A Muse Visits! Nude or not?

[Nigel Allan]

I was not sure where to post these as they are technically nudes...but are they? I just shoot what pleases my eye. Feedback is welcome.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.

​

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nigel,

These are indeed in the appropriate section!

After all, the main purpose of having a demarkation for figure studies and related art of nudes, male or female is a civic one! We want to give fair warning to the innocent, conservative or religious folk who might not be prepared for such imagery. It really matters not that the private parts are hidden or not, but the context of a bedroom and the possibility of intimacy goes far beyond the personal boundaries of many people. While we may not agree with what we might call prudery, nevertheless, in this community, we want to avoid providing discomfort and embrassment to our friends here.

So this way, we have the best of both world - we have only minimal censureship, (and that is mostly from the photographer's own selections), and then substantial protection for the scruples and sensitivities of folk who find many aspects of nudity in pictures to be undignified, uncouth and demeaning.

So, with all this in mind, your work, (which allows for many stories for each individual pose taken in isolation or together), certainly belongs in this section of our forum.

These studies are most welcome.

Thanks.

I'll revisit!

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Nigel,

These are indeed in the appropriate section!

After all, the main purpose of having a demarkation for figure studies and related art of nudes, male or female is a civic one! We want to give fair warning to the innocent, conservative or religious folk who might not be prepared for such imagery. It really matters not that the private parts are hidden or not, but the context of a bedroom and the possibility of intimacy goes far beyond the personal boundaries of many people. While we may not agree with what we might call prudery, nevertheless, in this community, we want to avoid providing discomfort and embrassment to our friends here.

So this way, we have the best of both world - we have only minimal censureship, (and that is mostly from the photographer's own selections), and then substantial protection for the scruples and sensitivities of folk who find many aspects of nudity in pictures to be undignified, uncouth and demeaning.

Asher, my friend (so real and true friend!), from early on I don't agree with this statement.
Art never needs censorship.
Art is part of education.
If one is not prepared for such imagery, one should ask his/her mother, father, son, sister, cousin or any good friend to explain her/him.
If art is too far from our culture then it shows us that there are other cultures, other way of thinking that are as valuable as our's.
And if one doesn't want to see, very simple, flip the page!

Let's share, Let's share!

So, with all this in mind, your work, (which allows for many stories for each individual pose taken in isolation or together), certainly belongs (in this section of) to our forum.

These studies are most welcome.

Thanks.

I'll revisit!

Asher

This (slightly corrected ; ) I fully agree!

 

[Tom dinning]

Asher, my friend (so real and true friend!), from early on I don't agree with this statement.
Art never needs censorship.
Art is part of education.
If one is not prepared for such imagery, one should ask his/her mother, father, son, sister, cousin or any good friend to explain her/him.
If art is too far from our culture then it shows us that there are other cultures, other way of thinking that are as valuable as our's.
And if one doesn't want to see, very simple, flip the page!

Let's share, Let's share!



This (slightly corrected ; ) I fully agree!

A virtuous and commendable ideal, Nic. Fortunately, not one shared by all.
Whether we like it or not, art is not an excuse for anything goes.
and censorship isn't something necessarily forced upon is by an external demagogy.
Both censorship and exposure are a balance held in equilibrium by the social values we hold as having currency.
Admittedly they shift. The influences of the shift are numerous. Art might well be one of them, a least those who hold artistic ideals.
It is quite possible that, in the name of art, one might post a photo here or anywhere else where the subject matter is unacceptable to the viewing public. Having the capacity to switch of or 'turn the page' doesn't alter the general acceptance of the image. It may well verify it.
Censorship is there for a reason. It is to test our current values, not define them.
We know here that certain images may not be accepted by some. We tell people that. Looking at the image doesn't mean that we agree or disagree. What it does is to allow us to make a decision.
I do agree with you. Lets see whats happening out there.
I also like the idea that we can speak our piece.
Ultimately, our judgement might be about the photo bit it may not be possible for any of us to separate that from our own ethics or interpretation.

"anyone who tries to separate their own ideals from those of the photograph are looking with only one eye open". Thomas Dinning senior 1976

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas and Tom,

I am gratified to see these responses. I do not have the time to persuade anyone that the human form won't harm them but I respect to a considerable extent people's feelings.

Some personal and limited views do indeed have an effect on our society! This to me falls into existential basic values we have managed to grasp and acquire for civilization of essentially "bands of breeding apes with iPhones"!

