:
I, too, noticed the otherly bored look on most of those models' faces.  The other thing that absolutely gets me is how many of them just plain out look anorexic.  Most of them look like they could stand to eat a sandwich.

Fashion models are always thin and rail like. But the good ones (Kate Moss types) have fire and energy with the camera....Garry's girls, don't. I think Garry is good as shooting, but he's not good at pulling anything out of these girls, and they bore me to tears...I think bondage my spice up his portfolio.

Garry k wrote:

As OP that sounds good to me . I did state that this forum was for models to respond to

despite gentle reminders from nuetral participants  Sad sacks Kev and Taper up just dont seem to get that this  forum is for models responses only . Given their  constant interference in this thread - As Op I am abandoning it

Daniela V wrote:
Time out....no offense Gary, but your "fashion" models are all the same- boring with no depth. I think you could probably do much better fashion with models that (yeah- tell me how they are all agency represented- frankly, I think they are all flat and boring) have something to offer. I don't think any of them could even handle bondage...because bondage can be interesting, and while your shots are good, there's nothing interesting about the girls in them. You seem to be doing all of the work...so to say to a bondage photographer that he wishes he could shoot your girls is silly because they look bored stiff in your photos, and I don't think that's what the bondage photographer is looking for.

I could be wrong though- why don't you shoot bondage with one of your fashion girls? I'd be curious to see if they can pull it off.

So you look at a simple photo of soemone in a particular  style of photography  -  and you can make a judgement on their chararacter . That be quite a skill  you have ......
( I would suggest maybe you have some paranormal ablilties ?)

Further  it is only thru Bondage that we are able to determine that a model has depth ?

And the looks of discomfort , agony , fear etc on a bondage models face are preferable  to looking detached /bored?

And as for Taperup wanting to shoot one of my models - he originally said it not me ( as forfeiture if I lost a previous  joust with him )

Garry k wrote:

So you look at a simple photo of soemone in a particular  style of photography  -  and you can make a judgement on their chararacter . That be quite a skill  you have ......
( I would suggest maybe you have some paranormal ablilties ?)

Further  it is only thru Bondage that we are able to determine that a model has depth ?

And the looks of discomfort , agony , fear etc on a bondage models face are preferable  to looking detached /bored?

And as for Taperup wanting to shoot one of my models - he originally said it not me ( as forfeiture if I lost a previous  joust with him )

Which, btw, you did indeed lose.

But allow me to translate this post and your previous post:

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Tape Her Up wrote:

Which, btw, you did indeed lose.

But allow me to translate this post and your previous post:

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

I havent been albe to persuade you to stop doing what your  doing - and  maybe no one will ever ..But at least I am not forced  to look at your "work "anymore -cuz everytime you try to post one of your Taped Models as an aavatar shot - you get censured by the mods -so maybe thats all I shall ever achieve . So be it .

Garry k wrote:
As OP that sounds good to me . I did state that this forum was for models to respond to

despite gentle reminders from nuetral participants  Sad sacks Kev and Taper up just dont seem to get that this  forum is for models responses only .

That must be why you posted it in General Mayhem--gotta keep your bondage and nudity topics in front of everyone, after all.

Garry k wrote:
Given their  constant interference in this thread - As Op I am abandoning it

For 13 minutes, at least.

Garry k wrote:
Further  it is only thru Bondage that we are able to determine that a model has depth ?

Garry k wrote:
But at least I am not forced  to look at your "work "anymore -cuz everytime you try to post one of your Taped Models as an aavatar shot - you get censured by the mods -so maybe thats all I shall ever achieve . So be it .

You also keep bondage photography in front of MM as well, starting new threads on the topic fairly regularly.

Current score for original question:
25 model accounts responding. Photographer accounts excluded.
Nudity:14
Bondage:17

Indication of 'both, but prefer X' were listed only as the preference.
One 'neither' (zero for each), and six with 'both' (counted as one for each)