So I've gotta ask - has anyone else noticed that pictures with females in get over 100 views in no time but others seem to hover around between 20 or 50. Why is it that ppl what to have their images viewed but don't bother to scout around the gallery and take a look at something different, interesting or just plain catches their eye? I know this is prob the wrong place to ask this because everyone who will reply here already does scout around. Apart from slow dail-up connections, I don't see how it if fair to use the excuse that you're too busy because you had the time to post.

Is it fair to post expecting views but not to give any?

Not bitching, just intereste...

Yes I did noticed what you mention! Those people very narrow minded, focus they interest on a limited subject...yes LADIES!  They find no  beauty in butterfly or flying eagle or a single yellow flower.  They live they life not knowing what they miss in photography art!

seeya Tunde

Attached Link: Link to Risque Thumb

This has forever been one of the topics for discussion here at Rero. Sadly there are many more people browsing the galleries for a quick thrill and too few artists seeking out real art and interested in more than just T&A. And most of the first kind don't bother to leave a comment -- it is just the way it is. Case in point: I don't shoot many "sexy" photos, but the one time I put a negligee (sp?) clad bottom up as a thumb, that image got the most views of ANY in my gallery (1415 at last count). Now it was an April Fools prank and the actual image was nothing like the thumb, so it just goes to show you the mentality of so many RR members. It has 38 comments as of this writting, but so does the Tiny Flower 8 just below it, and that only has 111 viewings. The way I look at it...I do my images for myself first, and second for the people that appreciate them and comment. I don't let the fact that a quickly rendered Poser babe with breasts bared is going to get more views than any of my photos get to me. I DO take comfort in the fact that even with fewer viewings, my photos will probably get more comments than the Poser babe. ;] I like the human body just as much as anyone else but can appreciate all of the wonders of nature, not just double D breasts. I comment on an image if the thumb catches my eye or if I am familiar with the artist and know I can expect interesting work from them. Sadly, I just never seem to have to time to visit and comment on all the art I'd like to. I think many people here are in that same situation.

Hi Vera!

LOL!!!

I had the same wonderings a year ago...so I did a test :D :D

I uploaded two test  a year ago...They are still in.... whats left of my gallery here :)

The first......   "intercourse...NOT 4 peeping toms" 851 viewers!!!!!!!  MEGA-LOL!!!!!!!

the second.....  "not 4 w...ers either" 722 viewers...rolling eyes

My experiment fellt out JUST PERFECT!!!!!! LOL!!!!

 

Puss & Kram & Haaaaaaapppppy SPRING!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Hi Modesty, good to "see" you. Happy Spring yourself Grover buddy! =o]

Puss & Kram at ya Kort aka Groverbuddy ;)...

how does the little blue buggar do?

I made a blue ladie 4 him.........U can snatch it 4him on my own site....

and put it over hes bed when he arrives back at ya.....LOL!!!!!!!!!!

Awww, that was sweet of you, thanks. :) He's doing well. Off to New Zealand after spending some time in Hawaii. You could probably find the link in the forum if you'd like to take a look. :) :m_bouncy:

This debate is as old as Rosity itself, although it usually occurs over in the Poser forum/gallery, & it can get quite nasty over there too (good entertainment if you've got nothing better to do).

Actually, regarding the viewing, but not commenting I do agree with has been posted somewhere in these forums before. Something along the lines of: how many times does an image need the same compliment underneath it?
I'll comment if I see an image early enough or if there is something specific that I really like. I often vote as well, but don't say so. It would be good if there was an extra button on an image page that would add your name to a list of people who like the image - sort of like the 'Favourite Image button, but without adding the image to your homepage (or I'd have nothing else, but images I like).

Yes, Vera, I already made some remarks about that too. It's very frustrating sometimes. I once uploaded an image, and found that it was placed right between 5 nude images. They each had over 100 viewings when my image had only 10. I really felt that my image had no chance that way, and I simply removed it and waited an hour, then put it up again... I find that viewing mentality ridiculous and very non-constructive, but what can you do? If someone really wants to see nude images, there are plenty of other sites...

