New Figure magazine

haha I actually agree with Duane for once, good post

Looks like we are into the what's "clean" and what's "dirty" business. I've always been of the opinion that each and every image deserves its own critique. I never heard of Carrie Leigh before this -- so I went to the web site -- and had a great laugh! The photographs shown -- are technically excellent -- for a 1950's girly magazine. Sure they are updated -- but they remind me of the old "Bunny Yeager" books -- nude model turns photographer. Seems like very contrived poses. But each to his own.

I find some Hamilton and Jock Sturges work to be pushing the limits -- I also find a lot of their work to be fantastic photography. Somehow, our puritanical ancestory has us convinced that if the models are young -- it must be dirty. What a shame!

I've interpreted the bible a little different than some other people -- when GOD asked Adam and Eve "Who told you you were naked?" -- since GOD is all knowing, he already knew -- therefore it must have been a retorical question. Stop and think -- who told you? satan? Well, must be satan who thinks naked is dirty -- not GOD.

Now, as for that new magazine --- I ain't wasting my money!:rolleyes:

That's just it though -- in spite of the art world praise for Jock Sturges (and commercial acclaim for Hamilton) -- they are probably just as horny towards their models as anyone else, although I am sure they are professional as well. Pictures of beautiful naked women are sexual and it is silly to deny it.

Scary thing is that I know some of the models in that magazine and they're proud of being in it. I don't think it's high art but it is classier than, say, being in Hustler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Petronio

That's just it though -- in spite of the art world praise for Jock Sturges (and commercial acclaim for Hamilton) -- they are probably just as horny towards their models as anyone else, although I am sure they are professional as well. Pictures of beautiful naked women are sexual and it is silly to deny it.

---

Point well taken. As humans, we have a NEED to reproduce. That goes over into being "interested" in the body of the opposite sex. The important thing -- in this case "as a photographer" -- remain professional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duane Polcou

I've seen all four issues. They feature fine art nude photography. In this day and age, "fine art nude photography" seems to mean black and white or toned imagery versus color, and content intended to be metaphorical, or at least to emphasize form and shape rather than sexuality. As in, "this sepia toned picture of a woman lying in the lotus position on a giant paper mache scrotum represents North Korea's inhumanity to plankton" . Stuff like that.

I just think "fine art nude photography" is a smokescreen for photographers to get attractive women (and men) naked and pretend as though they have a loftier agenda other than taking nudie shots.

"Ohhhh noooo. I don't do cheesecake. How dare you, sir. I do art. I'm an artist. Because my models don't wear makeup and I posed them in front of a fern and I used a wooden camera and they're printed in sepia. Are you blind?"

At least Helmut Newton had the cajuengas to admit he was a perv.

Are pictures still art if someone whacks off to them? If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, will Michael Fatali be blamed?

Take Jock Sturges. 13 year old girls with pouty lips posing naked. Ahem. Ohh noo, that's art. Because he used a view camera and it's in Black and White and EVERYONE was naked because that's how they live and no one EVER thinks of sex even when they're all naked with pouty lips and even their dogs are naked with pouty lips so get your mind out of the gutter!!

And you wonder why Christie Brinkley's ex husband has a porn addiction. He should have gotten a view camera, and viewed the porn on his computer screen through the ground glass. Then, you know, he's an artist.

---

Totally agree. That old pervert Michellangelo Buonaroti, he even dare to paint naked children in Sixtine chappel.. Oh, wait, he called them angels, and it was 600 years ago.

Now, was Michellangelo artist or just old pervert?

:)

What about the work of the Weston's, of Bernhard, of Cunningham, of Casanave? Many of these noted names used large format cameras. Where does their work if in? I posted a flyer of Martha's work on another site and got band saying the work was not what this site supported but they posted work of clothed models in poses that was much more suggestive then most straight figure work.

Weston did make art. He also did his models. I don't know about the ladies predilictions, but I love the photo of Imogen and Twinkle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haris

Totally agree. That old pervert Michellangelo Buonaroti, he even dare to paint naked children in Sixtine chappel.. Oh, wait, he called them angels, and it was 600 years ago.

Now, was Michellangelo artist or just old pervert?

:)

---

Being that Michellangelo's models were male, one wonders.... :rolleyes:

I like the one Charis quoted in an interview:
While Titian was mixing rose madder
his model was perched on a ladder
The position to Titian suggested coition
so he ran up the ladder and had her.

Picked up a copy today, my second. Somebody there seems to have a very good relationship with Kim Weston, and the interviews with him keep are enough to keep me coming back.