Al Kaplan
Veteran
I have no trouble with the photos themselves. I really like a couple of them. I just don't like the term "fine art" being used that way. A hundred years ago a lot of people would have considered them pornographic. Some might have seen the artistic aspects but they wouldn't get framed and hung on the living room wall.
Nobody ever says "fine art flowers" or "fine art landscapes" or "fine art street photos". This argument, and I guess that I started it, is about semantics more than anything.
Nobody ever says "fine art flowers" or "fine art landscapes" or "fine art street photos". This argument, and I guess that I started it, is about semantics more than anything.
Tuolumne
Veteran
"Fine art nudes" - Let's just call it a euphemism and be done with it.
/T
/T
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
I reckon shooting your first Speed Graphic shoot was quite different from the other shoot Fred found? Must be slower to work, a model needing more patience etc? Do you find the technical stuff takes more attention? Does that make it harder to direct the model and to manage the shoot?
Can you describe the difference, and if not, can you describe the general feel of this shoot?
I'm thinking psychology of the shoot here, both for you and for the model.
Dunk
Established
They look too full of tension to my eyes and personally I do not like nude studies with the model staring at the camera. Some of the poses look very unnatural and with the exception of No. 11 which IMO is quite a good study, do not convey the femininity that I normally associate with nude art studies.
But thanks for sharing and hope you get some ideas from the total feedback and that you try again so we can see your second nude studio session.
Cheers
dunk
But thanks for sharing and hope you get some ideas from the total feedback and that you try again so we can see your second nude studio session.
Cheers
dunk
Last edited:
jreid
Member
Photographing unclothed women always seems to provoke some kind of unfortunate response in many people -- anger, defensiveness, whatever. I think that's the biggest argument in favor of doing it.
As for the pictures that are the subject of this thread, I don't think they're terribly interesting. Using the Speed Graphic is a challenge and I commend you for that. But my question would be what are you trying to say with your nudes?
It's a question I struggle with but my answer boils down to this: I want people to feel the same awe I do when I see the naked human form. I also want to carry people beyond the negative emotional reaction many people often have to nudes.
As for the pictures that are the subject of this thread, I don't think they're terribly interesting. Using the Speed Graphic is a challenge and I commend you for that. But my question would be what are you trying to say with your nudes?
It's a question I struggle with but my answer boils down to this: I want people to feel the same awe I do when I see the naked human form. I also want to carry people beyond the negative emotional reaction many people often have to nudes.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Why does it almost always seem to be a naked female form? Doesn't the male form inspire the same awe?
Let's see some male nudes, or perhaps nude couples.
Let's see some male nudes, or perhaps nude couples.
Last edited:
djonesii
Well-known
Dear rangefinder forum guy/gals;
Thanks for all your input, it is indeed a lively thread. From all I have read, there was in no way shape or form, any offense given, and certainly none taken. Quite nice in a forum where most likely we will never meet face to face.
My motivation in taking these photos is that I like the way the female form and its associated curves interact with light and shadow. Even more so when I can capture that on film. I make an active choice to search out situations where I can take those photos in a "wife safe" environment. Just for me, if I take a photo, I have to be willing to show it to my wife. And as a rule, the models are indeed professional models, nothing more, nothing less. I would guess that this is close to my 20th nude model shoot, just to clarify. I shoot at a studio with the owner, and a group of 2-4 other photographers. Every one always shoots digital, one other person shoots film, sometimes in a Nikon F, and others in a Leica M6. No one else shoots medium format film, or large format film. I compile my favorites for my web site, and some specialized sets to share, like on this forum. At the end of the year, I print a vanity book. This year will be my third book. So much for the motivations.
In this setting, there is a fair bit of time pressure to get on with your turn at the lights, and get the model posed, and shoot. Most of the shoots that I really enjoy, I have eithier directed or set the lights my self. Given this setting, both directing the model, and getting the photograph with large format are interciate parts of the whole process. LF takes much work work. I shot near on 100 frames between the speed and the polaroid before I treid to use either at a "real" shoot. To say the least, there were quite a few mistakes in that first 100 or so. At this point in my photographic journey, I think I have a reasonable understaing of the fundamentals, aperature, speed, focus .... MF and LF images that are in focus and exposed correclty are the proof of that.
The LF process takes much more time and more rigor than the DSLR process, its a check list that I have in mind mentally, set speed, cock, Open up the lens, focus, veryif aperature, close lens, dark slide, fire, reverse dark slide, reverse film holder, repeat ..... This process takes in the order in minutes when you have a 7-10 minute slot of shooting time. I take a few digials first to check posing, then a few 35mm or 645 film, then if I'm lucky one or two LF. At this point, I'm still working on camera technique. Sadly, the thing that suffers most is the posing. But the only way to get better at it is to do it. Of the 20 shots that I attempted, I think I actually got about 14 that show technial profeciency with the camera, thats 70%, barely pasing.
As to if these shots are art, or porn, or something else, it's a free country, have your opinion. I sleep well at night, with a clear consence. I imagane that Hugh Hefner and some internet porn site owners do too.
As I have said in a previous post, most of the shots in the LF set are there because they were taken with a 4X5 range finder, not because they are my favorites. Of them, 2 will probably make the book, and of that, only one will be 8X10.
Having reviewed this set, I think I made an error, and one Contax photo slipped in, care to take a guess?
Dave
Thanks for all your input, it is indeed a lively thread. From all I have read, there was in no way shape or form, any offense given, and certainly none taken. Quite nice in a forum where most likely we will never meet face to face.
My motivation in taking these photos is that I like the way the female form and its associated curves interact with light and shadow. Even more so when I can capture that on film. I make an active choice to search out situations where I can take those photos in a "wife safe" environment. Just for me, if I take a photo, I have to be willing to show it to my wife. And as a rule, the models are indeed professional models, nothing more, nothing less. I would guess that this is close to my 20th nude model shoot, just to clarify. I shoot at a studio with the owner, and a group of 2-4 other photographers. Every one always shoots digital, one other person shoots film, sometimes in a Nikon F, and others in a Leica M6. No one else shoots medium format film, or large format film. I compile my favorites for my web site, and some specialized sets to share, like on this forum. At the end of the year, I print a vanity book. This year will be my third book. So much for the motivations.
In this setting, there is a fair bit of time pressure to get on with your turn at the lights, and get the model posed, and shoot. Most of the shoots that I really enjoy, I have eithier directed or set the lights my self. Given this setting, both directing the model, and getting the photograph with large format are interciate parts of the whole process. LF takes much work work. I shot near on 100 frames between the speed and the polaroid before I treid to use either at a "real" shoot. To say the least, there were quite a few mistakes in that first 100 or so. At this point in my photographic journey, I think I have a reasonable understaing of the fundamentals, aperature, speed, focus .... MF and LF images that are in focus and exposed correclty are the proof of that.
The LF process takes much more time and more rigor than the DSLR process, its a check list that I have in mind mentally, set speed, cock, Open up the lens, focus, veryif aperature, close lens, dark slide, fire, reverse dark slide, reverse film holder, repeat ..... This process takes in the order in minutes when you have a 7-10 minute slot of shooting time. I take a few digials first to check posing, then a few 35mm or 645 film, then if I'm lucky one or two LF. At this point, I'm still working on camera technique. Sadly, the thing that suffers most is the posing. But the only way to get better at it is to do it. Of the 20 shots that I attempted, I think I actually got about 14 that show technial profeciency with the camera, thats 70%, barely pasing.
As to if these shots are art, or porn, or something else, it's a free country, have your opinion. I sleep well at night, with a clear consence. I imagane that Hugh Hefner and some internet porn site owners do too.
As I have said in a previous post, most of the shots in the LF set are there because they were taken with a 4X5 range finder, not because they are my favorites. Of them, 2 will probably make the book, and of that, only one will be 8X10.
Having reviewed this set, I think I made an error, and one Contax photo slipped in, care to take a guess?
Dave
djonesii
Well-known
A quick response to Al .... check my site, I have many sets that show a couple of female models ..... Although I don't think that's quite what you had in mind when you said couples.
Dave
Dave
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
I agree with AL Kaplan. Fine art is Van Gogh, Vermeer, Matisse -- this was the title bestowed on them by the cogniscenti over the years. Fine art used to describe the recent photog of nude women seems an inappropriate use of the term. I dont believe Helmut Newton called himself a "fine artist."