An old debate and have also done the risqué thumb trick, which in fact cost me several people removing me from their favorites and a few pretty shitty IM’s

 

The bottom line (excuse the pun) is that there are people that are here (and many other sites) just to look at the girlies.

 

As for commenting, I comment on stuff that I like regardless of the subject matter, that said I haven’t commented on much at all lately as I just haven’t the time.

 

As a bit of irony I use a model/photographer portfolio site in the UK where 99% of the content is female models with the odd macro, landscape thrown in, the landscapes often attract more attention than the models do! Strange world eh lol

Hahah, that is strange. I guess if you see so much skin, the odd tree or bug here and there helps break the monotony. :m_tongue2:

If some one wants to view/post adult content they should go to R'osity's sister-site. Do you all agree?

Why? Artistic nudes have as much a place here as still life. It's all art.

But then again, I don't see nude as being specifically adult content.

ummmm whats wrong with nudes lol

I tend to shoot nudes and semi nudes I try to be as artistic as I can.. there is such a fine line between shooting something for art and shooting it and it coming out like soft porn.

I have tried shooting the nature stuff but i am no good at it.. I like smooth and fine lines and if I have to shoot a tree I go oh crap its so busy I wouldnt even know where to crop it at without stressing.. lol

I love other peoples nature shots and I go now how did they know to crop that tree with so many others around lol

my images show less then what they use to when it comes to nudes.. for several reasons. 1 I would get 1000 views 10 comments and then 30 IM's saying how can you post that crap here? lol

and i would be thinking ummmm I didnt force you to click on it. it was clearly marked nude in title and check box ... and you take the time out to chew me out but dont have time to comment on the art you do like lol

an what really floors me is I get the most grief from poser people.. and I go look at their gallery and they are all naked girls with swords but they are giving me grief lol I tried to figure that one out but was afraid I would get an aneurysms in the process lol

if any nudes or semi nudes I do offend anyone let me know and I will tame them down again

I do not post my fav images I shoot here anymore due to it causes to much trouble :-)

Quote - If some one wants to view/post adult content they should go to R'osity's sister-site. Do you all agree?

Nudes are not adult content IMO so in answer to your question, NO.

 

I think that is a bit of a sweeping statement anyway, Nude = Adult content then yes? Um no.

 

I don’t understand the taboo with the naked body, 100% of all nature, landscape… etc is all shot as nature made it, so why not the body?

 

Quote - "I don’t understand the taboo with the naked body, 100% of all nature, landscape… etc is all shot as nature made it, so why not the body?"

OH YES SIMON!!!!!!! :b_grin:

This was not about showing or not showing nude art. It was about that viewer's mentality. Nude photography can be very beautiful and artful, like any other subject. I certainly don't disapprove of it, like Simon said, no taboo here. I try to look at nude photography the same way as I look at other subjects. No more or less. But that clearly doesn't apply to most viewers...

To those viewers nudes by Rembrand are also 'adult content'. There's always a few nutters ;)

Trust me I know the mentality.. thats what makes shooting nudity so tough for me.. How do you shoot a very pretty lady half naked with great lighting great shadows great outfit and not provoke some one getting aroused? its not possible to do.

the only thing I see that limits people getting aroused is if the girls face isnt in the image. if they cant put a face with the body they cant imagine a personality to get aroused over it.

if I shoot a close up of a nipple or much lower lol I never get any IM's saying oh my she is such a turn on lol

I wish everyone could look at nudes as art but its not going to happen when you are dealing with mentalities that get aroused over naked 3D models lol

Good thread. I look at every thumbnail posting in the photo gallery every morning, yes every morning, all 6 to 9 pages. I open up the images that catch my eye, landscape, female, cat, flower, whatever. I comment on the ones I really like or whatever. So yes, I notice all the semi nude/nude ones have hundreds of views but not many comments. I often wonder why they look but never comment, I comment, but I look at as art and I think that is how it should be viewed.

