canerino wrote:
i wonder how she feels about being the centerpiece of this debate?
I'd like to think that she is too young, too naïve, too inexperienced, and not sophisticated enough to really understand this discussion.
I believe Miley Cyrus was 17 and her parents were with her on an Annie Leiebowicz shoot, but left and did somewhat of a similar shot, minus the disheveled hair. There was a lot of controversy, obviously, about that shot as well. Cyrus expressed embarrassment later of the shot for Vanity Fair.
You have taken pictures of your 15 year old daughter in a state of undress, sitting in a bed, tousled hair, and then wondered why people can look at them sexually?
Well, because most of us here are adults, have had sex, and know that usually when a female is sitting like that in bed, she has just finished... something.
Now, does this mean 15 year old girls don't wake up from sleep and sit in bed like that? No.. It doesn't. No one takes pictures of them and puts them online when they do though.. Big difference.
It's not my place to tell you what you can and can't do with your children. I do think that taking pictures like this with your daughter is sending the wrong message not only to the people viewing the images, but to your daughter as well.
What if a photography student at her school wanted to duplicate a shot like this for the school paper? or for his website? Would you okay it or would you say no? And if you would okay it, would you really be fine with a young man you don't know posting these images of your daughter on his website? And if you would say no, are you telling her only her father has the right to photograph her half nude?
All that aside.. these are pictures for you and your family to enjoy.... Not complete strangers. For every 5 comments, there are 20 lurkers on public forums, and you've now shared these pictures of your daughter with everyone on here and more. How many of these people have saved these pictures of your child? And deep down, HOW can you be okay with that?
Again.. I don't know.. this is just me, and I'm only one person... She is your daughter, and you know her better than any one of us do. I just think that as photographers and artists, there should be lines between the work we put out, and our private lives.
I'm sorry.. and to the people talking about the kids on the beaches, do we see their dads there posing them and taking pictures of them in said string bikinis? If we did, wouldn't we raise our eyebrows?
And did someone REALLY mention Miley Cyrus in the debate FOR these pics? REALLY? The 'twerking' Miley Cyrus? The 'dancing on the pole at her concerts' Miley Cyrus?
PS: I just read my comment back and realize I came across a tad more confrontational than I intended. I apologize.. Its just that, I'm a mom.. and even though I tried REALLY hard when I first came upon this thread, I couldn't find the good that could come from posting these online.. I just don't get the 'why'.. that's all. I get everything else... I just don't understand why OP chose to post them HERE.. that's all.
monie2078 wrote:
You have taken pictures of your 15 year old daughter in a state of undress, sitting in a bed, tousled hair, and then wondered why people can look at them sexually?
Have you read this thread in its entirety? I never once questioned why people look at them sexually. All I did was ask for opinions on the matter...
You'd be better served by reading the content before commenting...
russdenney01 wrote:
Have you read this thread in its entirety? I never once questioned why people look at them sexually. All I did was ask for opinions on the matter...
You'd be better served by reading the content before commenting...
Ah, I'm so sorry. I did read the entire thread.. I meant to phrase that differently. My intention (I amended my comment) was not to attack you; I'm sorry that I came across that way...
Everyone, check out his posting history. Two days before creating this spectacularly ridiculous thread, he had already created another post with the same picture of his daughter laying in bed:
As I write this, he received ONE single reply to that post. The title was tame, the post text simply gave the settings used for the photo. There was no drama, no strategically written drivel written in an sad and desperate attempt to capture more viewers of his "work".
This alone proves the point I've been making in my previous posts - he didn't get the attention he initially hoped for in his first post, so he's now using disgusting child sexual exploitation comments/suggestions to get attention for his daughters picture. This is just wrong.
Don't get me started about his other post about him not wanting to photograph 'ugly' people, just attractive ones. He comes across as a very shallow and disturbed individual.
To Russ - any 'skill' you may think you have, is greatly overshadowed by the threads you keep creating.
I wish the owner of this site would just delete this sort of thing.
dangod wrote:
Everyone, check out his posting history. Two days before creating this spectacularly ridiculous thread, he had already created another post with the same picture of his daughter laying in bed:
As I write this, he received ONE single reply to that post. The title was tame, the post text simply gave the settings used for the photo. There was no drama, no strategically written drivel written in an sad and desperate attempt to capture more viewers of his "work".
This alone proves the point I've been making in my previous posts - he didn't get the attention he initially hoped for in his first post, so he's now using disgusting child sexual exploitation comments/suggestions to get attention for his daughters picture. This is just wrong.
