Nude

[miss_emma_jade]

Four pages and no boobs.

Thoroughly disappointed.

actually im impressed. frank must have posted the right pic. i love the way it keeps pulling me back for another look. anyone else got a pic to post? lol

[Alan Gales]

I'm sure that when Frank snapped that shot he had no idea about how much the photo would be discussed later!

[Darryl Baird]

Well, Jay, regardless of what you think, I posted a photograph, which is what is supposed to be shared and discussed in this thread. No? Care to play? Care to post a nude? Or is it words you prefer? I went through at least half of the 141 pages and saw some good work, but the majority of pages contained large amount of replies, much of them rude, dumb, childish, condescending, argumentative, angry, or just a bunch of words that have little relevance to this age-old subject. Not surprisingly, the number of images posted has dropped considerably since the beginning. hmmm. So, it's a little surprising I was the best at this... managed with a single post (done in jest) and according to your take, the worst of the worst. I guess I win, but I never entered the contest, just wanted to show and discuss the idea/imagery of the "nude."
Please, by all means, take the thread where it needs to go, it's certainly not worth the effort or angst to me.... and thanks for the confirmation. Bye.

[Aurélien87]

well, seven pages without any picture !!
it's time to to make photographs, guys, let's stop speacking ....

[Yef]

Thought I'd try some of this nakeeed woman photography stuff because it's so arty. I hope she got a ride home after I left her there without any clothes.

Attachment 77096

wounderful picture - just perfect

[alex from holland]

well, seven pages without any picture !!
it's time to to make photographs, guys, let's stop speacking ....

+1, really a shame

[Jim Noel]

[QUOTE=JBAphoto;910305]

Was this made just before you had your prostate gland checked?

In truth I like it, as one of the few pix here that made me laugh

Here is a beautiful young lady making by far the best comment about all the useless chatter which has appeared lately on this thread.
I hope you post other images of this terrific model.

[SamReeves]

I had a rare bit of extra time today and decided to follow some threads here on LFPF, this was one that I was curious about. Originally I thought I might post some of my experiments from the last year, but after seeing all the holier-than-thou, snarky, pissy, flame-baiting BS... NOT. But as a way to get some levity (and a damned photograph) inserted, here's a "nude."

Attachment 77240

LOL.

That's original for sure.

[wentbackward]

[QUOTE=Jim Noel;911091]

Here is a beautiful young lady making by far the best comment about all the useless chatter which has appeared lately on this thread.
I hope you post other images of this terrific model.

Jim, I believe that's Fanny Cheuk, quite a well known photographer in hong kong. You can find her work here and here

[rdenney]

I'm sorry but to me all that is so asinine. At a glance I thought it was a digital snap showing how he set up the next shots. When I saw the film border, I thought, "Why would anyone waste a sheet of film on that?"

I think that all the time when looking at photos on forums. And many of those photos attract all manner of raves from others. Is the problem with the photograph, those who offer rave reviews, or me who doesn't get it? Beats me. As long as it's possible that it's me, though, I'm going to be pretty careful about how I offer rejection. I'm one of those who does not react well to criticism that does not point me in a useful direction, nor is my confidence (from an artistic standpoint) so strong that I can remain uninjured by rejection.

I look at Frank's work, and a couple of things are consistent in my response to them: They are quite literal, and they are oddly compelling.

This one is no different. If it had a story in narrative form that could be expressed in words, then he should write instead of making photos.

The literal aspect is interesting. They are all uniquely photographic--one cannot imagine his photos as paintings. And they don't try to make their point through mere effect, though I've seen Frank use effect. (The photo he made holding his Technika for the pictures-of-cameras thread was chock-full of effect--it had a graphic element that fairly cried out German industrialism.)

What came into my mind was: "This seems like satire on the whole notion of making photographs of implausibly naked women out in 'nature.'" So many of those are romantic to the point of nauseating sentimentality, with flowing curtains, soft focus, and swirly bokeh. Frank's is, um, frankly unsentimental.

Here's the satirical caption I would write, if I felt a caption was needed: "Hey! Look at me! I'm photographing a naked woman!" It seems to me imperative that the "background" be a sheet with the fold marks plainly visible, to expose it for what it is. Without it, it's no longer a satire on creepy amateur photographers, but rather it becomes just another implausible picture of a naked woman in nature, and becomes potentially creepy rather than a satire on creepiness. The model's enthusiastic pose reinforces the story. Her caption would be, "Hey! Look at me! I'm modeling nude for Art! For a real Artist! Woo-Hoo!"

By removing this photograph from the creepiness of the cliche nude in nature, it makes me feel less creepy when I look at it.

None of his models look like objects--they all seem like they are having fun, in the way that real people have fun, even if "fun" for some of them would make me decidedly uncomfortable.

Rick "who probably would have been too much of a creep to think of a photo like this" Denney