I recently acquired a Canon 5D Mark III and 85mm 1.2 lens that I quickly put to use on some natural light photos of my 15 year old daughter. Some of which I posted on this site...
Now, I will be the first to admit that these are a little provocative given her age AND the fact that I am her father. I understand the "creep" conclusion one could come to...but how about this for my side of the story
Jodie Foster was 13 years old when she played a prostitute in Taxi Driver with Robert Dinero. Yet, some how, I am the bad guy for these mildly suggestive portraits of my 15 year old daughter. These pictures pale in comparison to the suggestive roles and themes teens played on TV and in movies. Why is it that portraits are subject to a double-standard I am sure they were high-fiving Jodie Foster when she landed the role. A model in a photograph (daughter or not) is no different than an actress in a movie--she is hired to play a fictional role.
I even had one uber-feminist imply that it was porn and then went on to say it was creepy for me to take a pic of my daughter like that. To which I asked, "Okay...so it's not the picture, it's who took it?" Of course she then went a totally different direction with it...
Sally Mann came under fire when she did a series of total nude photos of her kids...something I will never approach. In a way, I like the controversy as there is "no such thing as bad press," but I am also irritated by the double standard applied to photography versus other mediums.
It is a damn shame there are people in the world who sexually abuse children. I sure as hell am not one of them. But because of their monstrous behavior, I am left having to justify my work.
If you are offended by the following, I do apologize.
Just curious what post got the comments you were talking about. Was it another forum? When I saw "Megan by Window Light", I thought you might get some comments along those lines, but just one comment period and nothing controversial. So I'm not really sure what you're talking about when you're talking about these controversial pictures and discussions.
As for whether you as the father of a 15-year-old should be taking these pictures or not, I don't really have an opinion. I'm not offended. It is an implied topless, given her bare shoulders and the way she's holding the sheet. Whether she should be taking photos like that should be left to you and her. Whether you should be taking those photos should again be left to you and her. Are they artistic? Yeah, I think so. And I'm curious to see where this goes.
I love the light and shadow play in #1. None of these bother me at all, but I've been in the position where I was chastised for photos I took of my own (similarly aged) daughter. Sometimes people have nothing better to do than to try to stir up controversy.
I'm no prude. But for the life of me, I cannot figure out any benefit to posting photos of your fifteen year old daughter, in a sexualized fashion, on a public internet forum.
What has the world come to. For fu*k sake. How can anyone class these as po*n? It's ludicrous, absolutely ludicrous.
Great set. You've captured these very well. It's your daughter for goodness sake. Not some underage hooker you bribed off the street with the promise of money or something. The world is going flipping mad.
On a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is you are bang out of order for taking and posting these, I grade this whole situation at a -100. Keep up the good work and ignore the lunatics.
Nice post processing, but these portray sadness to me although not porn for sure, it creates an appetite for it.
The scary thing is that some of ones not making comments weather FM members or not are looking at these images are lusting, drooling and imaging what they would love to do to your daughter, harsh yes but thats the truth. Sure thats just being human right we say? Eye of the beholder? Im human it's normal? hmmmm
My daughter got pregnant at an early age, and she didn't even have to post these kind of shots
I would never in my right mind ever post my daughter in these enticing position
Attack on me has it may, it's not porn correct, there are many sites people go for that, but this creates a illusion that it's ok it not harming anyone, but it is in this day and age of the internet it is, weather you believe it or not
At least wait till she is 18 then you can take these kind of shots and post her on MM, she will get lots of responses for sure, lots of people would love to take pictures of her
As I said, it's completely ludicrous. Not posting these images because someone somewhere may find them sexually appealing and may, as the previous poster states, be imagining what they would do to her is completely pointless. We can't live our lives based on what someone else somewhere may or may not think or do. That being the case we should all stop going to work in skyscrapers because some nutter flew a plane into the world trade centre.
What you did is in no way pornographic or sleazy. Your daughter was comfortable to feature in the shots in this way. You cannot see any part of her body other than her shoulders. You have done nothing wrong.
Take photos of her breasts and post those shots then yes, I would say that's wrong. These however are well taken, decent pictures. Nothing more nothing less.
canerino wrote:
I'm no prude. But for the life of me, I cannot figure out any benefit to posting photos of your fifteen year old daughter, in a sexualized fashion, on a public internet forum.
IMO- Too much moralizing and rationalizing on both sides of the question.
If your daughter and her mother and you have no objections- and it's not breaking any laws- it's all a non-issue.
As for me- some good images here.
And thanks for telling me it's your daughter.
Some guys post shots of family and don't tell us. I might make a comment that I would NOT make if I knew it was a person in the photog's family (i.e. the wrong lighting can make a woman's lip fuzz look like a mustache).
Charlie
Now, I will be the first to admit that these are a little provocative given her age AND the fact that I am her father. I understand the "creep" conclusion one could come to.
That is my conclusion for the last three in the set.
As far as my 'initial impression' and what I take from the last three photos, given she is 15 and the photographer and poster is her father:
They could be titled "Violated, What Do I Do Now?". The look on her face in the last three photos gives me the feeling she is not happy with what just happened, and she is wondering "Do I tell someone?" and/or "Who do I tell?".
Thought the facial lighting in the last is a little flat compared to the others.
Those are my thoughts. This is Fred Miranda's site and property, he controls the post. You have the opportunity to post what he allows, just as I have a right to do the same.
I simply asked what good can possibly come by posting photos that sexualize the poater's daughter? That question has still gone unanswered by the OP. But lets look at what happened thus far in this thread...the subject of these photos is the center piece of a debate about wheter these phoos are pornographic (which i dont think they are). That would be enough for me to examine "why" im posting these images.
canerino wrote:
Who labeled them as porn (besides you)?
He is referring to my original comment about the fact that someone on my FB page implied they were pornographic in nature.
As to your question, what good can come of this?
In short, in 10, 20, or 30 years from now, I or my kids, grandkids, great grand kids etc... are going to look back at a wonderful (hopefully) portfolio of their mother/grandmother/great grandmother and realize how beautiful she is/was. The first thought in their mind will not be "how old is she?" or the like...and most of their friends will not have a portfolio of their family anywhere near as astonishing (at least that is my goal)...
And for today, I have what I feel is some of my most original and best portraiture to date in the short time I have been doing this. There is no doubt in my mind how beautiful she is inside and out...and, at least for me, these pictures only begin to convey that in photographic form.
For what it's worth, I certainly don't plan on taking it any further than this. She wanted me to take a shot with her facing away from the camera with the sheet wrapped around her exposing only her back, and I refused.