Don't get me started about his other post about him not wanting to photograph 'ugly' people, just attractive ones. He comes across as a very shallow and disturbed individual.
To Russ - any 'skill' you may think you have, is greatly overshadowed by the threads you keep creating.
I wish the owner of this site would just delete this sort of thing.
. Dude, I said in my opening statement I had already posted some of the images here...and other readers even wrote about seeing them. You're no detective here buddy...you're going to have to do a lot better than that.
I don't care if you think I started this thread to attract attention...it's not even relevant to the discussion at hand.
russdenney01 wrote: . Dude, I said in my opening statement I had already posted some of the images here...and other readers even wrote about seeing them. You're no detective here buddy...you're going to have to do a lot better than that.
I don't care if you think I started this thread to attract attention...it's not event relevant to the discussion at hand.
You're beating a dead dog. Get over it.
... What did you mean "another controversial one"? I just assumed you'd been getting a lot of flack, and people had called you out on the pictures being too controversial..?
... What did you mean "another controversial one"? I just assumed you'd been getting a lot of flack, and people had called you out on the pictures being too controversial..?
I meant another controversial one as the last thread I started about a different subject also drew out a lot of responses--many people browbeating me for my opinion on the matter.
Go out and ask some responsible parents to allow you to take pictures of their 15 year old daughter in this same manner and see what responses you get. Hopefully you will still be able to breath through your bloodied nose afterwards.
If there's enough money involved (how much did you pay your daughter?) you will probably get some takers but if you asked me to allow you to portray my fifteen year old daughter in this manner I would seriously consider punching you squarely in the nose.
You sound like a guy who would do anything for career advancement/profit/attention, or someone simply with a whole different set of standards.
exposedme wrote:
Go out and ask some responsible parents to allow you to take pictures of their 15 year old daughter in this same manner and see what responses you get. Hopefully you will still be able to breath through your bloodied nose afterwards.
If there's enough money involved (how much did you pay your daughter?) you will probably get some takers but if you asked me to allow you to portray my fifteen year old daughter in this manner I would seriously consider punching you squarely in the nose.
You sound like a guy who would do anything for career advancement/profit/attention, or someone simply with a whole different set of standards....Show more →
I can understand your take on the matter, but this work wasn't produced with you in mind now was it?
russdenney01 wrote:
I can understand your take on the matter, but this work wasn't produced with you in mind now was it?
How would I know? I believe that you are the only person that you had in mind when you took this. Most def not the well being of your daughter, and that's who you should have had in mind.
russdenney01 wrote:
It's funny how I maintain a steady calm in this whole thing and some people get pissed off and go on the attack.
Are you really that threatened dangod?
And by the way, I still only take pictures of good looking people.
russdenney01, you are bringing this on yourself by your continued posts. It's like you're egging people on, and then getting all defensive when some does finally attack you. Did you post here genuinely wanting photo critique or did you post here as an act to try to create some kind of manufactured controversy?
Nobody is telling you what to shoot, or even how you should shoot it. But this is a forum for photographers, really if the intent is to create manufactured controversy, it doesn't belong here. Thoughtful discussion of issues related to photography / photographers / subjects is one thing, but this isn't that; it honestly wouldn't surprise me if this thread was locked soon.
There are many takes on these images - and I don't really understand all of the angst. I would have hoped that discussion would have revolved around the photos.
There is a great value to recording the nature of youth - and that even includes some aspects of youthful sexuality. I see nothing intrinsically wrong with this. Hopefully, this can be done artistically. We have had great proponents of this in genre of photography who have tackled the material with sensitivity and directness: David Hamilton, Jock Sturges, Eva Ionesco, Sally Mann and others come to mind.
In terms of these images (IMHO), they almost work as good documentary view of a young lady. I say "almost" because there seems to be something lacking in the honesty of the portrayal - the images seem to be "contrived by a formula" that does not work for me. None the less, I think the pictures are a good concept that could be revisited in a different image style that reveals the spontaneity of youth rather than the sultry emotionality (partly because the young lady is not "ready" for this yet).
My 14 1/2 year old daughter has been my muse (for lack of a better term) my entire photography career. I shoot her a lot. I don't think there's inherently anything wrong with that.
. Dude, I said in my opening statement I had already posted some of the images here...and other readers even wrote about seeing them. You're no detective here buddy...you're going to have to do a lot better than that.