# Pornography



## abraxas (May 25, 2008)

I'm hoping this is a stimulating subject...

Porno, good or bad? What do you think?


----------



## usayit (May 25, 2008)

oh boy.... this is going to be interesting.  Definitely want to see people's responses..

My feeling is...

It doesn't matter what I think.  I'm a big advocate for freedom of speech and err on personal rights (or as George Carlin rather say.... privileges).  Whether or not I agree with porno, I think those that make it should be allowed and those that view it should be allowed.  Topic echos a recent debate over some drinks with my friends regarding prostitution....


----------



## Rhys (May 25, 2008)

I smell a troll.


----------



## usayit (May 25, 2008)

nah... abraxas has been around long enough that I think it safe to say he has good intentions.


Whether or not the moderators agree is a different story.


----------



## JimmyO (May 25, 2008)




----------



## usayit (May 25, 2008)

Somehow I don't think that was the response abraxas was lookin for hehehe..


----------



## astrostu (May 25, 2008)

Are you talking about it in terms of artistic "merit," photographing it, or just, "Do you think porn is good/bad/immoral/etc.?"


----------



## Joves (May 25, 2008)

I personally see it a garbage picture taking. I dont see it as having any merit in any way shape or form. Im guessing you are talking about what seems to be the majority of the webtrash out there. And I might be strage but, when I see some of it, I see blown highlights and, alot of out of focus work.


----------



## Battou (May 25, 2008)

usayit said:


> nah... abraxas has been around long enough that I think it safe to say he has good intentions.
> 
> 
> Whether or not the moderators agree is a different story.



Actually it's more along the lines of "abraxas has been around long enough that he can get away with it"


um....Porn, It depends what you are looking at and how it corrisponds to your desires really......


I'll go more into detail later, I have a few things that need to be done first.


----------



## passerby (May 26, 2008)

abraxas said:


> Porno, good or bad? What do you think?


 
Quick recheck of the definition to make sure, and it came up that still it is consisit of two greek words: *Porn* and *Graphy*. (Geo graphy came to mind)

Porn is understood along these lines: *bought*, *purchased*, *exported*, *sold*. While graphy means *To write*. So pornography should means To write about selling, or something close to it.

Prostitution is known as one of the oldest profession. Those people who did prostitution did not do it of pleasure but from the surrounding pressure. Today in the western world is mostly from greed, but in the poorer part of the world mostly are because lack of expertise to compete in the competitve world to earn the living through the normal ways. Still categorically under pressure.

So which one is it that should be discuss here in this thread, this definition?


----------



## astrostu (May 26, 2008)

passerby said:


> Prostitution is known as one of the oldest profession. Those people who did prostitution did not do it of pleasure but from the surrounding pressure. Today in the western world is mostly from greed, but in the poorer part of the world mostly are because lack of expertise to compete in the competitve world to earn the living through the normal ways. Still categorically under pressure.



I think that, in the Western world, it's also occasionally used by some who want to get into modeling or acting.  Some start out by underwear modeling, while some start with slightly less clothing.  Also, I think some people see it as an easy way to make some money, such as for college.

But of course, there are those who then just make a career of it, thrive on the exploitation, etc.


----------



## Battou (May 26, 2008)

astrostu said:


> I think that, in the Western world, it's also occasionally used by some who want to get into modeling or acting.  Some start out by underwear modeling, while some start with slightly less clothing.  Also, I think some people see it as an easy way to make some money, such as for college.
> 
> But of course, there are those who then just make a career of it, thrive on the exploitation, etc.



Actually no, I believe you to be mistaken on the first half of that. The faint grey line between Porn and Artistic nudity is being faded more and more with every passing day by the loads of thumbnail pages that are scattered across the internet. Archive sites that litterally have their staff roam the internet and accumulate pages upon pages of what they find sexually arousing and add the url to their list of sites. In some cases like your common beastie stuff there is no mistake but when you get into the young attractive women, it's a whole different ballgame. One starts finding urls leading to sites that are not pornographic in the least.

I do all my porn hunting from such sites, I have encountered a number of occations where comming directly off a collection/archive site, I have been led to galleries from Met Art, Hegre-art, Femjoy *(All links NSFW)* and the like. Somehow I doubt that young people looking to start modeling careers are dropping their laundry infront of the cameras and photographers of these sites have any intention of being called porn in any way.