So here, uniquely, public outcry and confrontation is essential and even, I'd say almost compulsory. That "injunction" of mine, covers demeaning people and cruelty and taking away another's humanity. The latter is now enshrined in our highest values and laws. The idea that each person is born with rights, that neither have to be earned or proven, is, to me at least, the great value of the turmoil and blood lost in the French Revolution. furthermore, coincidentally, the spreading of "The Rights of Man" by his conquering armies, made Napoleon one of the most important architects in human history.

Just like Dalton revealing to us that Hydrogen, being the slightest atom can be the standard by which the mass of all objects can be measured, the French Assemblies sculpting "The Rights of Man" is perhaps one of the most important events in human history.

Here, in our humble forum, we cannot change the entire world, but we can "Be nice to everyone in the, (this very modest), tour bus".

So the views of my dear French friend and my new combatant colleague from down under are not incompatible, after all!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

I was not sure where to post these as they are technically nudes...but are they? I just shoot what pleases my eye. Feedback is welcome.

Well... since you are explicitly asking for feedback.

You already have posted images of Maria at various occasions. Here in Phuket (south of Thailand) and a few more in that very same hotel room: here, here, here and here. You were indeed in Macau, in this thread, we recognise the Conrad Hotel.

From a few details, like the personal objects on the bedside tables, the hair on the pillow and the iPhone on the bed, this looks like a slice of private life. From the fact that you photographed Maria on 9/1 in Phuket and on 21/1 in Macau, we understand that you are traveling with that young, attractive woman. Now, there is nothing wrong with that, but I can only wonder why you would expose your private life on this forum. Of course, I may be wrong and you could have carefully planned the shot to appear to be what it is.

Still: I think that the answer to the question asked in the title is yes.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I was not sure where to post these as they are technically nudes...but are they? I just shoot what pleases my eye. Feedback is welcome.​

3.



Well, Nigel,

The choices one makes does indeed reveal a little about the person putting on the show. However, to really understand that, one needs a personal and 3rd person account of the artist's intentions.

I take these as offerings to be considered as works of art.

In that case, I would find the entire group to be looked at as a whole in sone sense as so-called, "Performance Art", where the behavior in the sequence of things becomes a key guide to understanding the art.

However, for me, I would like to see this picture isolated on its own, devoid of its neighbors. It then is able to blossom like a flower, delicate, temporary, beautiful, harmless and vulnerable!

The others have rights too! But their confrontational aspects make different art and could be viewed perfectly coherently on a single wall in a gallery with an equally good but very different experience.

Asher​

 

[Tom dinning]

Ho hum!
It's first day back at school for great grand daughter. I'm off to school with her.
My advice to her as she faces the world with an open mind and heart: don't get sucked in by people with suspect motives. And don't go having your photo taken like this by some old bloke regardless of what he says.
Art, soft porn, documentary, snap, personal, whatever. Nigel, your no fool. Whatever your motives you will be away of the diversity of opinions here.
Even Asher knows that he might say it's art but others will ink differently.
Just as you approach the task carrying all your luggage, we do the same. It's unavoidable.
You knowing that suggests that you are not just playing your cards but are playing into our hand as well.
Any photograph is an interpretation of what you see. How you play that will stimulate us into interpreting it in either an open or guided way. That's up to you.
So I ask: what is your intention? What is your guidance?

 

[Nigel Allan]

Well... since you are explicitly asking for feedback.

You already have posted images of Maria at various occasions. Here in Phuket (south of Thailand) and a few more in that very same hotel room: here, here, here and here. You were indeed in Macau, in this thread, we recognise the Conrad Hotel.

From a few details, like the personal objects on the bedside tables, the hair on the pillow and the iPhone on the bed, this looks like a slice of private life. From the fact that you photographed Maria on 9/1 in Phuket and on 21/1 in Macau, we understand that you are traveling with that young, attractive woman. Now, there is nothing wrong with that, but I can only wonder why you would expose your private life on this forum. Of course, I may be wrong and you could have carefully planned the shot to appear to be what it is.

Still: I think that the answer to the question asked in the title is yes.

Yes it is my private life but equally these are the fruits of a new muse in my life and I feel these have creative or artistic merit enough to share. I do not claim to be an artist, per se, I am not so arrogant, but surely all art is very personal expression, otherwise it would not have meaning? All great artists have expressed their personal vision and this is mine

Besides which there is nothing graphic or intimate shown in any of my photos, no private parts, nothing you would not see on any beach in the world, only suggestions of intimacy and an invitation to be a voyeur and enjoy my life vicariously.

And after all, in essence isn't voyeurism what photography is about?

 

[Nigel Allan]

Ho hum!
It's first day back at school for great grand daughter. I'm off to school with her.
My advice to her as she faces the world with an open mind and heart: don't get sucked in by people with suspect motives. And don't go having your photo taken like this by some old bloke regardless of what he says.
Art, soft porn, documentary, snap, personal, whatever. Nigel, your no fool. Whatever your motives you will be away of the diversity of opinions here.
Even Asher knows that he might say it's art but others will ink differently.
Just as you approach the task carrying all your luggage, we do the same. It's unavoidable.
You knowing that suggests that you are not just playing your cards but are playing into our hand as well.
Any photograph is an interpretation of what you see. How you play that will stimulate us into interpreting it in either an open or guided way. That's up to you.
So I ask: what is your intention? What is your guidance?

Firstly, I never expected this simple posting in the 'nude' section to trigger such debate, especially since NOTHING GRAPHIC OR INTIMATE IS SHOWN. These are no more revealing than what you can see on any beach in the world

Secondly I would argue they are simple still lifes, yet this thread has turned into the usual art vs porn debate.

Thirdly reading between the lines I am tempted to think the reaction is not to the photos themselves but to what (you think) they suggest. Everyone is reacting to their OWN imagination here.

It makes me think that if she were a paid model with no relationship to me whatsoever, people would not react the same and would view them simply as nude studies.

Frankly, I am now thinking that by evoking such reactions means I have achieved something here...and done it without revealing a single pixel of genitalia.

I have managed to express what you cannot see and allowed you to create the pictures in your own imagination (with all your cultural and moral baggage it comes with). I guess this puts me right up there with the likes of Tracy Emin and her Unmade Bed or even Damien Hirst

Thanks for the compliments everyone. Noone kicks a dead dog.

 

[Nigel Allan]

Oh and by the way, MARIA LOVES THEM and is not ashamed or shy about them in any way.

And Tom, while you are giving advice to your grand daughter maybe you should tell her never to go to a beach or go swimming (when she reaches Maria's age in her 30s) just in case some 'old bloke' sees more than her ankles

 

[Tom dinning]

Oh and by the way, MARIA LOVES THEM and is not ashamed or shy about them in any way.

And Tom, while you are giving advice to your grand daughter maybe you should tell her never to go to a beach or go swimming (when she reaches Maria's age in her 30s) just in case some 'old bloke' sees more than her ankles

I probably will, Nigel. There's 65 years of separation between us. That will be enough to create some dissension in a year or two. Or right now. I just took her for her swimming lessons in our pool. She's says: "you ARE going to put swimmers on. Poppa Tom?"
Seems like modesty works both ways.

Xx

 

[Tom dinning]

Firstly, I never expected this simple posting in the 'nude' section to trigger such debate, especially since NOTHING GRAPHIC OR INTIMATE IS SHOWN. These are no more revealing than what you can see on any beach in the world

Secondly I would argue they are simple still lifes, yet this thread has turned into the usual art vs porn debate.

Thirdly reading between the lines I am tempted to think the reaction is not to the photos themselves but to what (you think) they suggest. Everyone is reacting to their OWN imagination here.

It makes me think that if she were a paid model with no relationship to me whatsoever, people would not react the same and would view them simply as nude studies.

Frankly, I am now thinking that by evoking such reactions means I have achieved something here...and done it without revealing a single pixel of genitalia.

I have managed to express what you cannot see and allowed you to create the pictures in your own imagination (with all your cultural and moral baggage it comes with). I guess this puts me right up there with the likes of Tracy Emin and her Unmade Bed or even Damien Hirst

Thanks for the compliments everyone. Noone kicks a dead dog.

Debate, if that's what it is, is good.
I remember reading somewhere in the past that an effective nude is one which is denying us what we wish to see.
I'm not a big fan of fannies. Genitalia doesn't do much for me. Besides, it's only a picture, as you Say, and its contents mean nothing at all to us. We just look at the picture and make no judgements.
Yeah, right! And I'm dead from the shoulders up.
There are 6billion people on the planet, Nigel, and only one will look at the photo as you do: YOU!
The rest of us are looking over the fence wondering what's going on. And if we don't know, we'll make something up.
Only Ash called it art, but he's like that. It gives the site status.
I'm just an old perv who flicks through the girly mags in the newsagent and pretend I'm reading the articles.
I'd also be the same bloke who might take a photo of his partner in bed and keep it to myself, even if she liked the shot. But that's just me.
I don't have to agree with your morals to make a comment here. I don't even have to like your picture.
So I'm making my voice heard just so you know that not everyone thinks like you do.
Or me.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Doubtless, even Picasso couldn't help but be enamored with his models, muses and mistresses. So Nigel we have great folk to follow, even if we we'll never accomplish what they did we can have some enjoyment attempting to make art.

I do not give a whit as to how you got her on to the bed, lover, wife or paid model. It's the immediacy of the work I like. But as I said, one picture stands on its own but as part of a grouping, it's about you as well as what's in the picture.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

You ask for an opinion. From me, you got a factual analysis of the presented images. Apparently you do not like the answer, but using as a defence the idea that the pictures do not show genitalia is bizarre to say the least.

 

[Tom dinning]

You ask for an opinion. From me, you got a factual analysis of the presented images. Apparently you do not like the answer, but using as a defence the idea that the pictures do not show genitalia is bizarre to say the least.

This is a bit like an elephant not showing its trunk. It's still an elephant.
In the days of political incorrectness there was a joke going about.

What is a woman?

It's the life support system for a vagina.


Maybe it applies here.

 

[Tom dinning]

You ask for an opinion. From me, you got a factual analysis of the presented images. Apparently you do not like the answer, but using as a defence the idea that the pictures do not show genitalia is bizarre to say the least.

Your response wasn't all factual but certainly reasonable, Jerome.

It does seem a bit strange that genitalia should be mentioned, as though they excuse or define the context of the image.

If this had been a purposeful project with intent to demonstrate artistic intent I would approach it in a different manner.
But my first guess was confirmed. This is a private moment. I have the feeling that the privacy has been violated for the sake of sensationalism or just boasting.
We all have private moments. Sharing them on the internet with friends is a destruction of the privacy of the moment unless that moment has a lesser value than the esteem provided by the sharing.
Its a choice we might all be faced with as photographers.
This isn't one I'd have trouble confronting.

If I am to be forthright I would say: Bad choice, Nigel.

xxx

 

[Andy brown]

I'm reminded of a wee joke:

Hamish goes to confession - " Bless me farder for oi've sinned"
" Now moi son, what is it that yer've doon?"

" Well farder, see dere were dese two gorgeous Swedish
buckpuckers who'd swanned into tarn and I met dem at de
poob an' we chatted an' sooch an' one ting led to anudder an'
we ended oop back at me pad an' next ting ya know we're
doin' oral sex and spankin's an' the loik all noit long!

" wait a second, I recognise your voice!, you're Hamish
McTavish, you're a filthy protestant, what the hell are ya
tellin' me for?"

" Father,....Oim tellin' everyone!"

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Andy,

I'm reminded of a wee joke:

Hamish goes to confession - " Bless me farder for oi've sinned"
" Now moi son, what is it that yer've doon?"

" Well farder, see dere were dese two gorgeous Swedish
buckpuckers who'd swanned into tarn and I met dem at de
poob an' we chatted an' sooch an' one ting led to anudder an'
we ended oop back at me pad an' next ting ya know we're
doin' oral sex and spankin's an' the loik all noit long!

" wait a second, I recognise your voice!, you're Hamish
McTavish, you're a filthy protestant, what the hell are ya
tellin' me for?"

" Father,....Oim tellin' everyone!"

Aye, lad, I believe you've summed it up!

Best regards,

Doug
Half Scottish
Half German
All telephone engineer

 

[Jerome Marot]

Your response wasn't all factual but certainly reasonable, Jerome.

It does seem a bit strange that genitalia should be mentioned, as though they excuse or define the context of the image.

If this had been a purposeful project with intent to demonstrate artistic intent I would approach it in a different manner.
But my first guess was confirmed. This is a private moment. I have the feeling that the privacy has been violated for the sake of sensationalism or just boasting.
We all have private moments. Sharing them on the internet with friends is a destruction of the privacy of the moment unless that moment has a lesser value than the esteem provided by the sharing.
Its a choice we might all be faced with as photographers.
This isn't one I'd have trouble confronting.

If I am to be forthright I would say: Bad choice, Nigel.

xxx

Maybe I should give another image for comparison?

(Willy Ronis: Le nu provençal)
​

 

[Asher Kelman]

This is a bit like an elephant not showing its trunk. It's still an elephant.
In the days of political incorrectness there was a joke going about.

What is a woman?

It's the life support system for a vagina.


Maybe it applies here.

...........For the uterus, Tom, that's where the action is!

The Vagina is just the front door!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Maybe I should give another image for comparison?

(Willy Ronis: Le nu provençal)
​

Sets a very high standard in creating mood innocence and presence!

Unlike Nigel's work, there is no male subtext of conquering, appreciation, lust, pleasure or power!

It's just a view from a spider on the wall who would sooner catch a hapless fly than watch her further!

Asher

P.S. Still Nigel's work, as it very much involved the unseen photographer, is akin to performance art.

 

[Tom dinning]

...........For the uterus, Tom, that's where the action is!

The Vagina is just the front door!

Asher

My mates wouldn't know what a uterus is.
It's always best, for comic effect, to keep the language relevant to the audiences understanding of anatomy.
Besides.........
No , I won't go on. I'm having some very basic thoughts and its best not to share them here.
(Sarcasm intended)

Xx

 

[Asher Kelman]

My mates wouldn't know what a uterus is.
It's always best, for comic effect, to keep the language relevant to the audiences understanding of anatomy.
Besides.........
No , I won't go on. I'm having some very basic thoughts and its best not to share them here.
(Sarcasm intended)

Xx

Some woman berated me that I knew nothing about how women might feel, "Listen "know it all", you don't happen to have a uterus!", implying she had settled the argument!

"But I do, madam, I certainly do!"

"Well where is your goddamned uterus then?, she demanded!

In one of the greatest and unforgivable trespasses on PC-politeness and decency I replied, "At home, washing dishes!", but those were the feisty 60's and we took risks.

Today my wife would do surgery on me in one Hollywood second

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

Some woman berated me that I knew nothing about how women might feel, "Listen "know it all", you don't happen to have a uterus!", implying she had settled the argument!

"But I do, madam, I certainly do!"

"Well where is your goddamned uterus then?, she demanded!

In one of the greatest and unforgivable trespasses on PC-politeness and decency I replied, "At home, washing dishes!", but those were the feisty 60's and we took risks.

Today my wife would do surgery on me in one Hollywood second

Asher

Ah! The 60s. What a decade. Men were men back then.
That was when you could show your mates a picture of a girl on a bed and they knew you had scored. Any mention of art would only be related to the art of seduction.
Funny, though. No one would consider showing a picture of the wife, unless it was some one else's wife and you'd just scored with her.
It might have all been a bit hypocritical but we knew where the lines were drawn.
Redefining the parameters has confused me no end.
Although there is hope.
I told my grandson that young men of his age think about sex every 15 minutes on average.
He wants to know what to think about for the rest of the time.

 

[nicolas claris]

Tiens, je suis fatigué d'écrire en anglais…
Pendant que vous continuez à disserter à propos de vagins, utérus et autres accessoires, personne n'a remarqué que Nigel a retiré ces images de son post original.
Je ne sais pas pourquoi, mais j'ai tout de même une vague idée…
C'est nul.

I feel so sorry Nigel!

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Nicolas,

Tiens, je suis fatigué d'écrire en anglais…

Et je suis fatigué de lire ça, et l'anglais est ma langue maternelle!

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Nigel Allan]

Tiens, je suis fatigué d'écrire en anglais…
Pendant que vous continuez à disserter à propos de vagins, utérus et autres accessoires, personne n'a remarqué que Nigel a retiré ces images de son post original.
Je ne sais pas pourquoi, mais j'ai tout de même une vague idée…
C'est nul.

I feel so sorry Nigel!

Merci, Nicolas

 

[Jerome Marot]

Tiens, je suis fatigué d'écrire en anglais…
Pendant que vous continuez à disserter à propos de vagins, utérus et autres accessoires, personne n'a remarqué que Nigel a retiré ces images de son post original.

Personne ne l'a remarqué parce qu'il ne les a pas retirées. Elles sont toujours là.

 

[James Lemon]

Glad to see the pictures back up! I do enjoy them and don't feel the need to criticise. From the set presented I enjoy # 3 the most.