a question of taste

[paulfish4570]

this is an old issue, but i think there is still some meat on the bone: should nudes and cheesecake shots be posted in the general gallery?

my faith aside (and i mean this sincerely), i think they should be posted in their own gallery, easily accessible, so anyone who wants to see them can do so but without exposing the shots (nice pun, right?) to everyone using the general gallery.

i do not like nude/cheesecake shots, period. 99.99999999 percent of them are of young women. i cannot help but think of these young women as someone's daughters and/or grandaughters - which they are - not as "models" or "subjects" for exploring light and shadow and line.

cheesecake shots - which can be nude, but not necessairly so - clearly are meant to be sexually provocative. there is no other reason for them.

in recent weeks, the number of nude/cheesecake shots seems to have grown significantly. i'd prefer to not be faced with nude/cheesecake thumbnails on what seems at times to be every other page in the gallery. i'd bet a bunch of other members see this issue the way i do.

consider it not as an issue of censoring, but of taste. let us choose, please, whether we want to see these shots.

 

[35mmdelux]

its not a question of taste IMO. It has more to do with the values of this site which is often said to be a family leaning -- not right-wing necessarily but more middle-of-the-road. Teenagers view this website as do women, and the kids of shooters too. Nudes are part of an artist arsenal. However some have said photography is not an "art." So which is it? Some photos here demean women.

 

[paulfish4570]

i went back 26 gallery pages to last sunday and counted the number of nudes/cheesecakes, which was nine. that's one for every three pages.

 

[rover]

Paul, I just looked to confirm, and you do actually have that choice now.

On the gallery page, click to see your profile, then choose Edit Profile. The first question asks if you would like to view mature content.

The next issue on hand is up to the users of the gallery who must correctly identify their images as mature when posting so that this filter can work.

 

[t.s.k.]

It's also up to the discretion of the author whether to tag the image as mature, right?

 

[rover]

It's also up to the discretion of the author whether to tag the image as mature, right?

correct...

 

[newspaperguy]

Thanks for the tip, Rover. I had completely forgotten that.

That said, I am less concerned with morality than Paul is, BUT...

realize that I hesitate to open the gallery while I'm at school for fear

of what might pop up .. or out... in front of students.

Rick

.

 

[paulfish4570]

i went back 48 pages and counted 14 or 15 that i'd consider nude/cheesecake; that's about one for every three pages. i will do that profile thing and then count. thanks for the profile tip.

 

[Sparrow]

Although I have no idea what a cheesecake shot is I would object to any general censorship here, or anywhere for that matter. I have no problem with a user induced mature content filter but would be appalled if any one person were deciding what was suitable for me to view.

Anyway the idea of banishing photographic nudity on the interweb is laughable, it's been an intrinsic part of photography from the outset

 

[dave lackey]

Well, IMO, I have no problem with nudes, etc. at any point EXCEPT when it is inappropriate for others. Such as when I am at my desk going through the gallery, opening up the page or whatever and my grandkids ages 3-7 come into the room.

It is not a touchy issue with my son and daughter with their own kids but it is inappropriate at times like that as it should be, so, I would vote for a separation of certain material if we have an option.:angel: And it is not just on the gallery, it pops up on threads periodically.

 

[jippiejee]

Is there an option to show nudes only? Thnx in advance.

 

[rover]

Although I have no idea what a cheesecake shot is I would object to any general censorship here, or anywhere for that matter. I have no problem with a user induced mature content filter but would be appalled if any one person were deciding what was suitable for me to view.

Anyway the idea of banishing photographic nudity on the interweb is laughable, it's been an intrinsic part of photography from the outset

You have to keep in mind that there are RFF rules regarding this for use of the Gallery.

Nudity is an acceptable form of art on this site. Photographs may not, however, show male or female genitalia or any acts of sex. Nudity should be presented in a tasteful manner.

So, as long as an image is within the rules of the forum, then I agree, and Paul has clearly stated this too, censorship is not needed, just a filter and proper use of the Mature Tag on posted images.

 

[paulfish4570]

Rover, i guess i am stupid, but i cannot find the mature check box.

it would be nice if posters would mark their mature stuff as such, so i do not have to see it on every third page of the gallery - if i can figure out that check box thingy ...

 

[NeeZee]

i guess this thread will vastly increase the traffic in the gallery. i didn't know there were nude chicks there before 😉

 

[35mmdelux]

On the gallery page, click to see your profile, then choose Edit Profile. The first question asks if you would like to view mature content.

Does anyone expect kids/teenagers to say they do not want to view mature content? On contrar monsieur, probably a rousing YES!

 

[NeeZee]

i guess there are enough places on the net where teenagers (and everyone else) can view much more explicit content...

 

[rover]

Does anyone expect kids/teenagers to say they do not want to view mature content? On contrar monsieur, probably a rousing YES!

I expect parents, like I have, to make a determination of what is right and wrong for their children if they need to, and not put their heads in the sand while blaming everyone else in the world for their own failures.

Oops, that one slipped out. (and not pointed at you, just a short rant)

 

[Sparrow]

You have to keep in mind that there are RFF rules regarding this for use of the Gallery.



So, as long as an image is within the rules of the forum, then I agree, and Paul has clearly stated this too, censorship is not needed, just a filter and proper use of the Mature Tag on posted images.

I don't have a problem with that, but assumed the suggestion was that the RFF rules needed tightening, or that such images should be isolated in some hidden ungodly nude gallery ... a bit like the way off topic has been banished from the forum these days

 

[j j]

What is a cheesecake?

 

[taskoni]

I think is wrong to separate the nude from the gallery - the authors are still members and in photography world the nude is as important as any other shots. Where you see someone's else daughter I see good lighting and shapes. I guess then we can divide the whole gallery on sub galleries - I don't like personally minimalistic shots for example but I don't have problems seeing A LOT of them all the time. I don't like Tim Baker's portrait photography as well but for different reasons - he makes me feel very miserable and I am getting really jealous of his great work and lighting.
The authors of nude post more ready than any other authors and it won't be fair to loose the spice and miss the beauty of shape, light and flash.
My 2 cents.