So, it's always a bit of a debate, especially in the nude photography world, as to what is art and what is.. well smut, porn or just a nude photo. In my experience, I have found that the type of photos you take (or a model wants to pose for) can be affected by the mighty $. You mention a model using an attention-grabbing headline like “cum see my art” on OnlyFans. I know models that are working hard to be artistic and don't particularly want to go down that road, but the reality is that they are competing for income with others who raise (or lower) the bar and they may feel that they need to attract that attention, by posting content that may not be their desired niche. As a photographer who does NOT rely on my photographs to earn income, in a lot of ways I am free from that kind of choice. At the same time, my motivation is to share my art and for that, I need an audience, so at times, to increase that audience, I am guilty of the same attention-grabbing headline or posts. My justification is that even my explicit photos have artistic merit. But do they? Well, to some they do. I find the biggest taboo is that a lot of people automatically reject explicit photos as porn, and don't even consider that they may have artistic merit. I muddle along, being my own worst critic, periodically removing photos that I look back on and see as not having real artistic merit, or feeling that they are more exploitative in nature. There is no black and white here. Only shades of grey, and of course some splashes of color!
Thanks for commenting. I like the conversation. You've probably noticed that many of my posts focus on this debate on nude work, or on mental health, or both.
I enjoy the chance to give food for thought based on a male photographers POV. This particular debate is ongoing and always will be however my initial reason to write this one was to comment on the use of the word "art". Seeing another woman using the word to describe her video shot with a cell phone and a ring light (if she's lucky) of her in the shower makes me laugh. I think the word is used in a similar manner to how I describe my usage of it with my early boudoir work. The word is thrown around a lot.
I use titles that draw interest such as this one. I have never called a models butt an "ass" because it carries certain connotations. I lower the bar deliberately similarly to how you describe the OF model. I get the need to draw clientele in a world of competition. Although I do enjoy writing, I know I draw a different market here than I do to Twitter or Instagram or Model Mayhem. I use all these ways to draw interest to my work. I wish I could push more to my Patreon but it is still early days.
As I indicate, art is largely defined by the critic or audience and that's why I love people like Helmut Newton who challenged what art was in terms of photography. There's others doing it now too but everyone now has a camera, the playing field is now massive.
Many of my photos of nudes I consider art, partly because the initial photo is not the final outcome but just the raw material I use to create the image. The photo is also rarely about a specific body part but instead is more about form/shape/shadow that makes it into art.
I also think that often art tells a story, the Helmut Newton photo does that and that is what makes it art as opposed to just a photo of an ass.
Thank you for commenting. I have followed you for a while and enjoy your art. I like the statement "the initial photo is not the final outcome but just the raw material I use to create the image". I wholeheartedly agree. I am still uncertain whether art needs to relay a story. I understand the debate but in our medium, often the story comes from photojournalism. Is that art? Some could be of course. I am just sitting on the fence about that so far.
It's not just the story. I would rarely consider photojournalism art. Art is often defined as something that invokes an emotion, but that could include photojournalism as well. Some say art is done with intent, but again photojournalism could be included in that. But most agree that in general photojournalism is not considered art. So it brings up an interesting point for which I don't have a good answer.
So, it's always a bit of a debate, especially in the nude photography world, as to what is art and what is.. well smut, porn or just a nude photo. In my experience, I have found that the type of photos you take (or a model wants to pose for) can be affected by the mighty $. You mention a model using an attention-grabbing headline like “cum see my art” on OnlyFans. I know models that are working hard to be artistic and don't particularly want to go down that road, but the reality is that they are competing for income with others who raise (or lower) the bar and they may feel that they need to attract that attention, by posting content that may not be their desired niche. As a photographer who does NOT rely on my photographs to earn income, in a lot of ways I am free from that kind of choice. At the same time, my motivation is to share my art and for that, I need an audience, so at times, to increase that audience, I am guilty of the same attention-grabbing headline or posts. My justification is that even my explicit photos have artistic merit. But do they? Well, to some they do. I find the biggest taboo is that a lot of people automatically reject explicit photos as porn, and don't even consider that they may have artistic merit. I muddle along, being my own worst critic, periodically removing photos that I look back on and see as not having real artistic merit, or feeling that they are more exploitative in nature. There is no black and white here. Only shades of grey, and of course some splashes of color!
Thanks for commenting. I like the conversation. You've probably noticed that many of my posts focus on this debate on nude work, or on mental health, or both.
I enjoy the chance to give food for thought based on a male photographers POV. This particular debate is ongoing and always will be however my initial reason to write this one was to comment on the use of the word "art". Seeing another woman using the word to describe her video shot with a cell phone and a ring light (if she's lucky) of her in the shower makes me laugh. I think the word is used in a similar manner to how I describe my usage of it with my early boudoir work. The word is thrown around a lot.
I use titles that draw interest such as this one. I have never called a models butt an "ass" because it carries certain connotations. I lower the bar deliberately similarly to how you describe the OF model. I get the need to draw clientele in a world of competition. Although I do enjoy writing, I know I draw a different market here than I do to Twitter or Instagram or Model Mayhem. I use all these ways to draw interest to my work. I wish I could push more to my Patreon but it is still early days.
As I indicate, art is largely defined by the critic or audience and that's why I love people like Helmut Newton who challenged what art was in terms of photography. There's others doing it now too but everyone now has a camera, the playing field is now massive.
Thanks again for your insightful response!
Many of my photos of nudes I consider art, partly because the initial photo is not the final outcome but just the raw material I use to create the image. The photo is also rarely about a specific body part but instead is more about form/shape/shadow that makes it into art.
I also think that often art tells a story, the Helmut Newton photo does that and that is what makes it art as opposed to just a photo of an ass.
You can see examples of what I'm referring to at https://www.instagram.com/craigcolvinphoto/
Thank you for commenting. I have followed you for a while and enjoy your art. I like the statement "the initial photo is not the final outcome but just the raw material I use to create the image". I wholeheartedly agree. I am still uncertain whether art needs to relay a story. I understand the debate but in our medium, often the story comes from photojournalism. Is that art? Some could be of course. I am just sitting on the fence about that so far.
It's not just the story. I would rarely consider photojournalism art. Art is often defined as something that invokes an emotion, but that could include photojournalism as well. Some say art is done with intent, but again photojournalism could be included in that. But most agree that in general photojournalism is not considered art. So it brings up an interesting point for which I don't have a good answer.