----------



## Garbz (May 26, 2008)

Depends entirely on the girl and the fetish involved. Oh wait... we were talking about photography weren't we....

Actually despite the amazing amount of crap photography that even professional pornography displays, there are some incredible exceptions. (NSFW Porn mag site) http://www.met-art.com/ (NSFW Porn mag site) is one of them. Some of the photography in their magazine rival some of the best professional photography I've seen. Except of course that it's porn.


----------



## Alpha (May 26, 2008)

We photograph every other important thing in life, mostly without objection. I see no compelling reason that sex should be categorically excluded.


----------



## O'Rork (May 26, 2008)

as for me, i think of it kinda like this........
do not do anything that you would not do in front of your mom.

pornography is typically the explicit visual and audio recording of sexual intimacy between people.

It's nasty.
It has denotative connotations.

:thumbdown:


----------



## tedE (May 26, 2008)

I think pornography is misleading.


----------



## Rhys (May 26, 2008)

errm... Most porn is so retouched that it's nothing like the original photos.


----------



## Alpha (May 26, 2008)

O'Rork said:


> as for me, i think of it kinda like this........
> do not do anything that you would not do in front of your mom.
> 
> pornography is typically the explicit visual and audio recording of sexual intimacy between people.
> ...



Apparently your mother doesn't care much for grammar, as you just horribly misused the word "denotative," which means absolutely nothing related to what you think it does.

Ridiculous logic anyway. Or at least ridiculous moral standards. Should one not be allowed to photograph their significant other nude or semi nude because they wouldn't want to show it to their mother?


----------



## cszakolczai (May 26, 2008)

I read all the posts but am kind of confused about how far we are willing to stretch the definition of pornography. Is playboy considered pornography? If so than I really don't mind it. Even if the images have been retouched, they still have some beautiful pictures. Anyone who considers the human naked body pornographic (playboy type photo's) than I guess Da Vinci and other famous artists must have been painting inappropriate images. Of course my whole response has been based off the fact that we are speaking about playboy photo's as well. If not than pornography is a hit or miss subject, I guess.  Depends on the image of course.


----------



## Joves (May 26, 2008)

Rhys said:


> errm... Most porn is so retouched that it's nothing like the original photos.


So you are saying they add blown highlights/under exposure and, out of focus effects. Cool Id hate to think of someone making alot of money off bad skills.
 No Playboy is not porn, I recently saw a newer issue and, see they have returned to their former style. For awhile there they went the tacky way.
 Everytime I see porn, I think your parents must be proud.


----------



## usayit (May 26, 2008)

Joves said:


> So you are saying they add blown highlights/under exposure and, out of focus effects. Cool Id hate to think of someone making alot of money off bad skills.
> No Playboy is not porn, I recently saw a newer issue and, see they have returned to their former style. For awhile there they went the tacky way.
> Everytime I see porn, I think your parents must be proud.



I think he meant it is quite over-produced.  If you ever get a unique opportunity to see the filming of a porn flick or photo shoot behind the scenes, it is pretty damn boring and far from erotic.  At least that's what I think he meant....


----------



## Onion (May 26, 2008)

O'Rork said:


> as for me, i think of it kinda like this........
> do not do anything that you would not do in front of your mom.
> 
> pornography is typically the explicit visual and audio recording of sexual intimacy between people.
> ...


 
masterbation is out then?

we seam like we all like to look at pron, why do we look down on it?


----------



## Rhys (May 26, 2008)

Onion said:


> masterbation is out then?
> 
> we seam like we all like to look at pron, why do we look down on it?



Umm... It could be that we have to be seen to be against porn or our girlfriends/wives would immediately smack us. Having said that, women read a lot of porn - theirs is more mental than visual as they tend to read a lot of slutty "romance".


----------



## usayit (May 26, 2008)

Rhys said:


> ..... Having said that, women read a lot of porn - theirs is more mental than visual as they tend to read a lot of slutty "romance".....



Isn't it strange that that is more accepted than "visual" porn?


----------



## JimmyO (May 26, 2008)

I think its funny that we've only had guys make posts here (unless one of you are lying...lol)


----------



## Icon72 (May 26, 2008)

Simply put, if you don't like it or agree with it don't look at it.


