Gallery Rules?

[Frank Petronio]

So are there any prohibitions about showing nudes (done w a rangefinder) here? Just asking because one fellow asked me to remove some because it's a "family forum".

 

[whitecat]

I see no problem if they are done tastefully. Clearly the one you just put up is fine.

 

[MickH]

As far as a "Family Forum" goes, I would think that the only family members who peruse this site are the Dads, or grown up (ish) sons. From what I've seen of Frank's posts in the Gallery there is little difference between those shots and the ones we see regularly here in the UK in the Daily and Sunday papers so are hardly likely to cause offence on this side of "the pond".

I do apologise to the female membership for the male-centric comments above, but there do seem to be very few of you, and my guess (based on nothing) is that you are broad minded enough to accept the level of nudity that Frank has posted.

We are all adults after all, and anyone who lets kids onto the Internet without supervision is just asking for trouble.

 

[Pablito]

From what I've seen of Frank's posts in the Gallery there is little difference between those shots and the ones we see regularly here in the UK in the Daily and Sunday papers

only Frank's are done with considerably more artistry.

 

[MickH]

I agree. I was making the point about the level of nudity of course. 😉

 

[jan normandale]

This has come up before. There are nudes in the galleries somewhere. So you are not the first. Put them up. I've seen your blog and in my opinion you could even put up your LF material if you wanted. There's a LF group here.

I think I would tell the 'writer' thanks very much for the email and have a nice day.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Yes, people in the U.S. don't seem to want their kids to know what naked people look like. Some kind of original sin thing, or something.

That also includes any in-depth discussion about religion or politics. Opinions are bad. Only bad people have those.

This is an unfortunate result from some people not knowing where the line is. Whenever there isn't talent or brains, the line has to be "challenged".

And that is yet another can of worms.

 

[Rafael]

And that is yet another can of worms.

"Can"!!! Now that is a positively disgusting word!

 

[Frank Petronio]

haha OK. I'm not so much into nudes as I am into portraits, it's just that sometimes they take their clothes off because they're exhibitionists ;-p

Yesterday a forum member asked me to remove them and I obliged because I thought their might be some sort of rule or that he was an admin. Obviously he's in the minority.

Yes, a lot of the 4x5 work is indeed done with a rangefinder, either the Technika or the Crown. I also use an XA and a M6 although I just got a new D300/50/1.2 combo that is pretty nice to use.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Frank Petronio:


I like your portraits and have no problem whatsoever about the models' clothing.

In the FAQ's there are 'The Golden Rules'. Number 4 refers to no sexually-orientated images etc.

In my opinion your images are no more sexually-orientated than the ads for perfume I see on the side of buses.

There are only four people here with monitor status who can tell you to take down an image (indeed they could delete it themselves). The four are CameraQuest, back alley, Rover, and Kim Coxon. Anybody else here is just the same status as you, and is entitled to their view but may not impose it upon you.

 

[back alley]

Rule No. 4 - No "Offensive" Posts, Links or Images
4) You will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, racist, sexist, discriminatory, or otherwise violative of any local or international laws. This includes links in your signature, profile, bookmarks as well as posted images, photos and avatars. Staff will ultimately decide if something is appropriate or not.

there are some 'rules' for posting that need to be followed.
the original owner was a parent and stated that rff was a family friendly site and to please consider that children might be viewing photos along with a parent.
it's mostly a matter of taste and what one finds appealing or offensive.
as with all postings here i would encorage everyone to consider what you are posting before you post it.
joe

 

[btgc]

Hopefully the kids are having more fun playing violent video games that checking out nudes at RFF. 🙂

that's a good note 🙂 I'll add - or staring at websites w/ content far beyond what average RFF'r could photograph.

English isn't my native language. Do Number 4 "no sexually-orientated images etc." includes nudity ? I guess that sexuality referes to sexual contact and genitalia in sexual context, like erected penis or wet squirrel. Otherwise they are only parts of human body, aren't they ?

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Frank Petronio:


There a guy here, Marc Jutras, and his photos seem to pass the 'Rule 4' test.

The photos are diferent from yours, but do feature states of undress and bondage quite often.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=3381&ppuser=427

 

[rover]

First, Frank, thank you for showing discression and making the decision to remove the photos after consideration of a request by another member.

Also, thank you to you and Pitxu for communicating with each other regarding an issue. This shows that we do have an open community in which we can address each other.

As far as the rules go, Joe posted them as described in our FAQ. Regardless of what rules may be in place, I think we see here a good example of our community working, and as long as that happens the rules will be an after thought.

 

[MickH]

Just so everyone understands, the photos in question were:

1: A naked woman who seemed to be urinating into a glass.

2: A naked woman lying on the floor who seemed to be either a rape victim or a junky dead from an overdose.

I must have hit the site late, I missed those. The shots still on the Gallery are fine though surely?

 

[BillP]

View attachment 55966
Screen shot. Not my words.
__________

I have to say, I have always taken that to refer to language used, not images posted.

Regards,

Bill

 

[BillP]

So we can't say cu*t, but we can show it?

Pixtu, please understand that like you I can only speak subjectively, imprisoned as I recognise that I am in my own socio-cultural frame of reference.

That said, I can honestly say that I would object to inappropriate language before I object to nudity in an image.

Regards,

Bill

 

[MickH]

So we can't say cu*t, but we can show it?

I actually laughed out loud at that! Good job I wasn't drinking my tea, or I'd have done the nose trick.

 

[back alley]

there IS NO answer here, only different versions of our own truth.

i suggest that a continuance of arguments will convince no one and no minds will be changed.
this is fundamental values stuff.

joe