
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.
Bookmarks