glamour/pornographic/other? help!

onefunkypenguin

onefunkypenguin

Messages
1,587
Name
dave
Edit My Images
Yes
hello, i need some other people's views on my subject for uni.

i'm planning on doing a shoot with model in her underwear but not the glamour/FHM style but more dark and gritty, almost sleazy but not pornographic even though there may well be a bit of nudity.

what do you think makes the difference between these kind of images???

i know exactly how i want the finished photos to look and even though i'm not shooting for another month i would like people's opinions.
 
Excuses excuses, you just wanna take pictures of ladies not wearing much, and passing it off for art or something...good plan, where do I sign up...?

Seriously, I think that glamour/porn is just there to titillate, glamour being more suggestive, cleanly lit, with a certain style of PP, proceesed skin etc. Generally shot with a certain type of look from the model. For me, Glamour is defined by the FHM look, clean backgrounds, good lighting, heavy PP, big hair, big boobs, tanned skin etc.

Porn, well, but of a wider subject, and one I am not too familiar with so I will pass.......

Porn is whatever the viewer wants it to be, and does not have such clear boundaries, so is harder to define.

Can you give us examples of th look you are going for?
 
lower lady bits in, boobs out = shopping catalogue or glamour

all bits out and on display= porn

I guess... from when i was 16 (pretending to be 18) buying top shelf mags....(for my brother....:lol:)


and now with possible research availability from search engines such as google........I am sure there are darker and deeper areas to explore........:shrug:
 
A shot of someone sucking someones toe, whilst wanting to make me throw up, could be someone elses porn.

worth thinking about (or not as the case may well be...;))
 
ha ha, i knew this would bring out the 'deviants' from the darkest reaches of talkphotography.

i'l see if i can find an image that fits in with what i'm looking to achieve, i always do things back to front and think about my images before researching them but it's what i find suits me best.

the theme/concept is one of a young lady in crap looking flat, ready to go on night out and then the after party, messed up, not looking her best and quite clearly under the influence. the images i want to look dirty, sleazy and grainy but not pronographic and most definitely not glamour FHM style!
 
No legs open/erections or bodily fluids = not porn

Sucking toes, fettling chickens or general tying up, felching etc - fetish

In all honesty it depends what you want her to do on the shoot, if your just going to have her down an old dark alley in filthy ripped underwear and fishnets, then its just another side to soft glamour really, if your going to have her simulating sex acts, then its soft porn
 
iancandler said:
No legs open/erections or bodily fluids = not porn

Sucking toes, fettling chickens or general tying up, felching etc - fetish

In all honesty it depends what you want her to do on the shoot, if your just going to have her down an old dark alley in filthy ripped underwear and fishnets, then its just another side to soft glamour really, if your going to have her simulating sex acts, then its soft porn
Click to expand...


LMAO that is a great reply, really made me smile, thanks :lol::lol:
 
I don't think that there is a hard line, but rather a kind of... argument between taste and smut, art and just... gratuitous nudity.. and also what the photographer had in mind when it was taken, and the context in which the photo is presented.

This will always be an issue, especially as of recently with the masses of (typically) older gentlemen who are 'into photography' who are always overly keen to get a model's keks off. There are some models (I use the term loosely) who make a living off it, pretty amazing really.

I would certainly argue that, uh... aroused or open leg would in almost all contexts be considered more pornographic, but as with any medium there could be exceptions. And there will always be exceptions to 'lots of skin' being even remotely smutty... see this (NSFW) photo by Erwin Olaf for example! And yet it is a fantastic photo that you find yourself making up narratives to instantly.

End of the day, in the real world, the difference between erotic photography and porn is largely how good and arty it is. But theoretically, it is interesting... I'll post more when I'm more awake :)
 
Last edited:
At that shop opening I was at the night there was a pile of fashion mags with really nice photography in them and lots of topless and fully naked shots. We should go down on tuesday n have a look.

Also, was looking at (for research) some softcore wam porn the other day and it was really on the fence between high fashion and porn, il try and find you a link.
 
itsdavedotnet said:
This will always be an issue, especially as of recently with the masses of (typically) older gentlemen who are 'into photography' who are always overly keen to get a model's keks off. There are some models (I use the term loosely) who make a living off it, pretty amazing really.
Click to expand...


I know a lot of young un's that are pretty keen as well.. mind you though its ok for you, you get to see/play with firm younger flesh, for us lot its a distant memory :lol:

Having said that I have to admit to never having asked a model to get her kit off ever..I've shot nudes.. just never had to ask :D
 
I think I would call what you propse to do, conceptual art and it makes no difference how much clothing the model wears if it is part of the concept. Don't let people tell you it's glam if that's not what you intend it to be
 
andephotographic said:
At that shop opening I was at the night there was a pile of fashion mags with really nice photography in them and lots of topless and fully naked shots. We should go down on tuesday n have a look.

Also, was looking at (for research) some softcore wam porn the other day and it was really on the fence between high fashion and porn, il try and find you a link.
Click to expand...

may be able to do that, i have crystal castles gig but staying in town after uni so got a few hours to kill.
 
onefunkypenguin said:
hello, i need some other people's views on my subject for uni.

i'm planning on doing a shoot with model in her underwear but not the glamour/FHM style but more dark and gritty, almost sleazy but not pornographic even though there may well be a bit of nudity.

what do you think makes the difference between these kind of images???

i know exactly how i want the finished photos to look and even though i'm not shooting for another month i would like people's opinions.
Click to expand...

Serious question. Why are you worried about whether it's classified as glamour, porn or anything else?

Surely the important thing is that you get the image you want and that it's something the model is comfortable doing?
Does it really matter what label people might choose to put on it?
 
I'm not worried Sarah, It's something a lecturer was reminding me of when I approached him with the idea, there Is a fine line between the styles and I don't want to go down the wrong route.

The model Is comfortable with the shoot and there Is a few of us working on this as a team so It should be better than just my own ideas.

I personally do not care what people call it but I'm just curious as to how people define the styles as part of my research.
 
I would care if people started to spread the word that I was a porn photographer. I'm not saying it's wrong but it's not something I want to do so I wouldnt want people coming to me and asking me to do it.
 
andephotographic said:
... was looking at (for research) some softcore wam porn the other day and it was really on the fence between high fashion and porn, il try and find you a link.
Click to expand...
I didn't know what that was ... assumed a spelling mistake.

Now I see. Custard 'n stuff.

So ripped fishnets down a dark alley ... AND custard. Could be a niche there. See what your lecturer thinks.
 
good man!!!!! I particularly like the end where you see the reflection in the mirror ;)
 
yeah, i remember watching it for the first time and thinking it was great, i never saw it coming either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top