Nudity

[lilobee]

I think that there's a fine line between artistic nudity and p*rn-like nudity. The female body is extremely beautiful, a work of art. I have no problem with nude paintings, sculptures, photographs...as long as it's done with taste. Cuz a person can easily tell when nudity is being used to sexually seduce people. It's important as to what goes into the picture, lighting...makeup...poses...and the photographers general intent. You can always tell the difference between Victoria's Secret and for instance, a Paulo Roversi photograph. I don't think it's right for any women of any age to be used for sexual photographs that sells their body like that. A women's body IS a work of art, and should not be defiled in a self selling sexual way.

 

[lilobee]

AND. I think that if a model doesn't want to be shown nude, she should never be pressured into showing her body. It's a pretty horrific thing to force on a girl.

 

[wednesdays child]

^^ ofcourse.. that goes without saying.. she/he must be completely comfortable with it....
but people also should not force their hangups onto other people who don't have them, like criticising girls who have made that choice and are happy about it.. you know?

 

[crow_watcher]

^I agree. Getting back to Ali's Wallpaper magazine photos, I see nothing "sexual" about it. Yes, she is beautiful and looks very comfortable, but I don't see the pic trying to sell sex. Nudity is a beautiful thing. Some folks haven't embraced it because of the emotions they feel from nudity. One step is to understand it, and it's natural to enjoy viewing artistic nudity.

 

[ursus-arktos]

Tiiu Kuik - Marie Claire Italy May 2009
4 images from melkarch.com
posted by meduse in the Tiiu Kuik thread

 

[ursus-arktos]

Aurélie Claudel - French Playboy May 2009



usemycomputer.com

 

[Filipe]

Thanks for posting all these pictures

 

[ursus-arktos]

Top Models
cover by Herb Ritts
Models: Claudia Schiffer, Cindy Crawford, Tatjana Patitz, Stephanie Seymour, Nadja Auermann, Eva Herzigova, Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss, Elle Macpherson, Christy Turlington, Eva Padberg, Gisele Bundchen
project-xtapes.com

 

[silk skin paws]

Very nice photos ursus. For me modeling and nudity goes hand in hand.

 

[fashion tyger]

usemycomputer.com

French Playboy is so much better than American Playboy in every way

 

[Trista]

Oh without a doubt! The American one is just selling sex, while the French one has real celebrities (at least from what I read), models as Playmates, and it is just a lot less trashy. Those shots of Aurelie-most of them could end up in a legitimate fashion magazine (if there were more accessories).

 

[Tiffannie]

I think that there's a fine line between artistic nudity and p*rn-like nudity. The female body is extremely beautiful, a work of art. I have no problem with nude paintings, sculptures, photographs...as long as it's done with taste. Cuz a person can easily tell when nudity is being used to sexually seduce people. It's important as to what goes into the picture, lighting...makeup...poses...and the photographers general intent. You can always tell the difference between Victoria's Secret and for instance, a Paulo Roversi photograph. I don't think it's right for any women of any age to be used for sexual photographs that sells their body like that. A women's body IS a work of art, and should not be defiled in a self selling sexual way.

Yes I agree with you.
I don't mind much if its for art purposes but when I see it in pop-up ads, dvds, etc its disgusting

 

[PinkGoddess]

I think that there's a fine line between artistic nudity and p*rn-like nudity. The female body is extremely beautiful, a work of art. I have no problem with nude paintings, sculptures, photographs...as long as it's done with taste. Cuz a person can easily tell when nudity is being used to sexually seduce people. It's important as to what goes into the picture, lighting...makeup...poses...and the photographers general intent. You can always tell the difference between Victoria's Secret and for instance, a Paulo Roversi photograph. I don't think it's right for any women of any age to be used for sexual photographs that sells their body like that. A women's body IS a work of art, and should not be defiled in a self selling sexual way.

A woman who poses nude for purposes other than p*rn*gr*ph*c is still selling her body just the same, only she isn't selling sex.

How is selling one's body in a p*rn*gr*ph*c manner "defiling"? Is there something inherently wrong or immoral in material designed purely for sexual gratification? The body IS a sexual object (particularly the female body) and viewing it in that manner is perfectly healthy.

I also disagree about a fine line between art and p*rn*gr*phy. The photos of Marilyn Monroe used by Playboy for its first issue were not only viewed as p*rn*gr*ph*c at the time, but highly obscene and offensive.

Today most people would not even classify them as "p*rn".

I understand that the intention behind nudity is often blatantly obvious, but most of the time, 'non-artistic' nudity is aesthetically beautiful, and 'artistic' (or more commonly, high fashion) nudity is also sexually themed.

 

[PinkGoddess]

And sorry to get pedantic here, but "art" is intended as well as a form of creative expression, as a representation of life, and sex is certainly often blatant, graphic, intense, animalistic, sadomasochistic, and unclean. People can choose to see this viewpoint as negative if they wish, but it's simply one of the realities of sex. There are just some things that most pictures considered 'artistic' cannot reveal, and though I wouldn't say that most p*rn*gr*phy has much artistic value, I can certainly see how it could be viewed in an artistic manner. But "art" itself has always been largely subjective to begin with (Andy Warhol definitely proved that).

 

[tullepen]

Natasha has some nudes in MUSE that are so beautiful

ilove80.be/blog

 

[TommyGirl]

I guess "the fine line" is very personal. To me the line goes there where a girl spread her legs to the camera, full frontal. I mean, you know when it`s actual p*rn. I have nothing against VS pics, I love to watch them but I can`t deny the one above by Natasha is more poetic. I don`t feel offended when I see H&M lingerie ads at the bus stop, but some women may do.

A female body is indeed beautiful, and it deserves to be shown, as long as it`s fine to the object and the artist, rest of us don`t have to watch it, if we don`t want. Not to forget either that religious reasons have had a huge effect on how we see and feel about human body. I´m actually more worried about our unnatural relationship with bodies, when it`s the most organic thing we have. Stop shaming and hiding it, start to enjoy of it , you must live with it anyway.

 

[nijuyanah]

Natasha's shots are heavenly. Pure and sensual, but in a very soft and (like TommyGirl said) "poetic" way.

 

[Mchunu]

I am a huge fan of nudity, especially frontal. I love seeing someone in a photograph pose frontal and nude, like they are confronting you or even looking unaware and like they are in their natural habitat. The pose is beautiful, as well as the level of comfort Toni has next to Katrin. Her top is pulled down almost as if she was flashing someone, yet it does not come off as indecent or crude, just a tasteful depiction of a woman's breasts.

This is one of my favorite nudes, ever.



herfamedgoodlooks

f/ Vogue Italia Nov.2008
Cottage by the Sea by Steven Meisel

I really enjoy a lot of the nudes by Herb Ritts. He is a master of reinventing the human form.

 

[Mchunu]

here is a video of Ritts discussing his interest in shooting nudes, posted by Raven_McCoy in Herb Ritts's thread (most of it is in French, but him speaking is in english) lot of great supers from the 90s included, as well:

 

[tullepen]

scanned by taben
http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=07111_num9ro96_edita009_122_1164lo.jpg