----------



## JimmyO (May 26, 2008)

90% of guys watch porn
other 10% lie about it

=)


----------



## Senor Hound (May 26, 2008)

All I know is women always look at me like I'm a creep whenever they ask me what my job is, and I tell them, "I'm a freelance pornographer..."

Seriously, though, the way the world looks at sex is hilarious.  We have mainstream movies of people who get their heads ripped into with chainsaws (Scarface, and about a million horror flicks), yet scenes which show penetration or any other sexual act (things 99% of us actually will do in our lifetime), even artistically are labeled as smut.

Personally its always been my opinion I should be able to do whatever I want without infringing on the rights of others.  But if you're going to ban something or label it as obscene, you need to at least be universal about it.  Either allow pornography on a more mainstream level, or limit violence.  But the way we have it now is a joke...


----------



## Garbz (May 26, 2008)

Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is. 

People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.


----------



## Senor Hound (May 26, 2008)

Garbz said:


> Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is.
> 
> People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.



Garbz, I hate to say it, but I think liberal-minded people such as you and me, people who feel that society has the ability to self-govern, are out of luck.  There is no place that truly trusts their citizens...


----------



## Joves (May 26, 2008)

Garbz said:


> Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is.
> 
> People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.


Well the US courts are just as ambiguous on the matter. It is still defined as they dont know what is obscene/pornograpic but they will know it when they see it. The problem has always been defining it to suit everyone. It will never happen.


----------



## Senor Hound (May 26, 2008)

Joves said:


> Well the US courts are just as ambiguous on the matter. It is still defined as they dont know what is obscene/pornograpic but they will know it when they see it. The problem has always been defining it to suit everyone. It will never happen.




Especially as long as Larry Flynt and Pat Robertson are both American citizens...lol 

BTW, I find the term "acceptable" and "obscene" to be quite comical.  Obviously the content is acceptable and not obscene to someone, or they WOULDN'T BE MAKING IT!  So who is it unacceptable and obscene to?  A board of nine crotchety old former lawyers in Washington DC?  That doesn't seem very representative of our society...


----------



## Onion (May 27, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Especially as long as Larry Flynt and Pat Robertson are both American citizens...lol
> 
> BTW, I find the term *"acceptable" and "obscene"* to be quite comical. Obviously the content is acceptable and not obscene to someone, or they WOULDN'T BE MAKING IT! So who is it unacceptable and obscene to? A board of *nine crotchety old former lawyers in Washington DC?* That doesn't seem very representative of our society...


 
aceptable is when the girl is good looking. oscene is when the guy is good looking.


----------



## Battou (May 27, 2008)

Onion said:


> aceptable is when the girl is good looking. oscene is when the guy is good looking.




oscene is when they are both looking.....at you


----------



## Samriel (May 27, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Seriously, though, the way the world looks at sex is hilarious. We have mainstream movies of people who get their heads ripped into with chainsaws (Scarface, and about a million horror flicks), yet scenes which show penetration or any other sexual act (things 99% of us actually will do in our lifetime), even artistically are labeled as smut.



There is a very sound reason for this. Very few people will watch Scarface and get out and start rampaging with a chainsaw. Too few of us live in enviroments where this could be thought of nearly tolerable. Violence is more or less clearly defined as bad in most cultures. But with sexual acts, especially as seen in mainstream pornography, it's a different story. Nobody says sex is bad, nor can this be said for biological reasons. The education in this area is lacking, so many take pornography for a teacher. Many watch it and try, or would like to try, to do such things in their own real lives. Since pornography is mostly about the male fantasy, it shouldn't come as a wonder that females are not always happy about what males want of them. Sure, you can dream of your ten slave girls, but don't try to treat your partner as one - or so many people think. I rather see the whole thing as a problem of the sexual stereotype where the industry has been allowed the role of the educator - many women don't necesserely like that men think of certain sexual acts and procedures as "normal" or "mustdo"s. On the other hand, lately many men don't seem to like that society seems to thinks that *they* are supposed to start the flirt, invite to dinner, pay the dinner, have a car, be stronger etc. In families where the sexual education has been properly done (as is mostly the case with education concerning violence), there are much less problems with pornography or relations with the other sex.

