Oleg Volk ([info]olegvolk) wrote,
2009-06-18 22:36:00
  • Previous
  • Memorize
  • Share
  • Next

Standing around, with Garand

This shooter is just lounging around with a .458 Garand in hand.



The picture isn't too terrible: it's in focus, the colors are vivid enough to represent reality and the pose is relaxed. Somehow, I get an impression that it would get less attention than the next photo, though the latter is rather less plausible.



Why do you, the art connoisseurs, have such a preference for images showing just a little more of the human subject -- so long as the subject is comely and not a leper?


  • Post a new comment

    Error

    switch

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

     
    Help
  • 34 comments

[info]ernunnos

June 19 2009, 04:27:00 UTC 2 years ago

I can only speak for dirty old men, not art connoisseurs.

[info]jokereet

June 19 2009, 04:57:38 UTC 2 years ago

А вид дамы спереди будет? :о)

[info]dreamswimer

June 19 2009, 05:01:01 UTC 2 years ago

The rifle on both photos looks a bit too heavy for the girl, her soulders are little bit unnaturaly tensioned :)
But the photo is realllllllly good - fine colors, nice girl and interesting garand.

[info]radiantsun

June 19 2009, 05:17:43 UTC 2 years ago

Bring on the lepers

[info]parrothead_jeff

June 19 2009, 05:49:26 UTC 2 years ago

Probably because we don't see much of that type of art these days.

And the subjects are comely...

[info]devonai

June 19 2009, 05:57:07 UTC 2 years ago

This would make me think twice about sneaking up on her.

[info]ukta

June 19 2009, 06:17:19 UTC 2 years ago

I don't know... Lepers sound rather interesting as photography subjects. I'd be really intrigued by them to say the least.

Anonymous

June 19 2009, 06:34:04 UTC 2 years ago

possibly because full or partial nudity in public, combined with commonplace activity, represents a sense of freedom that most feel is being eroded.

or we just like bared flesh.

[info]_eljefe_

June 19 2009, 15:55:07 UTC 2 years ago

Yeah, that.

[info]pyenot

June 19 2009, 06:53:35 UTC 2 years ago

Восхитительно упирает приклад в бедро :)

[info]tarkhil

June 19 2009, 07:10:57 UTC 2 years ago

second is better :)

[info]ak_47

June 19 2009, 07:19:48 UTC 2 years ago

First, sex sells. Second, neurotic preoccupation with nudity and sex is mostly American phenomenon. Nudity in America has the whole new dimension of inappropriateness and tension.

[info]falnfenix

June 19 2009, 09:40:19 UTC 2 years ago

yes...thanks to our Puritan beginnings, we go all buggy-eyed when we see boobs.

[info]smjayman

2 years ago

  • Loading...

[info]igorilla

2 years ago

  • Loading...

[info]ak_47

2 years ago

  • Loading...

[info]ua_dubhne

June 19 2009, 08:09:40 UTC 2 years ago

Needs a third photo: No pants, either.

Anonymous

June 19 2009, 10:44:17 UTC 2 years ago

Тугая тёмная майка с длинным подолом здорово подчёркивает бёдра и портит фигуру, на мой взгляд.

Поэтому вторая фотография лучше. А вот если бы на первой фотографии дама была в свободной белой рубашке...

--borisk

[info]haat

June 19 2009, 10:56:48 UTC 2 years ago

The stance is more relaxed in the second picture. I think I'd like it more even if the clothing was switched between the two.

[info]tomcatshanger

June 19 2009, 13:07:49 UTC 2 years ago

The stance seems more relaxed in the first picture to me. A hand on the hip is not an indicator of tension in my mind.

[info]belyal

June 19 2009, 11:06:41 UTC 2 years ago

Beauty is good. Sometimes clothing can accentuate beauty, sometimes it just covers it up :)

[info]reflectoscope.wordpress.com

June 19 2009, 12:47:00 UTC 2 years ago

Preferences

I guess it depends on what you want a picture to mean when you frame it. The comment about showing more of the human form as a metaphor for taking back freedom struck me as pretty much what I'd have come up with eventually.