I don't understand why simon and PL get grief over their shots of the female art form!!

The only ones I don't like are the staged shots of violance containing blood, knives, guns whatever but hey, they think it art so I just pass them by, respecting their own views.

I would love to do a shoot with a female for the body art form but; 1. Can't afford a model. 2. Don't know anyone who will do it for free. 3. Probally would make a right mess of it because I never done one before.

So my final pennies worth is, to all those plonkers out there that don't like it, don't look and respect the artists view.

Sorry, thats my steam let off, not often I do that.

Steve

 

Brilliant thread.

I didn't realise how much of an issue this was.I just accepted the fact that there were people visiting the photo gallery that were not in fact photographers,but just wankers,(excuse my language),looking for a thrill.

Every time I upload a pic of one of my daughters,for example,it gets something like 600 views.But the comments I get are from the same people I know and respect,who looked because they love photography and are not here to just ogle.

That's why the number of viewings is irrelevant to me.So I pay no attention to it.

As far as what I comment on...I couldn't say it any better than Kort already did.I do try to look at and comment on as much as I can...I try to be as encouraging as I can...but it's almost impossible.Sometimes the ebots keep me out of the gallery,entirely.

And as far as nudes...There are true artists here.Miranda,you are one of them...but there are quite a few,shall we say,'seedier' images posted in the gallery.I am sure these get 1000 viewings,too.Which only goes to show....viewings are meaningless.They just show the baser side of humanity...not the side that loves and respects art.

Okay,I'm done now.

And Miranda...I'm sorry I missed your earlier work.If your current work is any indication,it must have been wonderful.

---

The gene pool could use a little chlorine."
---Unknown

Quote - Good thread. I look at every thumbnail posting in the photo gallery every morning, yes every morning, all 6 to 9 pages. I open up the images that catch my eye, landscape, female, cat, flower, whatever. I comment on the ones I really like or whatever. So yes, I notice all the semi nude/nude ones have hundreds of views but not many comments. I often wonder why they look but never comment, I comment, but I look at as art and I think that is how it should be viewed.

I don't understand why simon and PL get grief over their shots of the female art form!!

The only ones I don't like are the staged shots of violance containing blood, knives, guns whatever but hey, they think it art so I just pass them by, respecting their own views.

I would love to do a shoot with a female for the body art form but; 1. Can't afford a model. 2. Don't know anyone who will do it for free. 3. Probally would make a right mess of it because I never done one before.

So my final pennies worth is, to all those plonkers out there that don't like it, don't look and respect the artists view.

Sorry, thats my steam let off, not often I do that.

Steve

 

I only got grief once because I the thumb was a girl and the main image was a landscape (just for a bit of fun) but some thought that I was being disrespectful to the art nude artists, but really it was a tongue in cheek thing to see how many views it got! Oh over a 1000 lol.

 

Anyway Steve, I can’t remember quite where you are located, there are a fair few models that will pose on a prints/CD of images in exchange for modeling time basis and travel expenses etc. Although very few will do art nude or figure on that basis, and most will only pose for prints etc with photographers that have experience in that style of photography.

 

If you are ever down this way I would be happy to try to set up a shoot that you could attend. In my experience the first shoot that anyone does with a nude model usually provokes a “Ok I’m scared now” response when confronted with a nude model, even though the model that do this sort of work don’t bat an eyelid, as they do it a lot its nothing unusual to them.

The first one I done I was a little apprehensive and it must have showed! The model spotted it and taunted me saying “oh your not scared of a wee girlie are you?” all in good fun of course! She only really does art nude and doesn’t like doing clothed shoots, there are a few like that which I still find odd, I have even had one model refuse to model clothed!!

 

Anyway back on topic this is an issue that doesn’t really bother me (it used to but I have got used to it) My opinion on this subject is simple female models = lots of views and fewer comments, landscapes = more comments and fewer views, anything cute and cuddly = many views and often many comments.

 

Also of course any excellent photography attracts many views and comments what ever the subject matter.

 

Thanks Simon, Inverness turn left for another hour, not far really!!! Phew...

I heard this somewhere "sex sells, from the begining to the end of time'. Which is true. For this discussion, not meaning the act itself, but the human form clothed or not will generally attract more attention. For me personally, if a photo of a plant and person was placed side by side, in most cases i would look at the person first, whether I leave the comment would depend on my perception of it and overall impression it left on me.

Quote - If some one wants to view/post adult content they should go to R'osity's sister-site. Do you all agree?

I'm not really sure what you mean by adult content, but maybe the complete opposite of what the TOS will allow. Well if that is the case, then yes. Wow this is such an insightful thread.

I am new to all this and have just finished reading this thread - I have found it really interesting and informative as a relative newcomer to RR. The one thing that strikes me about nudity and Art v Porn is that the same issues don't seem to apply in sculpture. To give you an example, I just spent a day at the Tate Gallery in London, where I saw a fantastic sculpture/statue of a naked young boy. It was anatomically graphic and very beautiful. It was pure art and could not have been seen in any other way. However, I did wonder at the time if the same image would have been acceptable as a life-size photograph/painting up on the wall in the Tate. If the answer is no, it would not be acceptable, does that mean that statues/sculptures do not have the same arousal issues that photographs/paintings/drawings do? And if not - why not?

Quote - It was pure art and could not have been seen in any other way.

I find that true for so many cases, but you cannot control people differing perception and reaction to something like that(or any kind of art). For example, for the conservatives, the fact that he was nude might be considered indecent or vulgar. Or the fact that it was a young boy. I mean a relative sick few, would get off on that. > Quote - does that mean that statues/sculptures do not have the same arousal issues that photographs/paintings/drawings do? And if not - why not?

I'm really not sure, but would the fact the it is in 3D as opposed to 2D would have some kind or effect. Maybe the size of the piece, and maybe it would also depend on the presentation of the subject as well?

You are absolutely right, you cannot control differing perceptions and I am sure that maybe there would be the odd person here or there that would have their own unsavoury perception of the piece. I am just confused as to why a naked sculpture of a child is acceptable in art circles when I am pretty sure a 2D representation probably wouldn't. I mean, why not accept both or ban both? Do you see what I mean? It's a strange world that we live in.

For the 2D representation, do u mean that it also depicts the same subject matter (the naked child)?

I think a painting is more acceptable as a sculpture is.

 

I think that the issue that lies with photographic and rendered images is that they can be very detailed and graphic; any part of the anatomy in photography is a 2D scaled re-creation of the actual object to the minute detail. This in itself isn’t a problem, but add to that the use of such imagery in the adult industry, this is where the problems and issues creep in.

 

Well this is my personal opinion and I am very open to be wrong if someone points it out to me

It is just an opinion.

How a person thinks about nudes is taught from the day they were born.. A love scene comes on a movie and parents cover the child’s eyes in a panic saying oh my god don’t look Johnny lol then the next day they turn on the electronic baby sitter. And toss in a movie with nothing but violence from cartoons to power rangers sending a message its ok to hurt but not ok to love… but yet we all naturally desire to love and be loved.. we don’t naturally desire to be violent. So we are not teaching what’s natural at all.

 

And we all know as we get older we are happy we can finally do and see what we were not allowed to do and see as a child. That last for a couple years till we marry a spouse that was raised like above that I talked about. Then you are right back to sneaking to look and if caught you are now a full blown pervert lol

 

I will try an make this short and skip ahead a bit lol

So to me I think penetration of any kind should be the limit on showing nudity.

Now when I say this next part its just my opinion because I only see my side on this. No one has explained the other side to me yet..

 

Lets take the TOS here this is the one that don’t make sense to me

No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing.

Now I did a shot of my vertical smile hidden with M&M’s and it was deleted. But if I was to post my vertical smile with nothing covering it for the whole world to see it would have not been deleted lol and right away I go ok some man wrote this silly rule so they can see my smile.. its like don’t you dare hide that thing or we will ban you lol

 

I think it should read no sexual contact in the Genital area with any object

So there for rose peddles M&M’s hiding a genital area is bad.

 

But a naked poser figure with a sword with blood all over it with dead people all around now that’s art.

 

 So I guess my next shot I do should be me on my period while holding a sword lol

Then the TOS will smile real big and say see we are helping shape the art community

That Miranda girl use to come here and hide that thing with M&M’s she is now saved due to us lol

Hi Miranda.A few of the TOS rules don't make sense to me either,so I understand.

I once posted a pic that had my daughter Meg,at the age of about 3,wearing only a loosely draped towel.Now, I knew this was not allowed,so I put a black box over her entire body.But that was not allowed either.It seems the black box was also considered 'suggestive'.Even though there was nothing to see!Which I thought was rather strange...but I just accepted it being deleted.

I think it's very difficult to properly phrase the TOS,because there always seems to be loopholes or ways to misconstrue it.The one you mentioned,and your example, shows just that.It doesn't really make much sense.But I understand what they are trying to prevent...

Now,here's where people might not agree with me.

I think if we are going to post here,we simply have to accept the TOS....even if we don't agree.

But yes, debate is a good thing,and yes,sometimes things get changed by speaking out,so I can understand the importance of open discussion...as long as it's done sensibly.

Any way,that's just my two cents.

And lol at your 'vertical smile'.I've never heard that expression before.Clever.LOL.

Keep smiling! ;^)

---

Subliminal thought of the day:

Yes I know I have learned to live by the rules here.

And I respect all you are saying and I do realize there is a lot of loopholes in the TOS I just feel torn because....

violence and man made acts is a greater art then the natural art God gave us. and violence is more excepting then an image of natural child birth. we all know in our heart its wrong but we dont become active about it we become immune

I guess I am shocked that someone here said dont you think all nudes should go to RR sister site

Then I am thinking yes that would help so the violence can have a place to grow like cancer here then the next bright thing they will type is why are the teachers not protecting our kids at school from guns lol

I at one time did a post of an egg broken above my vertical smile it did not get deleted.. but I had to laugh when I got IM from people saying hey my 13 year old son hangs out here what gives you the right to expose my son to this..

and I had to laugh because one when you signed up for RR you checked the box saying it is ok to see nudity I didnt check it for you. 2 the thumbnail clearly said nudity in the title 3 I checked my box to warn you a 3rd time it was going to be nude. and now I am at fault for what you let your kid see. but when I went to the persons gallery I see nothing but bloody swords in naked girls hands. and right away I am thinking I guess its going to be the teachers fault when your son turns 16 and is in school with a gun yelling no one understands me.. I am sure my vertical smile with an egg on it drove him to that lol

None of this is directed to you Marlene I respect all you said im just venting here lol

I will stop now lol

veering OT a bit..
@miranda.. i never did understand the removal of that one
because rose petals are acceptable.. last i saw
so like you said, what's the dif tween rose petals & M&Ms & for that matter, an egg
ah well.. no longer my place to question why

the TOS is in place to prevent more "extreme" images from being posted
& shouldn't be taken so literally..
it's up to the staff to use their best judgment on those that fall between the lines..
(whether vertically or horizontally.. LOL)
& really, any image can be removed no matter what,
using the catch phrase "deemed unsuitable for this community"

as far as using "blots or censors" on children, that one is clearly spelled out
in the child image guidelines & there are very few exceptions
because there will always be a few who will use them inappropriately,
ruining it for others & so the broad ruling
but i won't get much into that again ..
since  it also censors cherubs portrayed in Fine Art  & that irritates me

the human body is Fine Art.. been portrayed as such for centuries
& there's an obvious difference tween Fine Art & porn

no debate there.. & to each his own..