To swing it back to photography, I think that pornogaphic photography is nothing to be ashamed of, and can be something to explore both the photographers sexuality and the sexuality of the model. It is of course mostly there to stimulate the viewer and sell in as many copies as possible. Sadly, it is also mostly made by men - would there be more women pornographers men might actually learn more useful things than just how to enjoy themselves.


----------



## Battou (May 27, 2008)

Samriel said:


> The education in this area is lacking, so many take pornography for a teacher.



This one of the problems with the world today, not just with pornography but violence as well. A kid plays GTA 3 and then goes out and shoots up his school...everyone blames the game, teenage pregnancy skyrockets everyone blames the porn industry....*NO*. It's the lack of education that is to blame. Humans are naturally curious....they will learn something either in school or threw exparimentation. In cases of extream violence or sexuality there are implications and rammifications that some one is _not_ doing an adiquate job of informing todays youth about.


----------



## Senor Hound (May 27, 2008)

Battou said:


> This one of the problems with the world today, not just with pornography but violence as well. A kid plays GAT 3 and then goes out and shoots up his school...everyone blames the game, teenage pregnancy skyrockets everyone blames the porn industry....*NO*. It's the lack of education that is to blame. Humans are naturally curious....they will learn something either in school or threw exparimentation. In cases of extream violence or sexuality there are implications and rammifications that some one is _not_ doing an adiquate job of informing todays youth about.



WOOT WOOT!!!  I love this post.  You get a gold star!  Except people have moved on to GTA4 now 

And whoever said that something about violence being more foreign to us than sex, and therefore acceptable to imitate makes no sense.  I just don't get that concept at all.  I will NEVER get how an 18 year old woman in a sexual pose  (or even having sex with a guy OR girl) is somehow more obscene then a simulated chainsaw to the brain.  And if violence is somehow easier to detach from than sex, IMO its only because of the way our society is constructed.  I can honestly say for me, it isn't.  I can watch a porn and not put myself in the position of the male star (no pun intended) a lot easier than I can not put myself in the position of someone getting shot in the head.  Violence is extremely vivid, to the point that it gives me nightmares. So maybe that's why I feel this way.

Maybe if people's sexualities were more out in the open and not seen as a "naughty act,"  Then perhaps people wouldn't develop such thoughts about it (MAYBE).  Maybe if our advertisements showed women with bare bodies, there wouldn't be as many privacy-invading voyeurs (MAYBE).   Maybe if our society was able to talk about our society's sexual habits in an open and friendly manner, even with people of a younger age (but who understand what sex is), there wouldn't be as many people who feel the need to look at pornography as a learning tool instead of as something fun to experience.(MAYBE).

So far the only argument that I've thought held water was that violence is simulated, while pornography is, well, quite obviously not.  That gives most sex videos an intensity violent videos don't have, but even implied sex freaks people out.


BTW, Pornography is just as degrading to men as it is to women.  Both sexes are promoted to do and act in ways that are unnatural.  Its being used as a learning tool when it shouldn't be.


----------



## Battou (May 27, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> WOOT WOOT!!!  I love this post.  You get a gold star!  Except people have moved on to GTA4 now


Oh....I don't play any of them so I did not know that one.....I stick to my War games....


----------



## Jedo_03 (May 27, 2008)

Rhys said:


> errm... Most porn is so retouched that it's nothing like the original photos.


 
Ummm - yeah,,, would agree... some of those porno models have been retouched and retouched and retouched so many times that it's nothing like how it was originally...
Jedo


----------



## Jedo_03 (May 27, 2008)

Garbz said:


> Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is.
> 
> People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.


 
Garbz: - Are you saying that your fetish is connected to sleeping dogs..
Don't ban me - I'm only joking...
Jedo


----------



## Battou (May 27, 2008)

Jedo_03 said:


> Ummm - yeah,,, would agree... some of those porno models have been retouched and retouched and retouched so many times that it's nothing like how it was originally...
> Jedo



No they haven't :lmao:


----------



## O'Rork (May 27, 2008)

Alpha said:


> Apparently your mother doesn't care much for grammar, as you just horribly misused the word "denotative," which means absolutely nothing related to what you think it does.
> 
> Ridiculous logic anyway. Or at least ridiculous moral standards. Should one not be allowed to photograph their significant other nude or semi nude because they wouldn't want to show it to their mother?