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I guess that all those kids with cell phone cameras are now Fine Artists sending naked pictures of themselves all over the place. With that amount of Fine Art out there it sure won't be worth much.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I have some quite valuable drawings and paintings by established artists that I've known over the years. Ask them what they do and you'll most likely get a response such as "I paint" or perhaps "I teach painting".
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
LOL. You're the man AL. I need to take out a membership in your Temple.
back alley
IMAGES
the ignorance and the arrogance...some of you folks are downright hilarious.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I can imagine that female nude sessions with LF is quite different from using a smaller, more mobile format camera. In my mind spontenaety would be compromised, and so I think that is what I saw there -- poses that, except for a couple, seemed more stiff or contrived as a result.
Achieving good nude studies with LF would require a lot of practice and experience, in my mind. So keep it up -- your technique is very good. I'm not sure exactly why you chose to do a session with LF, but I'm sure you have a good reason. It's a real challenge and I commend you.
Achieving good nude studies with LF would require a lot of practice and experience, in my mind. So keep it up -- your technique is very good. I'm not sure exactly why you chose to do a session with LF, but I'm sure you have a good reason. It's a real challenge and I commend you.
JohnnyT
Established
Wow... It's really, but really what we can call hostile.
I'M SORRY if I've misunderstood if it was actually a first attempt or not. It really remind me my years at the university where people were arguing on such ... absolute subject. Now that I work in the "art" industry, it's fun to see that nobody cares about the words, the concepts or anything that could stop the creativity. God bless me.
The only fact that is absolute is that the guy made a good attempt on a nude shooting; not perfect nor bad. He asked for opinion and people began to argue on fine art or not. And, it's been a while since I've seen such adults playing as kid.
God dammit, it's photography. You can find plenty of texts about the fine art or not and a lot of good arguments within it. Go for it and go for a butt kicking contest into the philosophy tread. But I think that the person here just wanted to show something that he found interresting and wanted to share it to the world. Fine art or not.
Now the next tread that is really a total, absolute, and really fun intellectual masturbation :
"Photography is an art or not?"
How can we call it fine art now that the title "art" as been put into questionning ? :angel:
Wait me up you kids, I'll go get my diet pepsi and a bag of all dressed chips!
Ah....
I'll say it again, good job for your photos. I hunger to see the rest with or without the fine before the art. Is that fine?
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Wow. Is this over the top or what?! Chill out dude. Its not there's an exam at the end of the thread.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Wow, I'm getting the itch again. Any ladies in the south Florida area that would like to pose nude? You must be 18 but there are no age or other weight restrictons. If you're one of those that I photographed forty years ago it might be interesting to do a "then and now" shoot. http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
amateriat
We're all light!
Tuolumne
Veteran
It was getting really boring around here. I love this thread.
/T
/T
djonesii
Well-known
Al;
I went out to your blog, too bad the baby speed is gone .....
With a little luck, you could find one at an estate sale for pennies on the dollar!
Seriously, I really think that my work is more of the arts and crafts variety than fine art. I don't take my self too seriously, don't find the models my self, and really don't organize the shoots, I just pay and show up. I do set the lights and poses. To me the fundamental inspiration is not that of an artist, but more of a tradesman. The craft is OK, and some of it might even be worth money, but to me, while the subject mater can be labeled fine art, the muse need to judge the quality as commission worthy is lacking.
Clearly, the term fine art has struck a nerve here, so let me pose the question, how would you signal to other forum members that you would be looking at nude young ladies, with very little chance of seeing what is shown in some medial text books and various web sites ... I choose the term fine art. Keep in mind, this is a short title block, and your typing at web speed ..
Dave
I went out to your blog, too bad the baby speed is gone .....
With a little luck, you could find one at an estate sale for pennies on the dollar!
Seriously, I really think that my work is more of the arts and crafts variety than fine art. I don't take my self too seriously, don't find the models my self, and really don't organize the shoots, I just pay and show up. I do set the lights and poses. To me the fundamental inspiration is not that of an artist, but more of a tradesman. The craft is OK, and some of it might even be worth money, but to me, while the subject mater can be labeled fine art, the muse need to judge the quality as commission worthy is lacking.
Clearly, the term fine art has struck a nerve here, so let me pose the question, how would you signal to other forum members that you would be looking at nude young ladies, with very little chance of seeing what is shown in some medial text books and various web sites ... I choose the term fine art. Keep in mind, this is a short title block, and your typing at web speed ..
Dave