The greatest mistakes/clichés in nude photography

Spider67

Spider67

Well-known
Local time
11:36 AM
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,143
Hi all,
Some among you have experience in that field (like Frank Petronio) and have surely studied artitstic (whatever that means) nudes.
So tell me what are the biggest mistakes/clichés you've noticed.
I mean things like nudes in old factory buildings or nudes in cornfields.
Let the List begin!:D
Des
 
Last edited:
How about, nude with bad boots shot with 35mm lens from distortable perspective? :eek: (My bad )

5126297399_38879e8af3_z.jpg
 
Nudes, as a genre, is as old as it gets. What hasn't been done? I think painting does the whole nude thing better. In photography nudes seem to be either tasteful (boring) or "everyday" people (boring) or an attempt to expose us to some sort of counterculture (simplistic redress of the "Nude").

Of course, if you can get other people to take off their clothes in front of you, then, well; good job!
 
I've seen photos by Jenaloup Sieff where even with a 21mm he couldn't get the whole model in and all you can see are the legs.
 
actually it's a good question. It's very easy to deviate towards the dark side of this type of photography with willing models. Plus it's also a very subjective view. That sliding scale between fine-art and porn rests with the viewer and it's heavily influenced by moral and religous beliefs.

sorry, image removed. This whole thread has me rethinking my photography.
 
Last edited:
Spider67 said:
Thanks for your photo Andy!
Click to expand...


You are welcome. I have many more bad ones and a nice stack of good ones as well.
I don't set out to do nude photos exactly. If the model wants to get into it great. Often I get something that both the model and I like. Often It is something neither of us likes.
The model in the shot I posted liked this image. I can only see those damn boots and "short" legs (she actually was quite tall).
It was a tight space and doomed to begin with for a full body shot.

Anyway, I agree with Jeff. The line between "good" nude and "bad" nude is usually defined by the viewer. (I think that is what I am reading)
All nudes are cliche in one way or another and some mistakes actually can make the shot.
 
f16sunshine said:
You are welcome. I have many more bad ones and a nice stack of good ones as well.
I don't set out to do nude photos exactly. If the model wants to get into it great. Often I get something that both the model and I like. Often It is something neither of us likes.
The model in the shot I posted liked this image. I can only see those damn boots and "short" legs (she actually was quite tall).
It was a tight space and doomed to begin with for a full body shot.

Anyway, I agree with Jeff. The line between "good" nude and "bad" nude is usually defined by the viewer. (I think that is what I am reading)
All nudes are cliche in one way or another and some mistakes actually can make the shot.
Click to expand...

Andy, you are correct, it's in the viewer's eyes. By the way, if you crop your image above and just retouch under her eyes a bit, you'll have a winning shot.
 
The nudes I dislike, artistically speaking, lack the awkwardness that makes people interesting. Conventional nude poses strip away the model's personality. There are almost no nude photos I actually like, as art. There are a couple of Erwitts I really like, the one of the mother asleep on the bed with the baby with her breasts exposed...

erwitt03.jpg


and this one

110627_elliot-erwitt-16376_p465.jpg


I like Nan Goldin, and Sally Mann, and I like this Eggleston:

guide_k.jpg


And I also like a lot of Frank's pictures that he's posted here.
 
Last edited:
FWIW I like the whole nudes illuminated by a window thing with the shadow of whatever frill is there on them.

I understand that people who remember the 1980s are quite bothered by this style, however.
 
One of the biggest mistakes when photographing nudes IMO is to get turned on by what you're seeing and I'm being quite serious here. Once you let your mind wander there you stop thinking clearly about what makes a good picture and what doesn't.

I'm not a big fan of the classic bw 'artistic nude' although I must admit that every now and then I see something I can appreciate like, e.g. the most recent nude photos of Miranda Kerr for Industrie Magazine (http://www.fashionising.com/picture...e-Magazine-January-12-NSFW-12811-1828005.html). Pretty girl, simple setup/lighting - can't go wrong. It's not amazing but it's nice to look at.

I do agree with Mabelsound that conventional nudes can be a bit boring as they lack the model's personality but then that's sort of the point, isn't it? A portrait of someone in the nude is not necessarily a 'nude' in the conventional sense. A 'nude' is most often about the nude body/form itself.
 
I need to see hundreds of examples before I understand what is behind it all. So let's start the educational process now.
 
Fireboy - I think that strip on the right, as presented, would make a very interesting way to show nudes. With a few alterations, maybe both strips running largely parallel but blurred (just enough, as they are, to get a feel for the 'story' of the series).

I've never had an interest in nudes in and of themselves (painting or photography) - when nudes work for me, the nudity isn't really the point of the shot, it's just capturing a situation as it happens to be (such as the images posted by mabelsound).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom