Discussion
Ok Podies' monthly competition is being overtaken partly by a discussion on what is appropriate to post directly in the topic
This link will lead you to some images of the semi naked female form, you have the choice whether you wish to go there or not.....
www.sailshots.co.uk/Louise/index.html
will link into the rest of my site tomorrow
Steve
>>> Edited by Scooby_snax on Wednesday 6th April 01:09
This link will lead you to some images of the semi naked female form, you have the choice whether you wish to go there or not.....
www.sailshots.co.uk/Louise/index.html
will link into the rest of my site tomorrow
Steve
>>> Edited by Scooby_snax on Wednesday 6th April 01:09
As mentioned on the other thread I have written to Ted asking for his view on how we approach this subject and sending him a direct link to the 'offending' pic. (errr with warning!!)
I would point out that in the whole of this debate my intention has not been to offend or even spark controversy...I just happened to be a little chuffed with my efforts (especially with the use of light) considering these shots were not done in a studio
Steve
I would point out that in the whole of this debate my intention has not been to offend or even spark controversy...I just happened to be a little chuffed with my efforts (especially with the use of light) considering these shots were not done in a studio
Steve
Ah!....I wasn't aware that someone had complained.
My original query was why Big Al had removed the image whereas similar had deemed acceptable and are still online elsewhere. Perhaps a learning from this is that the Moderators explain to the contributor why they have taken such an action.
This section of PH is a good source of info and debate and I totally agree a line has to be drawn somewhere, my original image I had deemed to be tasteful (in fact there are more offensive contributions elsewher in PH)if I overstepped the line I apologise
If nothing else this debate has established or will establish where that line is
Steve
(must go to work now)
My original query was why Big Al had removed the image whereas similar had deemed acceptable and are still online elsewhere. Perhaps a learning from this is that the Moderators explain to the contributor why they have taken such an action.
This section of PH is a good source of info and debate and I totally agree a line has to be drawn somewhere, my original image I had deemed to be tasteful (in fact there are more offensive contributions elsewher in PH)if I overstepped the line I apologise
If nothing else this debate has established or will establish where that line is
Steve
(must go to work now)
None of the previous images posted have caused me any problem, but that is because I was reading PH when working from home. I think I would feel differently if I had opened the thread when I was sitting in an open plan office. 
Surely the easiest thing is to post a link to anything that may be deemed to be 18 cert, together with a warning statement, exactly as Scooby did above.
Surely the easiest thing is to post a link to anything that may be deemed to be 18 cert, together with a warning statement, exactly as Scooby did above.
The pics are technically really good, but if I'm honest they're very close to crossing that line from being photographic expressions of the female form to lusty pornography. Her expression in a couple of pics in particular leads me to this conclusion - it's almost like a Page-3 shoot.
I don't have a problem with this, but I can see why some people may.
An 18-cert warning is probably the best way to go.
But yes, nice pics.
I don't have a problem with this, but I can see why some people may.
An 18-cert warning is probably the best way to go.
But yes, nice pics.
-DeaDLocK- said:
The pics are technically really good, but if I'm honest they're very close to crossing that line from being photographic expressions of the female form to lusty pornography. Her expression in a couple of pics in particular leads me to this conclusion - it's almost like a Page-3 shoot.
I don't have a problem with this, but I can see why some people may.
An 18-cert warning is probably the best way to go.
But yes, nice pics.
Many of those shots have (IMHO) crossed the line into porn (albeit well and tastefully done porn.) If I had those come up at work I would have a very tricky time explaining them. I don't think it's as simple as B&W=art/colour=porn, as deadlock says it's more her expression.
But I don't want to chuck the baby out with the bath water, so posting a warning and link should suffice.
The issue I have with nakedness is merely the fact that people primarily view PH at work and don't want to open up a page on PH to find pictures of nekked ladeez embedded or a link to such content without a suitable warning.
So external links, with a warning of the content are fine by me.
So external links, with a warning of the content are fine by me.
V6GTO said:
If people choose to view images at work then they are the ones at fault, not the people posting. If it might put your position at risk, don't do it! If you're not sopposed to be surfing the net at work, and you do, then you run a risk.
Martin.
This site is about cars, not naked chicks. Nothing wrong with naked chicks, but these days pics of naked chicks and work don't mix. All you need is one busy body to see a glimpse of the screen and the next thing you'll be busted for been a porno fiend!
V6GTO said:There's a difference between browsing a website like PH during your lunch break at work, and viewing pictures which some people may find offensive.
If people choose to view images at work then they are the ones at fault, not the people posting. If it might put your position at risk, don't do it! If you're not sopposed to be surfing the net at work, and you do, then you run a risk.
Martin.
I agree - if people choose to view such images when they're not meant to, then it's a risk they are obviously prepared to take. The point that people are making is that sometimes it is not clear that such images are included in a thread, and in these cases you don't have a choice as you don't know until you've opened them - which sod's law says is going to be when the CEO is walking past your desk!