Jim

[info]praecorloth

June 19 2009, 13:12:13 UTC 2 years ago

I don't think the first photo compliments her very well. Shows off her hips great, but I think the angles are making the rest of her curves go away. Also you can't go wrong with some good side-boob shots.

[info]crimmycat

June 19 2009, 15:51:08 UTC 2 years ago

Partially, I like the second photo much better because the pose. The design of the shirt in the first makes her look completely straight and thin up top, while the shirt halfway down her hips, combined with the way her waist is the intersection of the triangle formed by arm and rifle and the triangle formed by her legs, makes her hips look very large and her torso very thin and small.

Even if she was wearing a shirt in the second one (especially if were tucked in or ended at the waistline), it would be much less likely to have that effect.

The second photo also triggers the "it's art" because of the general fascination artists have with sticking half-naked or nude models in any situation they can get away with. Art is often expected to be absurd. Woman in a business suit laying on a sidewalk? Call 911 and get her an ambulance! Nude woman laying on a sidewalk chained to weird tangle of metal and with green bodypaint splashed on her? Oh, Lord, the art students invaded downtown again.

That, and comely subjects are good art already - they're designed to be pleasing to the eye at the most basic hormonal level we have. Men like seeing beautiful women because... they're male. Women like seeing beautiful women because we like to look at beautiful things. (And shop - woman looking at other women are often thinking something like "I want those abs, and that chest, but not that ass.")

[info]staghounds

June 19 2009, 15:52:38 UTC 2 years ago

The second one fails to work for me.

Bark, ticks, poison ivy, abrasions, thorns, sunburn, hot brass...

Naked is no way to be when interacting with natural outdoor surfaces.

[info]olegvolk

June 19 2009, 15:53:37 UTC 2 years ago

Which is precisely why I tagged it as "impractical" :-)

Anonymous

2 years ago

  • Loading...

[info]ravenclaw_eric

June 19 2009, 16:16:03 UTC 2 years ago

Because I'm wired up that way?

[info]dukephotos

June 19 2009, 16:23:04 UTC 2 years ago

I like them both

I like them both but the one thing that really stands out for me on these is her hair. In the first pic her hair interacts nicely with the similarly colored shirt, and in the second pic it interacts nicely with her pale skin. Which do I like better? I don't know, I'll have to let it percolate in the back of my mind for awhile.

[info]the_storm_rose

June 19 2009, 18:38:33 UTC 2 years ago

Re: I like them both

Very impractical....but only because I forgot the bug spray. :)

[info]staghounds

June 19 2009, 18:51:34 UTC 2 years ago

Eye of the beholder and all that.

It's not impracticality or implausibility all by itself that gets in the way. There are plenty of impractical, implausible, or just plain impossible juxtapositions, or things themselves, that work just fine for me.

Neither pose is terribly story-telling- she doesn't make me feel like she's there DOING anything, except watching- and a hunter or sentry would be wearing more. And be somewhat concealed. But the main difference is the shirt and lack thereof.

I suspect that it is just my own experience, plus degree, for this one. The first outfit provides very little protection, but it isn't as stark and complete. It doesn't feel "naked", so my subconscious doesn't intervene with a felt response.

For example, a surgeon might be too close to the subject for his subconscious to set aside naked people doing surgery, whereas I might not feel a non thought out disconnect.

I'm terrible at analysing art and my reaction to it. I sort of hate the process, thinking sometimes gets in the way.

[info]partywhipple

June 20 2009, 16:25:47 UTC 2 years ago

She has a nice back but I like the first shot better. Her arm positions and her top's color are all real nice.

[info]rafn

June 21 2009, 06:18:22 UTC 2 years ago

First photo, it's a better pose in that the hips are not thrust to the right. Far more relaxed and ready.

Anonymous

August 16 2009, 05:06:38 UTC 2 years ago

why?

I think that it is not necessarily the neekid-ness, I can find that anywhere. The unusual, or less likely is a more striking, and longer lasting image.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…