The fine line.

DSC_2128-EditA lot of people say to me, “Oh, it’s a fine line between artistic and pornographic photography”, and I suppose that’s right, if you’re a bit narrow-minded. I’m a portrait photographer, I photograph people, and sometimes I photograph people without their clothes on…and that’s pretty much all I have to say on the subject.

DSC_1101-EditDSCF0585

27 comments

  1. What’s always interesting in nude portrait, is the thin line between our artistic perception and our sexual appetite. For me, the second one always comes first. What’s more interesting in nude portrait is when a photograph can instantaneously skip the sexual thing to bring us right to the artistic one.

    The nude will always be intriguing and attractive for me. A good blend of artistic and sexuality is always the best of both world.

    Thank you Phill and nice pictures!

    Like

  2. Art vs. Porn – this is just like anything else in my mind – it’s in the eye of the beholder; the same goes for beauty. Society, in general, feels the need package things in categorical boxes nice and neat like and then label them bad or good. I don’t know why some people cannot let it be, let people decide what let like and want to see. If you don’t like it, shut up and don’t look at. Beautiful images Phil; nice work.

    Like

  3. A photograph is a photograph and these are beautiful irregardless of whether they are crossing any moral lines. What I find more interesting then the art vs. porn is the beautiful person vs. ordinary or even ugly person in art. Architectural photography can easily transition between beautiful pristine structures and old and abandoned ones and still be considered mainstream art. This doesn’t seem to work with nudes. We all seem to seek beautiful models and anyone photographing ordinary or even ugly people without their clothes on are considered edgy like Leonard Nimoy’s full bodied project. So to me it isn’t porn vs. art it is beauty vs art and how we define beauty.

    Like

  4. Nothing slightly pornographic about that. I guess being raised in the Netherlands I’ve always been open minded. These are beautiful photographs of beautiful people. And sometimes people are naked. That’s all I can say about that!

    Like

  5. These are beautiful. Also, I made it to the IOM this weekend and caught your exhibition at Noa Bakehouse – your photos look good on a screen, but they are that much more stunning framed and hung. Really pleased to have had the opportunity to see them.

    Like

  6. Phillis, This is an easy one. According to the Oxford English dictionary (Online version):

    “Definition of pornography in English:
    pornography
    Line breaks: porn|og¦raphy
    Pronunciation: /pɔːˈnɒgrəfi /
    NOUN

    [MASS NOUN]
    Printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement.”

    Ergo, your pictures are not porn. The Queen says so.

    Art:

    “art
    Line breaks: art
    Pronunciation: /ɑːt /
    NOUN

    [MASS NOUN] The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power”

    Pretty clear cut I’d say. Unless you clearly set out to stimulate sexual excitement?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: