Police close down photography exhibition

Indeed, not bad publicity for her photography though!
 
DerekL said:
Just seen this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ked-women-indecent-display-public-square.html

In Copenhagen of all places where they have the sex museum. Quite ironic really.
Click to expand...

Copenhagen have a sex museum??? Well, surely if it have a such thing as a sex museum, it would be indoors behind closed doors and where kids can't see?

The photo exhibition of naked women was going to be outdoors in a public place, specifically a public square, that means kids would be able to see those photos.

They're totally different locations. It would be ironic if the photo exhibition being held indoors, with a door sign saying "Under 18 not allowed" yet they show soft arty images of naked women, was to be closed down, while they have a sex museum next door that, well what do a sex museum do anyway??? I don't see it being ironic that the outdoor exhibition was refused permissions for display in a city where they have indoor sex museum.
 
Do we really believe her explanations that 'Female Beauty' is all about combating negative self-image? surely she'd use models of all sizes, ages, rather than the usually accepted type of model you'd find in magazines portraying beauty?
 
Byker28i said:
Do we really believe her explanations that 'Female Beauty' is all about combating negative self-image? surely she'd use models of all sizes, ages, rather than the usually accepted type of model you'd find in magazines portraying beauty?
Click to expand...
Aye, and if it wasn't about being a perv with a camera the Nude and Glamour section of this forum would also contain a mix of gender, age and build...

:exit:
 
Alastair said:
Aye, and if it wasn't about being a perv with a camera the Nude and Glamour section of this forum would also contain a mix of gender, age and build...
Click to expand...
Though rather than being a perv, surely this is more to do with the same argument being used elsewhere on the forum regarding landscapes. It is the need that most photographers have to want to recreate the perfect image - nude, landscape, *your genre here, etc...
 
Bythesea said:
It is the need that most photographers have to want to recreate the perfect image
Click to expand...
Ok.. so according to your theory the perfect image of the human form can't represent a diverse range of gender, age and build - sounds stupid, doesn't it?
 
Alastair said:
Ok.. so according to your theory the perfect image of the human form can't represent a diverse range of gender, age and build - sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
Not my theory at all, I totally agree that there is a wide range of body types and shapes missing in that genre. Just pointing out that for most photographers there is what they consider a perfect image, just like has been discussed in another thread regarding landscapes. Makes them all very boring in my opinion. Unfortunately most photographers want to perpetuate certain types of image as it is what they see most of the time.
 
Alastair said:
Ok.. so according to your theory the perfect image of the human form can't represent a diverse range of gender, age and build - sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Not for glamour photograhy it can't.

It's an interesting point - who would want to see a dull and uninteresting lanscape, endless shots of sparrows etc? Being serious for a moment, most photography requires one to portray, as near as possible, extremes of something to make it interesting. So one might photograph the obese, the wrinkled, the aged, the pendulous, the deformed. Few, I imagine would find much interest in 'male, slightly pudgy, 40s, thinning hair' etc. One might also keep a bottle of mind-bleach by the door. ;)
 
ancient_mariner said:
Not for glamour photograhy it can't.
Click to expand...
Really? is "art" porn less representative the the regular sort :D

ancient_mariner said:
Few, I imagine would find much interest in 'male, slightly pudgy, 40s, thinning hair' etc.
Click to expand...
Ah, so art nudes have to be the easy subjects because those that practice it aren't very good at it. Surely the true challenge is to find the beauty in the slightly pudgy man in his 40s with receding hair. After all, that description probably fits many of those shooting art nudes!
 
Alastair said:
Really? is "art" porn less representative the the regular sort :D


Ah, so art nudes have to be the easy subjects because those that practice it aren't very good at it. Surely the true challenge is to find the beauty in the slightly pudgy man in his 40s with receding hair. After all, that description probably fits many of those shooting art nudes!
Click to expand...

You have a point - didin't a picture of a very dull bit of landscape sell for a very large amount of money not so long go? Maybe the difference is what we convince the viewer they should see in the image?
 
That's the one. ^

Alastair said:
Ah, so art nudes have to be the easy subjects because those that practice it aren't very good at it. Surely the true challenge is to find the beauty in the slightly pudgy man in his 40s with receding hair. After all, that description probably fits many of those shooting art nudes!
Click to expand...

On further consideration you seem to have misunderstood me. I made no comment on the ability of photographers, but those who shoot nudes often do so for a particular 'market' that our pudgy balding male (do they have to have an inner beauty? Why can't they be tedious, common, dull and unworthy of photographing for that purpose?) could never be accepted into.
 
Alastair said:
Ok.. so according to your theory the perfect image of the human form can't represent a diverse range of gender, age and build - sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Click to expand...


Yep :)

ancient_mariner said:
That's the one. ^



On further consideration you seem to have misunderstood me. I made no comment on the ability of photographers, but those who shoot nudes often do so for a particular 'market' that our pudgy balding male (do they have to have an inner beauty? Why can't they be tedious, common, dull and unworthy of photographing for that purpose?) could never be accepted into.
Click to expand...


Because all most people want is a pretty picture that displays things to a commonly understood idea of aesthetic.... hence pristine landscapes, beautiful women etc. They can't see the beauty in the everyday. They're blind to it because they're chasing an ideal.
 
Last edited:
Bythesea said:
Though rather than being a perv, surely this is more to do with the same argument being used elsewhere on the forum regarding landscapes. It is the need that most photographers have to want to recreate the perfect image - nude, landscape, *your genre here, etc...
Click to expand...

On her website http://www.mathildegrafstrom.com/#!about/crx2 she says
The female photographer, Mathilde Grafström has discovered that the picture we have of our self, determines how we appear to others. When she is shooting her models, she is using this insight to make her models show themselves from their best side. ”When we don't make our self small, boring and ugly with our own thoughts, we shine naturally of beauty, life and joy" she says and continues: ”All humans have more beauty in them than they realize. And it can be called forward in one days time, if we are willing to work with our self and question all our negative beliefs about our self.”

"I love to shoot my models whilst they are naked. But sometimes it can be difficult because I also fight with my own problems; I think my hips and breasts are to small. Sometimes when my boyfriend are looking at my body, I think that I'm unattractive. But then I can see that it's all the negative thoughts about my body that makes me less beautiful and unfree. When I think harder about it, then these thoughts are not new, but very old - I came to believe this about myself early in my life as a little girl, when I didn't receive the love and care I needed from my parents. I dreamt of being my fathers little princess, but I rarely was, so I came to believe that I was not pretty enough for him. Today I know that these thoughts are nonsense and not true. When I am weeding my inner flowerbed from old thoughts, I get really happy. And I see that I am perfect just as I am.

This is the knowledge I use when I help my models to find their beauty - and suddenly the girl that I'm working with can let go and show herself to me. And this is the moment where she is full of life, and that makes me so happy to see. This is also when I just know that these pictures are great, because this is all it takes to look amazing.

It's important for me that my models understand that the pictures I want to make of her, is not about how she looks physically, but about the life energi and beauty she contains. I believe that the saying, that true beauty comes from inside, is actually true, so it's not so much about the pose or position she is in when we are shooting, but more about the deeper understanding of herself, and when she gets that - the real work has begun.


Now the negative beliefs can be hunt down and destroyed, because they are not good on pictures. With this bad attitude you can never look or feel good.
Often when they see the pictures after the shooting has ended, I succeed with making women really happy for a longer period of time, when they realize that they are actually really wonderful, alive and beautiful.."

My point being, all the models used, if seen clothed in a normal portrait shoot, would be considered attractive. If the women portrayed are not models, then she's had a great impact on making the subjects feel liberated enough not only to get naked and have images made, but also to have them displayed. However, the question remains, are these ordinary women or models, women who regularly pose for images and hence are already comfortable with their bodies. As such, and because of the women used, it opens these questions and so possibly doesn't seem to meet the objective of the set of images. Do professional models, attractive, slime women, need help to find their beauty, when they probably attract admiring glances and looks in their everyday life.
 
I thought the sex museum was in amsterdam ..
 
Oh ok, I hadn't looked at her website, I'd made the assumption that the pictures wouldn't be there, reasoning that if they were, there would be no need for them to be exhibited publicly.
 
Major Eazy said:
Copenhagen have a sex museum??? Well, surely if it have a such thing as a sex museum, it would be indoors behind closed doors and where kids can't see?

The photo exhibition of naked women was going to be outdoors in a public place, specifically a public square, that means kids would be able to see those photos.

They're totally different locations. It would be ironic if the photo exhibition being held indoors, with a door sign saying "Under 18 not allowed" yet they show soft arty images of naked women, was to be closed down, while they have a sex museum next door that, well what do a sex museum do anyway??? I don't see it being ironic that the outdoor exhibition was refused permissions for display in a city where they have indoor sex museum.
Click to expand...

Last time I was in Copenhagen pornography was widely on open display in shop windows. I distinctly recall magazines with cover shots of young ladies engaged in peculiar activities with an Alsatian dog and a snake.

There is no big hang up over porn in much of Europe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top