Okay, okay, I'm NOT gonna start my rant about Tits For Hits (but it's still true), but if only, if only people would tell the damn truth about why they look at the damn pictures!!!! Like me! LOL http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=781480&Start=253&Sectionid=8&filter_genre_id=0&WhatsNew=Yes (",)

Hehe, so true.

Mikey has a point, but why make an issue out of it? As is, this post and the comments in the Gallery may indeed stir up a s___ storm. It is a borderline TOS issue: "Destructive commentary/communications made with the intent to disrupt or attack (Trolling). This applies to any communications within this community, whether in the forums, art galleries, graffiti wall, chat, or IM." S___ storms only cause hurt feelings and unpleasant work for the Staff. "Titles", and verbal descriptions of artwork, have ALWAYS been a source of amusement. Just try to tone down any attacks. Or better yet, show your amusement in more creative ways.

come on JA... be nice... nudity has been in art forever & not everyone thinks like you... TG :p

Bloody hell, mods, calm down calm down!! You know as well as I do that I never mean the comments maliciously, I just like to see reactions - I thought the likes of you, Misha, would know that as much as anyone! look : . molehill _ / / / mountain..... I'm sure I could quite easily drop back about a year and find comments to similar things from yourselves that found it funny then.... Jeez! (",) Power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely ;)

i believe misha was referring to your comment in the gallery on the work of a well respected photographer there

I don't beleive I criticised either his work OR his integrity - damn fine photo's. Mine was merely a comment on the number of hits the picture got NOT because of his photographic skill or lack of it, but because it was T&A. It was very much a hit at the mentality of the people that view the photo and their reasons for veiwing - not one person placing comments had the balls to say they were being voyeuristic!! If he'd created a VERY similar photo of a vase of flowers the number of hits would be 1/3 or less of what it got. THAT is an insult to the well respected photographer. (",)

please speak for yourself, i shan't lower myself to your mentality... now shoooo... wow us with some more photos! :]

yeah, thought THAT might shut ya up!!! Phhhhhhht!!! (",) Damn mod wannabees!!! Pain in the ass!! :D

If he'd created a VERY similar photo of a vase of flowers the number of hits would be 1/3 or less of what it got. THAT is an insult to the well respected photographer. As is your comment about voyeurs...which is obviously meant as an insult to the viewer. Who are you to be judging the intent of the viewer? (By the way..anyone viewing any image is being voyeuristic). Maybe you are attempting to apply a pornographic connotation to the viewer...or maybe you just don't understand that some people like nudes better than others...for whatever reason...human nature is what it is and maybe you don't like the way people are...that dosen't give you the right to publicly post acrimonious vilifications of all who view a certain image...

Quote me, solo - where exactly is my acrimonious vilification? And who are YOU to be judging my opinion? ;-) And yes, you are damn right it's meant as an insult to the viewer. If 200-300 people can be bothered to click on a picture solely because it has a bit of T&A, then they should be equally as enthusiastic about other pictures that don't. Now, I'm not talking about a difference of 20 or 30 hits - I'm talking about MULTIPLICATIONS of 20 or 30 hits. I find yours to be a very vindictive reply. Without knowing me you insult my freedom of thought ("...who are you to be judging..."), my intelligence ("...maybe you don't understand...") my freedom of speech ("...that doesn't give you the right...") and my knowledge of the English language. Without even resorting to the dictionary I think you'll find a voyeur is someone who gets sexual gratification from looking at something. Someone who is just looking at something is a VIEWER. If you get turned on my buildings, landscapes, flowers... hey, whatever your scene! ;) Solo, if you would be open and willing enough to skip back about the 4 years I've been here (or the last couple of days!) you'll find me to be an easy going, often humourous and generally well liked kind of guy. I TOTALLY understand human nature, but would like people to be intelligent enough to overcome animal urges and look at other pictures that often take more planning / knowledge / luck than nudes. I also understand that it's easy to be aggressive towards someone you don't know, and how easy it is to misinterpret them purely from text. Now, stop, shakes hands and play nicely with me :-D I'm sure Cyn can tell you the bit to do next..... ;-) (",)

eying the shiny new paddle again :] ding ding to your respective corners... i'm no parrot JA & don't perform upon command, but to repeat myself... you bring it on yourself mate

he he - I know, I know..... BUT ISN'T IT FUN?!?! (",) (I've just checked so I didn't look a fool, and dammit, I was right about Voyeur too!)