I have worked with people who have been fired for less than this, and I don't want to have to avoid visiting PH during work time (which is perfectly acceptable at my place of work) for fear of accidently viewing such images. I already avoid many threads in General Gassing and Pie & Piston for this reason during work hours, and I'd prefer not to have to do the same in this forum.
OK well I think the outcome of the original posting is that we all know where we stand. Anything 'dubious' should not be posted in open forum but linked to another site which allows the viewer to make a choice.
I am rather offended though that those pix on my site are being described as quasi-porn....there is nothing there that FHM wouldnt print I dont think that they can be described as a porn mag.......but there again one mans art is another mans porn...Hi ho
I think I will go back to my yachts and powerboats.....less hassle :-)
I am rather offended though that those pix on my site are being described as quasi-porn....there is nothing there that FHM wouldnt print I dont think that they can be described as a porn mag.......but there again one mans art is another mans porn...Hi ho
I think I will go back to my yachts and powerboats.....less hassle :-)
mechsympathy said:
Many of those shots have (IMHO) crossed the line into porn
PORN WHO MENTIONED PORN? 
Number one was the one I deleted I actually thought that it was tasteful.
Number two? borderline! On this forum IMHO
I personally don't give a moneys what people post, I'm an adult (I'm not taking votes on that BTW)
and I should be able to view and read what I want too.
I also work in my own office and have no one looking over my shoulder.
I should be so lucky.
Nice pics BTW scoob. OH
Scooby_snax said:Scooby me calling your work "quasi-porn" is by no means a judgement on you or your subject - it is just a distinction I am making based on the plethora of erotic photography I see out there. I'm sorry if by doing so you felt I've grouped you into "smut", but if I felt it were smut I would've used the word.
I am rather offended though that those pix on my site are being described as quasi-porn....there is nothing there that FHM wouldnt print I dont think that they can be described as a porn mag.......but there again one mans art is another mans porn...Hi ho
When I say that you are close to crossing that line I am in no way implying that your pictures are automatically devoid of any critical merit or of any "art" as you put it. I am just making a distinction that I feel some of those pics cross into territory which many may find offensive, or simply not wish to caught viewing. That's it. For the record I think the pictures are brilliant, and there is evidently chemistry with the girl in the photos and the lighting is fantastic and creative. I would be proud to have taken those photos.
And for the record, I include FHM pics in my category above, and I do feel lots of FHM is quasi-porn or just downright smut. Some of your shots are worthy of Playboy magazine, which again DO NOT automatically devalue them critically. I've seen some Playboy-esque pics that have been as equally impressive photographically.
This is not a moral judgement - merely a subject distinction. I apologise if you misunderstood.
Edited to add: keep' em coming!
>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Wednesday 6th April 20:50
Scooby_snax said:
I am rather offended though that those pix on my site are being described as quasi-porn....there is nothing there that FHM wouldnt print I dont think that they can be described as a porn mag.......but there again one mans art is another mans porn...Hi ho
Don't be offended. I don't think there is anythng wrong with your pics, I'm just not sure all my colleagues would agree.
And as you say "porn" ranges from art through smut to the downright filthy, it's just a label.
sjn2004 said:
This site is about cars
This forum is about photography.
sjn2004 said:
pics of naked chicks and work don't mix. All you need is one busy body to see a glimpse of the screen and the next thing you'll be busted for been a porno fiend!
You're not supposed to be playing on PH at work anyway, surely? You'll be busted for wasting company time, not ogling half a nipple - of which you will find far more blatant examples in the newspaper on the next desk... And if it's luch-hour and surfing is allowed, does a nipple really matter? This is 2005, not 1905. We live in a society which actively encourages men to stick their parts up each other bottoms - yet a nipple is taboo? Come on.
It's a pity that 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' didn't bother to express their views on the forum, but just ran to teacher.
simpo two said:
This site is about cars
This forum is about photography.
sjn2004 said:
pics of naked chicks and work don't mix. All you need is one busy body to see a glimpse of the screen and the next thing you'll be busted for been a porno fiend!
You're not supposed to be playing on PH at work anyway, surely? You'll be busted for wasting company time, not ogling half a nipple - of which you will find far more blatant examples in the newspaper on the next desk... And if it's luch-hour and surfing is allowed, does a nipple really matter? This is 2005, not 1905. We live in a society which actively encourages men to stick their parts up each other bottoms - yet a nipple is taboo? Come on.
It's a pity that 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' didn't bother to express their views on the forum, but just ran to teacher.
I'm self employed so I can surf when I want. You really hit the nail on the head though, being gay is OK, but thinking of women as pieces of meat isn't(especially good looking ones, the fatties don't like it!). Not my view, but the view of many in this moronic country. Even the Miss World competition was taken off air for years and they were fully clothed.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff