Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 46
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    unreal.....
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    unreal.....
    Sad!
    Canon 350D l EF-S 10-22 l EF-S 17-55 l EF 50 f/1.8 l EF 70-200 2.8 IS l 430EX l

    Fornography

    www.vicwrx.com.au

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    180
    I guess once and a while all that money I seem to dump into an education pays off in more than just a tax return...

    Issues like this really pop up all throughout history. I mean, ALL throughout. Art Vs. Censorship. But a particularly relevant case I thought I would delve into a little bit here is the case of Nan Goldin. She was a really interesting photographer. She photographed the gay community, and later on the punk rock / underground scene throughout the late 80's in Boston. She put out a couple of books, the most known being The Devils Playground. This book is partly a documentary of the lifestyle of the underground gay community, and partly a autobiography of her living with drug addiction and in an specifit sub-culture. Personally, I get the impression that a lot of her reputation comes from the shock-and-awe of her images. Often showing nudity, drug use, abuse these kinds of things.

    Anyway, she stirred up a lot of controversy in her time. But most people praised how she was so bold and her work so strong. Until one day, at one show came the image Edda and Klara Belly Dancing (warning, if you are easily offended, or at work. Please, DO NOT click! NSFW) This image is taken and used in an artistic context. The intent was to portray how a child is vulnerable and exposed, yet so free in a safe environment. But it was very controversial and was actually banned at one point. She was even investigated for child pornography! Nothing came of the charges. And eventually her images have been shown.
    But the controversy surrounding such art is ongoing. In 2007, Elton John dealt with legal issues when UK police siezed a numbered original of this print (part of a larger collection) from Elton's home. He faced child pornography charges. This was all cleared up of course, because it's art. But it just goes to show the nature of the sensitivity of people.

    This kind of sensitivity to art isn't new, and won't change anytime soon. But, when it comes to our children. I think it's better that people look into and check out all things art, or not! I would rather that art such as this been looked into, not banned, but looked into than have a blanket "If it's art it's ok" loop hole in the system!

    50D, Rebel XT, 70-200mm F4L IS, 17-85mm IS, 50mm F1.8, 28-135mm IS, 18-55mm, 75-300mm, 580 EX II, 480 EX II, Opus speedlight umbrella kit.
    Aron de Haan: Photography

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan/from Canada
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickcanada View Post
    That's right we feed our babies like birds do. We regurgitate our food and spit it into the mouths of our young, while we chant socialist propaganda thus infusing our liberal ideals into their soft minds.....
    Yup, "The People's Soviet Republic of Canuckistan" Eh! Just so you don't think I'm being absurd, some American politician actually said that Canada should change its name to this when commenting on our tax policies.

    There's always some freak who thinks they know best and has to tell everyone to change their ways no matter how ridiculous or insignificant. That's not the problem. Them problem is that "we" listen to them.
    CANON 7D, 400D, 24-104 f4L IS, 70-200 f2.8L IS, 28-105, 50 1.8, 75-300, 430 EX II, BG-E3
    SIGMA EX 10-20 DC HSM
    KENKO Extension Tube set 12mm, 20mm, 36mm

    http://www.mbimages.ca

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickcanada View Post
    That's right we feed our babies like birds do. We regurgitate our food and spit it into the mouths of our young, while we chant socialist propaganda thus infusing our liberal ideals into their soft minds.....
    That's what its all aboot
    Tim
    Canon 5D Mark II, 1D Mark II, Rebel XS
    50 F1.4, 85 F1.8, 100 2.8 Macro 70-200 F4L 580EX, 24-70 F2.8L

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan/from Canada
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoinac View Post
    I guess once and a while all that money I seem to dump into an education pays off in more than just a tax return...

    Issues like this really pop up all throughout history. I mean, ALL throughout. Art Vs. Censorship. But a particularly relevant case I thought I would delve into a little bit here is the case of Nan Goldin. She was a really interesting photographer. She photographed the gay community, and later on the punk rock / underground scene throughout the late 80's in Boston. She put out a couple of books, the most known being The Devils Playground. This book is partly a documentary of the lifestyle of the underground gay community, and partly a autobiography of her living with drug addiction and in an specifit sub-culture. Personally, I get the impression that a lot of her reputation comes from the shock-and-awe of her images. Often showing nudity, drug use, abuse these kinds of things.

    Anyway, she stirred up a lot of controversy in her time. But most people praised how she was so bold and her work so strong. Until one day, at one show came the image Edda and Klara Belly Dancing (warning, if you are easily offended, or at work. Please, DO NOT click! NSFW) This image is taken and used in an artistic context. The intent was to portray how a child is vulnerable and exposed, yet so free in a safe environment. But it was very controversial and was actually banned at one point. She was even investigated for child pornography! Nothing came of the charges. And eventually her images have been shown.
    But the controversy surrounding such art is ongoing. In 2007, Elton John dealt with legal issues when UK police siezed a numbered original of this print (part of a larger collection) from Elton's home. He faced child pornography charges. This was all cleared up of course, because it's art. But it just goes to show the nature of the sensitivity of people.

    This kind of sensitivity to art isn't new, and won't change anytime soon. But, when it comes to our children. I think it's better that people look into and check out all things art, or not! I would rather that art such as this been looked into, not banned, but looked into than have a blanket "If it's art it's ok" loop hole in the system!
    This is very interesting. I'd like to look into this artist more.
    CANON 7D, 400D, 24-104 f4L IS, 70-200 f2.8L IS, 28-105, 50 1.8, 75-300, 430 EX II, BG-E3
    SIGMA EX 10-20 DC HSM
    KENKO Extension Tube set 12mm, 20mm, 36mm

    http://www.mbimages.ca

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoinac View Post
    Until one day, at one show came the image Edda and Klara Belly Dancing (warning, if you are easily offended, or at work. Please, DO NOT click! NSFW) This image is taken and used in an artistic context. The intent was to portray how a child is vulnerable and exposed, yet so free in a safe environment. But it was very controversial and was actually banned at one point. She was even investigated for child pornography! Nothing came of the charges. And eventually her images have been shown.!
    there is always going to be a blurry line between what is art and what is porn...many push those boundaries. but with all due respect, the OP's image is nothing in the slightest bit like that one. i dont believe comparisons can be drawn between the 2.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,565
    Quote Originally Posted by te1221 View Post
    That's what its all aboot
    "aboot" hehehe.... it's so true... I say "aboot"
    5D MK III, 50D, ELAN 7E, 17-40mm 4, Sigma 10mm 2.8 fisheye, 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS, 30mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 580 EX, 430 EX speedlight, Pocket wizard flex and mini.
    Canon G10

    Pentax P30, 50mm 2.0

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,192
    This is simply a case of the lowest common denominator leading the play, there will always be some prude that is offended by nudity in any form, even the innocent nudity of a child. 18 months old an 3 years old still describes a child in my book.

    To go into the whole nudity/pronogrophy gives this complaint more credibilty than it deserves.

    This is nothing more than a photo of children being children, nothing different than would happen at the local pool or beach.

    The real issue is with the complainants view if the world
    Canon 350D l EF-S 10-22 l EF-S 17-55 l EF 50 f/1.8 l EF 70-200 2.8 IS l 430EX l

    Fornography

    www.vicwrx.com.au

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    I don't get it. I see nothing wrong with pictures of men, women, children, animals etc clothed or unclothed. There is nothing wrong with that. Where the law goes bananas is in declaring all naked bodies to be pornography. Again, I don't have a problem with pornography - can't say that it interests me at all though - what I do have a problem with is the whacko that decided that anybody that looks at a photo of a nude child is evil. I would much rather the law concentrated on preventing sexual exploitation than this nonsense.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •