base_nz 0 #126 July 18, 2008 Quote Quote I've read through a lot of this thread, but didn't look at the pictures until today. NOPE! Don't like it. If you need to depict children the way he does, then paint 'em. One must be capable of consenting to nude photographs, and 13 y/o kids just need a few more years, imho. At 13, given my life at that time, I woulda said "Sure! Take a picture of my clit." Today I would regret those pictures being on display. He needs to pick up a paint brush. linz the bolded text indicates to me that you have now problem with the youth modeling, more so that you dont perceive photography as art. Or did you not type what you really wanted to say? And would you regret those pictures if they are on display in the Guggenheim as some of his work is? Are you on crack??? How do you get the fact that the poster doesn't consider photography as art...The statement you underlined IMO was directed more at the different forms of art..... And im also guessing that the photos that get hung in the Guggenheim arnt he ones you get ashamed of.... But maybe you might regret it if your naked photo WAS one of the %99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 of photos that are not hung there//// ..... But of course if you have anything of value to add to the discussion..........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #127 July 18, 2008 Quote Quote Quote But of course if you have anything of value to add to the discussion..... you are the one that seems to get emotionally uptight and drags this discussion down. Objectivity seems to be something you lack, not to mention the ability to conduct yourself in a manner that does not try to insult others. But you are a KIWI so I cant really expect to much in the way of intellect or rational thoughtYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #128 July 18, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote But of course if you have anything of value to add to the discussion..... you are the one that seems to get emotionally uptight and drags this discussion down. Objectivity seems to be something you lack, not to mention the ability to conduct yourself in a manner that does not try to insult others. But you are a KIWI so I cant really expect to much in the way of intellect or rational thought So ill take that as a no???...........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #129 July 18, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote So ill take that as a no???...... I would like to think the majority of my contributions to this thread are of a little more value than your subjective emotional preachings. But hey that's just my (self declared) objective viewYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #130 July 18, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote So ill take that as a no???...... I would like to think the majority of my contributions to this thread are of a little more value than your subjective emotional preachings. But hey that's just my (self declared) objective view and im sure you will go on thinking that.... I started this thread to try and understand why certain photo's which i find a bit strange to look at a lot of people are staunchly defending ...I think i managed to get a better understanding on the topic thanks to quite a few people who showed me a different way to look at the subject......And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #131 July 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteI've read through a lot of this thread, but didn't look at the pictures until today. NOPE! Don't like it. If you need to depict children the way he does, then paint 'em. One must be capable of consenting to nude photographs, and 13 y/o kids just need a few more years, imho. At 13, given my life at that time, I woulda said "Sure! Take a picture of my clit." Today I would regret those pictures being on display. He needs to pick up a paint brush. linz the bolded text indicates to me that you have no problem with the youth modeling, more so that you dont perceive photography as art. Or did you not type what you really wanted to say? And would you regret those pictures if they are on display in the Guggenheim as some of his work is? I don't quite get what you're saying. I don't have a problem with youth modeling, and I do see photography as art. I just don't think that 12 and 13 y/o children should be the subjects in nude photography. I would not be bothered at all to see a painting that someone did of a child that age, because the image itself is not bothersome and certainly has artistic value, but is a step or two removed it seems to me. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #132 July 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote I don't quite get what you're saying. I don't have a problem with youth modeling, and I do see photography as art. I just don't think that 12 and 13 y/o children should be the subjects in nude photography. I would not be bothered at all to see a painting that someone did of a child that age, because the image itself is not bothersome and certainly has artistic value, but is a step or two removed it seems to me. linz So you dont believe the child is exploited (me either) your issue is with the medium alone, which is a personal preference, which is also fine by me. Can you explain why it is that you find the photographic images unacceptable, but you are okay with a realistic life painting of the same subject. Considering the modeling time for the painting can quite feasibly be a considerably longer time. (just trying to ascertain why you have a difference in apreciation?)You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreaming13000 1 #133 July 18, 2008 actually, I had a film developer tell me that they could not develop some of my photos once, of my 5 month old daughter in the bathtub, due to nudity ?! *shakes head* I always have to remind myself that the reason every thing has to be so regulated is that there are alot of idiots out there......idiots and bad people. "A man only gets in life what he is believing for, nothing more and nothing less" Kenneth Hagen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #134 July 19, 2008 Quote[ Can you explain why it is that you find the photographic images unacceptable, but you are okay with a realistic life painting of the same subject. Considering the modeling time for the painting can quite feasibly be a considerably longer time. (just trying to ascertain why you have a difference in apreciation?) Download an inappropriate photo you can go to jail for a long time download the same image as a painting and you wont!!!.