"I did a shot of my vertical smile hidden with M&M’s"
Eh? My brain crashed trying to work that image out  _

Following on from cynlee said - I think a lot of the TOS stuff is there to cover Rosity against every eventuality. Considering how quickly things can end up in court over the smallest thing I'm not too surprised.

Hi Margana, the word 'suggestive' is probably what caught you out - its a huge grey area that can be translated/argued almost anyway you want to suit your situation. Try defining suggestive - different people will have different limits on what that means.
Veering OT quite a bit.

I totally agree.On all counts.

---

"The best effect of fine persons is felt after we have left their presence."
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Hi gang! What an interesting...yet pointless (IMO) debate you´ve got going here.

First i´d like to reply to Vera if you don´t mind:

"Is it fair to post expecting views but not to give any?"

I sincerly doubt that the one posting nude/semi-nude photos expect more views than the one uploading a flower for instance. If they do, then i reckon that says more about them than the photo they uploaded. How often don´t you see thumbs suggesting something nude when the main photo might be of a sheep or whatever? Is it fair? Who is suffering from it? I hardly think that some random member would go into the gallery thinking...."hmmmm...today i´m gonna look at 1 photo and that´s it.....hmmm....will i pick the naked lady or will i go with the tulip." So i think that the word "fair" might be the wrong one to use.

There are many nude photos uploaded at this place that i consider to be just as much art or even more so than any of the "non-nude" ones. So as a reply to Radlaxf comment:

"If some one wants to view/post adult content they should go to R'osity's sister-site. Do you all agree?"

I will say a big NO. Everyone should be allowed to upload whatever they want as long as it´s within the TOS....then it seems that the TOS can be questioned from time to time....but on that i have no comment. Other than this:

I CAN`T BELIEVE THAT YOUR M&M-DISPENSER GOT DELETED MIRANDA!!!!!!!! LOL! :woot:

 

Well this has gone beyond the topic just a little, however I don’t see it as a pointless debate either, debate is how we as a race express our opinions.

 

I have expressed mine and on that note have little to add.

 

Before I deleted my LP gallery it was a photo of model Yvonne (some of you know) Yvonne does not do any nudity at all, yet it was one of her pictures that had the most views 1500 or something like that, which is in fact 3x more than any of the nudes that I had posted, this to me tells its own story, the image was a very powerful one IMO but nothing more that you will see in most ladies magazines, it has a certain commercial appeal to it.

 

My most commented was Eileen Donan Castle under a rainbow.

 

All I can add is that if an image has a powerful thumb it will get lots of views, it the large image is equally powerful it will get a fair amount of comments

yep.. you're right simon.. really comes down to marketing.. what will catch the eye of the viewer besides the obvious beautiful woman.. something a bit different ..unique.. a feeling.. it speaks.. there are so many variables & reasons why this & not that.. my own included..

 

Hey Simon....was that the photo of Yvonne holding a card that said "Get well Zacko"?

4 Vera @ first...can' t change the peepers :)...........or?????

well my experiment didn't changed them ...LOL!!!!!

Miranda I never did understand the removal of that one either.....

Simon I loved that one!!!!!!!!!!! Puss & Kram!!!!!!!

Cindy I love U :)

Art is ART :) And fine art Is MARVELOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Zacko U're to much!!!!!  Pust

 

http://modesty.just.nu

 

 

Andreas, it was this one on the left, although the get well one was very popular too

http://www.photo-models.uk-photos-web.co.uk/yvonne/ymckay/ym_a.html

Nothing backs up this whole  views vs comments debate more than the gallery itself! 