If there is a certain tone in my response it is in response to your insult. Primiarily because I believe that Art should be as free as you are with your opinion. That not only applies to the Artist to create,..but to the right of the Viewer to view..without whom Art would be superflous. Through out history Art has inspired moral warfare. It is my wish that we were all free to View whatever we please without someone getting in our face about it. Nothing personal...just trying to make a point....Raz

Kudos, Raz, No offense taken really anyways - I'm too thick skinned for that ;) (",)

Jordster - Ever the troublemaker. :) I think we had this conversation before. And I think I agreed with your sentiments, but also thought that the whole notion of freedom of thought kind of precluded doing anything other than giving people the hairy eyeball. :) It also drives me crazy to see someone's great photo sitting there with 30 views and 1 comment while a poor-to-mediocre (IMHO) nude gets 1300 views and 30 comments. Or even more annoying, seeing a nude with 1300 views and 1 comment. Great, you like nudes. Could you at least give the photographer a little something back? How did he do? Anything you would change? How was the lighting? Is the angle and pose working for you? Too blatant? Too cliche'? Fuzzy? -=>Donald

I also agree with your sentiments here Donald...but most people don't comment at all anyway. I too wish to get more critical comments in hope of improving my images.

now there's an issue that's worth discussing even though it's been hammered to death... honest critique (if negative, should always be followed by a positive) & how to get it... although, as i've been told, you get what you receive... & time being a major obstacle

ah, but surely the problem with that, Cyn, is that if you follow a negative with a positive the perp. either KNOWS the positive is there just to soften the blow and so means nothing or else the next time they concentrate on making more of the positive issues without solving the negative ones. When I was a supervisor those long moons ago, my team always said they appreciated the no-bullshit approach on what they did wrong because at least then they knew why I was throwing things at them from my desk. ;-) (",)

but the honest approach in writing is far more touchy & difficult, then in person with visual contact of the other person... also we have a lot of "sensitive artists" we're commenting on

Oh, I dunno, I seem to do ok ;-) ROFL (",) really, Cyn, do you HAVE to encourage me?!? snigger

I understand what you mean Cindy...as far as time is concerned. If you take the time to express a negative...a positive solution to remedy would only be fair. Sometimes it would take a whole tutorial in PS or PSP to make the changes that need to be made...not considering the time it would take to master the technique. At the same time many Artists have taken years to develop their technique and understand perfectly what the image needs, but why give away what it took years for you yourself to develop and master? That has always been the problem faced by the apprentice. You have to pay your dues...just like everyone else. In a way I believe this restriction causes those who have the talent to diversify and come up with new ideas instead of following the leader...nuthin wrong with being a rebel or a critic as long as you can follow through and actually create something unique. Thats what drives me crazy about nonpier critics who have never created anything but go around critisizing those who are creative. But like you say Jordy...and I agree perfectly...whatever floats your boat...everyone has different tastes....

I have to admit JA is right on with his first comment,and validates his point later in this thread.I just don't think he picked the right image to prove it on.You could have looked in the gallery tonight and used that comment, and it would have been appropriate.

Mike...First off I'm not sure that I have clearly expressed that I am in personal agreement with the premise of your comment. What I don't agree with is the manner in which you go about expressing your belief. Please bear with me for a moment, there is another aspect in this discussion we are having that I would like to explore with you that is directly related to the point of the viewers rights, which is the fact that there is a majority of people in this country that believe that no one should be allowed to view nude photographs at all...for any reason...declaring that any person who does is a pervert, which could easily be misinterpreted to be the solution to the position you were taking in the comment you posted. I am aware of course, that is not your position. The expert images you have created in your gallery reflect more about your dedication to your Art than any comment you might post in a forum. What bothers me most of all is the fact that the only thing that allows this genre to exist is the Bill of Rights protecting the minority from the majority. Providing ammunition to the majority by criticizing the viewer in this manner seems to me to be akin to cutting off your hand because it offends you. There are those who quickly found out that it didn't take long and you would starve to death. Offence is bound and determined to rear its ugly head..I believe it is wise for us to maintain as united a front as we possibly can and do everything we can to protect our freedoms, even if it means not publicly criticizing those who use your work for other than that which you desire. Hell, privately I would be up in their face myself.. but there will always be that aspect to this genre no matter what anyone says. Thanks for putting up with my rantings...I believe this is very important to future generations. It reminds me of how political partys often disintergrate from within because they can't get past the lesser issues and concentrate on the primary goal. What I seek to do is maintain what freedom we possess at this moment, which is under constant attack from the right. If they had their way they would be banging on your door, prepared to confiscate your Art and we would have the moral police monitoring our computers. It may sound extreme but if they could they would. Forgive me if my passion for freedom becomes overheated my intent is not to offend. I am an old Vietnam Vet and I have given this subject a great deal of thought over the years, having stared the Grim Reaper in the face in defense of the cause...I have learned that the status quo can change extremely quickly without due diligence...Sincerely...Fredric B. "Raspberry" Reed.......and yes! this is fun...:)..I'm not to the point of manlyhugs through the wire though....hahaha...that will take some getting used to on my part...