 
It's my understanding that "denotative connotations" means it sounds bad...

Ridiculous moral standards? You crack me up. You wanna take naked pics of your SO, fine. That's a very long way from my definition of porn. 
Would you take a snap of your SO with your genitalia in their mouth and show that to your mom?

Are you twisted?


----------



## Jedo_03 (May 27, 2008)

Photography forum...
Yet mention the word PORN and you get 40 posts in 36 hours...
Bugger-all really about technical quality / composition / lighting / exposure
So someone like Henson takes HQ photos of little girls, studied composition and featured lighting, full-frame sensor, and it's suddenly NOT porn...
It's ART...
Kalvin Klein made his million$ in advertising -  "exploiting" the notion of sexuality in underwear...
Pornographers make their million$ in exploiting the notion of sexuality...
What do you think Henson is doing..?
Is he exploiting little girls for a profit?
Is he exploring the concept of 'art for arts sake' (artis gratis)?
Is he pushing the boundaries..?  Why..?
There are many questions...
Jedo


----------



## Miaow (May 27, 2008)

abraxas said:
			
		

> I'm hoping this is a stimulating subject...


I'm sure it is to those that like it

Ok for an artistic view, in my opinion and I'm female, some soft core images can, if done nicely, have a reasonable artistic quality to them.  Hard Core is not artistic at all.


----------



## Alpha (May 27, 2008)

I'll say again, there is no compelling reason to prohibit a photograph of two consenting subjects having sex.


----------



## spiffybeth (May 27, 2008)

porno - good. 

if you look at it and it stimulates you, then why would you be concerned about the lighting?..it's done its job.

and if your concern is that there are photographers making money off this and their lighting (or whatever else) is terrible, then it sounds like jealousy and you should change what you photograph...

chances are, there is always someone getting aroused by a picture that isnt meant to be porn. its about time we got over it.


----------



## Rick Waldroup (May 27, 2008)

Has anyone here actually shot any porn, for pay?

I did once, many years ago. I was fresh out of high school and doing whatever I could to make money with a camera. A friend of mine said his dad wanted me to shoot some photos of the old man's girlfriend in her bathing suit. And the kicker was that he would pay me 350.00 for about two hours work. That was a _lot _of money back then for a kid to make.

So I show up at the guy's big, fancy house and was led into the back yard. There was a huge pool and the yard was bordered by a 10 foot wood security fence. I was astonished to see about 4 or 5 guys milling about, setting up two movie cameras and lights. This was being shot on film, not videotape. My friend's dad walked over, slapped me on the back and stuffed 400.00 dollars in my pocket and said they were filming a little movie and my job was to shoot stills. He asked me if I brought plenty of film and then told me that when I was done, to just give all the film to one of the assistants.

So, the _actors _come out and get down to business, and I thought I was going to pass out. I had never even _seen _a porn movie, much less shoot one. I was scared to death that the cops were going to bust in any minute. But I stayed and shot it.

Was I aroused? You bet. I was 19 years old. A few weeks later, my friend said his dad wanted me to shoot another one. I turned it down. And I really thought long and hard about that. Like I said, that was a lot of money back then. But I was just not comfortable shooting stuff like that. I did not find it disgusting or anything like that- it was just something I did not want to get involved in. I have no idea what the point of this story is, except to say that over the last 30 years I have shot all kinds of things, but that one remains probably one of the strangest things I ever shot.

For what it is worth, I don't see a problem with porn. To each his own. Whatever works for you- whether you be male, female, straight, gay, whatever.....


----------



## RubyMagic (May 27, 2008)

O'Rork said:


> as for me, i think of it kinda like this........
> do not do anything that you would not do in front of your mom.
> 
> pornography is typically the explicit visual and audio recording of sexual intimacy between people.
> ...



I wouldnt have sex with my wife in front of my mom, but that doesnt stop me...


----------



## Roger (May 27, 2008)

spiffybeth said:


> porno - good.
> 
> if you look at it and it stimulates you, then why would you be concerned about the lighting?..it's done its job.
> 
> ...




 this is such a common sense post, simple, to the point and balanced...a shame most of the populace is so far away from this approach.


----------

