Rant request – ‘Art Nude Superiority Complex’
I was asked to write a little rant about people that take pictures of tits, that look down their noses at, well, people that take pictures of tits.
When is tits and arse not tits and arse then? When it’s in black and white, with a little logo in the corner?
It’s only frothy-mouthed Daily Mail readers that see no difference between Terry Richardson and Sally Mann. But to scuttle to the very opposite end of the scale and leg it up the nearest ivory tower is just as annoying, and just as ignorant.
If your work is only about light, shade, texture and tone, and not at all about great racks and cracking arses, how come there’s no wrinkly old people in your port? How come there’s no pot-bellied Buddhas with tiny little acorn willies? No matronly mamas with boobs that touch their tummies? Where are the fascinating, ultra-thin men with razor-blade clavicles and knobbly knees? Why are all of your models YANGS (young, attractive, naked girls)?
A heterosexual man would rather look at a beautiful naked girl than anything else in the world. And there is absolutely not a thing in the world wrong with that. So if you’re one of the minority of photographers with a port full of nubile girls, that is kidding yourself, or trying to kid models that you’re somehow a better person than the average arty-farty smut-ographer, then perhaps you should stop talking bollocks, or go and photograph some.
Photograph by Ciaran Whyte
I/AM 
“A heterosexual man would rather look at a beautiful naked girl than anything else in the world” Not just heterosexual men. As an observation from attending many life drawing classes where the majority of folk have tended to be women (sexuality unknown) it is obvious that most of the attendees prefer the model to be a naked girl, beautiful or otherwise since when it is announced “next week we will be drawing a blokey” there is a groan and the attendance drops dramatically the following week. I believe that the majority of people of either gender or sexual orientation tend to the view that the female nude is better to look at than the male. BTW this is not some sort of an excuse on my part I make no bones about loving female nudes – that’s why they are my photographic subject of choice. I wont be able to do that much longer and at that stage will concentrate on drawing from my snaps.
Yes, I know what you mean. When I was an artist, if I put boobs onto something (a painting or sculpture) it would always sell. Most of my customers were women.
I think you’re right.
I like photographing nudes because I just enjoy the body in a celebratory way, as in it’s shape fascinates me as it’s different from person to person, it’s never the same, it can have freckles, moles, scars, curves here and there.
I’ll be honest, nudes also gets more views on any website I use whether it’s model-photography sites, my own sites or photo sharing sites. T&A just seems to sell and I’m more than happy to provide it (in an artsy fartsy way, not the GWC way) if it sells my work.
Good post but why use the shorthand “T&A” to describe such work? It simply reinforces ill informed prejudices.
Because it’s a rant, an off-the-cuff, honest and not always 100% PC opinion. If it was a balanced, logical & completely sensible blog post on the subject, I wouldn’t use T&A. And also because I’m suggesting to the people that sneer at people that shoot different stuff to them, that the very thing they’re sneering at isn’t as different as they like to think it is.
You are right, but who among these lofty, art-nude snobs is going to listen to a mere model? 😉 X
Brilliant
You have said what really upsets a lot of people when you say it.
David
I must be being particularly dim but I simply dont understand the statement by another David “Brilliant You have said what really upsets a lot of people when you say it. David
I’ll be honest, I don’t 100% understand that one myself! But it sounds like a compliment 😉 X
I am really confused now
What are you confused about David?