My oh My..... Anyone, please tell me where I either: a) Slate the artist or his work? b) Say we shouldn't be allowed to look at nudes? a) The artist concerned does excellent work that I myself am jealous of - a fact which he is personally aware from my IM's! There is no way on earth my comment can be seen as a criticism towards him! b) I have NOWHERE stated that we should NOT be able to view nudes!!! I REPEAT - NOWHERE !!! I like Nudes myself! At the risk of repeating myself again, IF 200-300 PEOPLE CAN TAKE THE TIME TO CLICK ON A PICTURE BECAUSE IT HAS T&A, THEN A NON-NUDE PICTURE WITH ARTISTIC MERIT SHOULD ALSO GET AS MANY HITS. That is all I have said, throughout. As this phenomenon ONLY happens with pictures either with (or with the hint of) nudity, yes those people are voyeurs!! What else do you call the extra 270 hitters? There is no avoiding the issue that they are only drawn to the picture is because of the nudity!! Please do not use me as an excuse for a political rant - even though (brace yourself!) I AGREE with you about personal freedoms. We'd be buggered without them. Instead, be free to show me where ANY of MY comments state we should not be allowed the freedom of viewing? Having read this whole thread again, YOU have made that statement as a complete misinterpretation of mine and then attacked me for it!!!! Damn, first I get attacked for using words as they are intended, then I get attacked for NOT saying something! Nothing like a nice healthy debate, I say!!! ;-) (",)

I'm sorry...I have stated my opinion...political rantings or otherwise...as clearly as I possibly can. I am not going to mince over words or get involved in a brawl, it will serve no purpose. Again, my intent is not to offend or as you call it...attack...my only desire is to be understood. I believe open discussion of disagreements is healthy. I am learning a great deal. Thank you for your comment.

[See what stirring up a little trouble does! See! The interpretations folks make get more and more abstract. Now we'll maybe let this go a bit farther before we lock the thread and upset everyone.]

Go on, Misha - hit that Ultimate Power button and lock it.... but why?!? Both me and solo have expressed in our most recent posts that we are enjoying this and that it is healthy. Surely you'd only add fuel to the fire if you blatantly call a halt to our freedom of speech for no reason!! Surely it's a little hypocritical to add more fuel to the fire with a post which begins "See what stirring up a little trouble does!" When that's EXACTLY what you are doing by threatening to lock it and QUOTE "upset everyone" UNQUOTE??? Yeah, that's the constructive approach ;-) ROFL!!! (",)

The Title of this Thread tells all... Mikey stirs it up again.... and is about as constructive as a 7 Day Old Ham Sandwich...this type of Thread happens over and over....for One's gratification of..."rolling on the floor and laughing at others"...and over time, I have seen it as a destructive Game of "one-upmanship and disruption" of what is normally a good Forum. Ta ta Agitators....manly hugz

GASP Sits with mouth open Tedz? sniff Is that how you really see me? sniff As the one-upping destructor? sobs "I never thought my own creation would turn against me" - Frank N Furter (",)

& "last-worder" hehe

What if he take a pictures of a nude lady holding avase of flowers covering the titilating bits and it had a lot of hits. Which is the reason for the hits? Good pose and photography or titilating bits? Bsteph

Nope, Cyn. Last word is the NEW post. Might as well lock this one off............ (",)