Sta.sh
Theme
.
Total prizes reach 1000 
But of course there are always the rules......
Please please please fave the journal!
Make another journal about this giveaway and provide a link of that journal in the comments (this will help spread the word about this giveaway)
this journal 
Rules
Should be about School Times!
oints:
, comment and watch!
It's been busy for me of late!
Inbetween taking Jenn up to the resting place of Lord Byron, helping her film some Amnesia cosplay footage, sorting out things for Metrocon and preparing for the SFX Weekender this weekend, I am shattered! Still, the Weekender is going to be wickedawesome, so it's worth it.
Sadly, Jenn can't make it to SFX with me any longer (she has a job interview that she cannot afford to miss), so ~sora1992 will be coming along with me! 8D
-------Gender Roles-------
A nice, varied (and plentiful!) set of responses to this one. It was very interesting to read about the different ways that many of you were brought up in comparison to me, so thanks for all the comments!
-------Nudity on DeviantART-------
Nudity comes up often as a discussion on dA, and I've wondered what my followers views on it were.
You can view the restrictions on nude art here: [link] (warning: possible graphic descriptions are used)
I'm a little torn on this. It's hard for me to describe what I view as "artistic nude" and "ffs I wish this wasn't on dA".
This picture is one I don't mind seeing, and would personally describe as 'artistic' (Warning: contains nudity) : [link]
This, however, I don't seen as being particularly artistic at all (and this is one of the BETTER examples of what I dislike seeing on dA. Again Nudity warning) : [link]
I'm not sure how I can put into words how I differentiate between them. The former seems to have more effort put into it, whereas the latter is more of just a glorified snapshot. The former can be looked at to have alternative meanings and symbolism, whereas I look at the latter, and just see a topless woman sat on her bed.
Of course, these are just my perspectives. Obviously everyone views art differently, and views are always going to clash on this subject in particular. Personally? I find that leaving a little to the imagination tends to make for a more attractive shot that full-on nudity. For example, if the woman in the latter picture had been wearing lingerie, I'd personally have found it more appealing.
The same goes for images of male nudity, though those are far less frequent on deviantART, as I'm sure you've all noticed! Perhaps I'm just prudish, but I find a gorgeous picture of a lingerie model or corset model significantly more attractive than full-on nudity. Am I the only one?
So, what are your views on it? What do you see as "artistic" nudity and just plain rubbish masquerading under the title of "art"? Do you think nudity should be allowed on dA? Do you think the current restrictions on it are strict enough? Or TOO strict?
Let me know what you think.
Click here for the Parlé Productions Facebook page!
Events I'm Attending
• 2nd - 5th Feb = SFX Weekender, UK
• 13th - 15th Apr = Kitacon, UK
• 26th - 27th May = MCM Expo, UK
• 15th - 17th Jun = Metrocon, FL, USA
Member of Parlé Productions
"If you enter this world knowing you are loved
and you leave this world knowing the same,
then everything that happens in between can be dealt with."
- Michael Jackson -
If there is some planning, or a meaning/purpose behind the model being naked, or if whatever is going on just happens to need a nude image, than fine. I find the human body a beautiful thing.
"Pornographic shots" similiar to the second picture you linked, is not art. It is meant to be sexually arousing and there is nothign symbolic about it. The only message is: "I think I am sexy and you should fap to me" or something along those lines.
Maybe I am biased, but I think there is a strong and definite difference between link one and link two.
I do agree with you; leaving something to the imagination is much more attractive than full on nudity.
[I'm certain it was taken down. Of course, I never went back to check XD]
I think that the first picture could be considered art for many reasons. For one thing, the woman is posing in a way that is obviously thought out and planned. She's not just taking a picture for "art", she and/or her photographer have given her a pose, a set, a prop, and added a certain sensuality to the picture that had purpose to give feeling into the picture.
In the second picture, the woman on the bed is in a very standard pose, that seems to me a bit /too/ casual for what is generally in nude art. It looks more of a spur of the moment "let's take a picture" type thing than a planned photo. Not that there's anything wrong with spontaneous photos, it's just that this one seems to lack any feeling. When I look at the picture I don't get any real type of feel for what the photographer was trying to capture with that picture. It's just a picture of a nude woman on a bed.
This is of course, just my opinion. It doesn't mean it's the "right" one or even a good one.
I feel that maybe that's a harsh argument to use because we have no way of knowing what was going through the photographer or model's head during the shoot... Who knows, perhaps the photog/model wasn't very experienced or it was their first times trying to portray an artistic nude and their first shot doesn't look very professional or nice ( some might even try to argue that it's "porn" in some cases... >_>" Though most people on here have no idea what porn is...). Everyone starts somewhere. I don't think the models or photographers deserve any of the bad comments some people might throw at them impulsively... It can be really hurtful to get that kind of attention on a piece that perhaps they've worked very hard on ( even though it might not show to some ).
Also is it just me that has noticed or has fetish art been getting a lot of hate these days? I find it sad because even the most beautiful and original pictures have been getting some nasty comments :/ I know it's not everyone's cup of tea but is it so hard for people to just look away or turn their mature filter on if it bothers them so much?
even people sculpt it (I know it has nothing to do with the pictures bare with me I'm getting their
But the first picture which looks edited I would consider art were as the on with the women on the bed it is kinda of what looks like a porno shoot. :S
Really I have nothing against it (not a perv by the way) as long as it says "WARNING contains nudity" then its fine I guess
I think the major difference between the two is intent. As an artist, you want your work to be viewed in a certain way. You want to make some kind of statement, and sometimes nudity is the only way to make that statement and to make the body of work come to life. It is the intent of the work that really draws a line for me between artistic nudes and wannabe porn ads.
I feel like the first image has a message. It has an intent. And as a a photography major myself I believe it to be a strong image. It took effort and planning to create and frankly I think it's beautiful.
The second image just seems lazy to me. Sure, in terms of technique it's a properly taken image, but I feel like it's lacking in the conceptual department. I see nothing more than a technically nice photo of a naked woman on a bed. And maybe that's enough to constitute art to some people, which is fine we're all entitled to our own opinions, but to me it seems like a lazy attempt to get attention in a "look she's naked" shock value type way.