Just checkout  the 2 sort choices available at the top of the photo gallery and you'll see quite a difference in the top 100 for each selection.

Most VIEWED
http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?Sectionid=8&filter_genre_id=0&MostWanted=Yes

Most Commented
http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?Sectionid=8&filter_genre_id=0&MostCommented=Yes

Miranda stated in a thread above " I got IM from people saying hey my 13 year old son hangs out here what gives you the right to expose my son to this.."

Wonder what ratio of Render members actually fall into the "teen boy" or younger age group.  Raging hormones.... might be behind all the HIGH viewing of Images containing nudity! 

Things that make ya go hmmmmmmmm!?!

Hej Modesty!

That shot is wonderful Simon.No mystery there!

And Joe,I keep trying to see the two images you linked to...but for some reason I can't.But LOL now I'm so curious to see what they are!

"Wonder what ratio of Render members actually fall into the "teen boy" or younger age group.  Raging hormones.... might be behind all the HIGH viewing of Images containing nudity!  "

I'm sure THAT ratio is pretty high!

---

"I have noticed that the people who are late are often so much jollier than the people who have to wait for them."
---E. V. Lucas

Marlene...those links are the same as selecting the Most viewed or Most Commented links at the top of the photo gallery!  Render is slow as molasses it seems....they come up eventually after you click the link.

Since no one has mentioned this as such and trust me when I say this isn’t a sexist comment, but based purely on statistics .

 

Pretty girls sell more than hunky guys or pictures of anything else.

 

Go watch the TV and see how many commercials have beautiful women in them Vs other imagery. I would be willing to bet it is a larger percentage.

 

Possibly for 2 reasons.

 

1. That is the way that society in general has manipulated us.

2. The female brain is more tuned to emotion and emotional response, where the male brain is more tuned to visual things.

 

This has been studied at length over the decades.

 

I don’t need to explain it, go down the shopping centre/Mall and see it for yourself.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely true Simon...

...and also the fact that women like seeing other attractive women,whereas men don't seem to care about looking at another good-looking guy...So an attractive female appeals to both sexes...

And Joe,I have RRrelated-ADD,it seems.After about 5 minutes,(if that long),RR turns to aRRgh! and I give up,lol.

I look for it in the photo gallery..if that ever opens,lol.But thanks for explaining.

---

"Sure, everyone always said 'Socrates, what is the meaning of life?' or 'Socrates, how can I find happiness?' Did anyone ever say 'Socrates, hemlock is poison'?"
---Socrates (shortly before his death)

...and also the fact that women like seeing other attractive women,whereas men don't seem to care about looking at another good-looking guy...So an attractive female appeals to both sexes...

I cant agree with this more I did a nude shoot of my hubby and he told me no one is going to want to see these so I decided not to post them... you all can thank me later lol

and the other thing is finding men to pose nude is impossible soon as you say there is no sex involved and you are going to be put on the net they shrink up like they were in an ice cold pool and run for the hills lol

:lol:

Right you lot now and do somthing artistic instead of talking about it!

http://market.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2646741

LOL! Miranda!Poor dears...some things you just can't hide! ;^P

And Simon...nice segue.....LOL!

---

"Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative."
---Oscar Wilde

The only ones I don't like are the staged shots of violance containing blood, knives, guns whatever but hey, they think it art so I just pass them by, respecting their own views.

Steve

 

Those are the ones i was talking about. Remember there are children browsing this site. p.s. if you post or link to images that contain nudity please put NWS or nudity in the title. This includes the "Favorite Images" feature. Thank you for your time.

it's almost the same discussion going on at every gallery site on the web, be it for photographs or other kind of art; that's one of the reasons why I finally restrict posing of my photographs to my personal site, leaving some pieces for discussions at f.i. RR (which is - as said earlier - far better than most of other sites I've seen so far)....