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sartre 0 #135 July 19, 2008 Ok, I did some research on the art in question, as well as the artist and his professed reasons for creating the photographs. And though I did find Vanillaskygirl's reasoning persuasive, and logical, once I saw some of Henson's photos, I immediately stopped seeing any reason they needed to be created. Perhaps I wouldn't look at those images as sexual, but a pedophile sure would. All well and good to say beauty and art are in the eye of the beholder, but when the subject is a young teen (or pre-teen) I see no reason nudes need to be taken of them, let alone displayed publically. The morality issue aside, there is still the very real probability that the child's "friends" and schoolmates are going to find these pictures on line and the next thing you know, the entire school is checking them out. Did the teen or the teen's parents anticipate what it would be like for that boy or girl to walk into a classroom in which the majority of people not only have seen nude photos of them, but are passing them around via cell phone? I certainly don't get any distinction between photographs and paintings of the same subject matter, at least not in this case. I have been accused before of being too uptight when it comes to these matters. I'll say right now, I don't care at all whether or not you think I'm wrong. Flame away. I know when I saw the photos (and mind you, these were not the ones pulled into court) I felt immediately that they should never have been taken. Call me all the names you wish, it's still my choice to decide whether or not something is appropriate in my opinion, and in this case, there's no way in hell I'll ever think these are appropriate pieces of "art". And as for the parents who consented to let them be taken and displayed - I feel this is at best irresponsible, if not shameful, decision making. I think they let their child down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 6 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
dreaming13000 1 #133 July 18, 2008 actually, I had a film developer tell me that they could not develop some of my photos once, of my 5 month old daughter in the bathtub, due to nudity ?! *shakes head* I always have to remind myself that the reason every thing has to be so regulated is that there are alot of idiots out there......idiots and bad people. "A man only gets in life what he is believing for, nothing more and nothing less" Kenneth Hagen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #134 July 19, 2008 Quote[ Can you explain why it is that you find the photographic images unacceptable, but you are okay with a realistic life painting of the same subject. Considering the modeling time for the painting can quite feasibly be a considerably longer time. (just trying to ascertain why you have a difference in apreciation?) Download an inappropriate photo you can go to jail for a long time download the same image as a painting and you wont!!!.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sartre 0 #135 July 19, 2008 Ok, I did some research on the art in question, as well as the artist and his professed reasons for creating the photographs. And though I did find Vanillaskygirl's reasoning persuasive, and logical, once I saw some of Henson's photos, I immediately stopped seeing any reason they needed to be created. Perhaps I wouldn't look at those images as sexual, but a pedophile sure would. All well and good to say beauty and art are in the eye of the beholder, but when the subject is a young teen (or pre-teen) I see no reason nudes need to be taken of them, let alone displayed publically. The morality issue aside, there is still the very real probability that the child's "friends" and schoolmates are going to find these pictures on line and the next thing you know, the entire school is checking them out. Did the teen or the teen's parents anticipate what it would be like for that boy or girl to walk into a classroom in which the majority of people not only have seen nude photos of them, but are passing them around via cell phone? I certainly don't get any distinction between photographs and paintings of the same subject matter, at least not in this case. I have been accused before of being too uptight when it comes to these matters. I'll say right now, I don't care at all whether or not you think I'm wrong. Flame away. I know when I saw the photos (and mind you, these were not the ones pulled into court) I felt immediately that they should never have been taken. Call me all the names you wish, it's still my choice to decide whether or not something is appropriate in my opinion, and in this case, there's no way in hell I'll ever think these are appropriate pieces of "art". And as for the parents who consented to let them be taken and displayed - I feel this is at best irresponsible, if not shameful, decision making. I think they let their child down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
