Women posing for magazines

Blindinthedark said:
Would you have felt differently if it were Hustler or Gallery or something a little less tasteful? Or does that matter?
I'm not familiar with Gallery, but I do know Hustler. I don't know how I would have felt if it had been Hustler. There's a much greater fame aspect there because Hustler has a bigger audience, but it's not sex-positive and women-positive like On Our Backs is. I think I'd have done it for Hustler, though.
 
Wickid Cherry Pie said:
I've just looked at your photos, Etoile, and they are really beautiful. It's no wonder that you are proud of them. :)
Maybe I only like them because they are in B&W. :D

On another note, I think that some of us are just narcissists rather than exhibitionists. We feed on the attention that others will dole out on us, and if it means showing some skin, then, so be it!
Thank you! I think they did come out very well in B/W; I'm pretty sure she was using B/W film so they've never been in color. I think B/W hides more blemishes than color, too! (OOB uses it because they can't afford to produce a full-color mag, afaik, not for the art aspect.)

I don't think I'm a narcissist - I have major self-esteem issues the rest of the time. I think I lean more toward exhibitionism than narcissism. I think.
 
Etoile said:
I'm not familiar with Gallery, but I do know Hustler. I don't know how I would have felt if it had been Hustler. There's a much greater fame aspect there because Hustler has a bigger audience, but it's not sex-positive and women-positive like On Our Backs is. I think I'd have done it for Hustler, though.
It's interesting that you would pose for Hustler. I thought that you would be against it considering Hustlers treatment of women (as you said). Shows what I know.

Is there anything that you wouldn't pose for? (I ask because your the only person who has experience in something other than an amateur interest).
What's the line that you wouldn't cross because then it would be pornographic and not something you would want to be apart of?

PS
I'm on the bandwagon. Your pics are super!
 
Blindinthedark said:
It's interesting that you would pose for Hustler. I thought that you would be against it considering Hustlers treatment of women (as you said). Shows what I know.

Is there anything that you wouldn't pose for? (I ask because your the only person who has experience in something other than an amateur interest).
What's the line that you wouldn't cross because then it would be pornographic and not something you would want to be apart of?

PS
I'm on the bandwagon. Your pics are super!
Hustler definitely degrades women, but I can see myself posing in it as a springboard to something else.

What wouldn't I pose for? I'm not sure. I wouldn't mind kink scenes, foot photos, etc. I know people are jerking off to my pictures, and I don't have to watch so I don't really care. I think I wasn't clear about what I would and wouldn't want to be part of, though - you seemed to think that I wouldn't want to be a part of pornography. I would love to! I've done it before and I'd do it again. Even the OOB pictures are objectification and pornographic. They're not "pink" spreads, but I'd probably be willing to do that too. My main concern is knowing the target audience, I guess. If it's for a national magazine or a website I would have no problems with it. If there's a chance that it's just for the photographer's own wanking, then I wouldn't be interested.

And thank you for the compliment on the pictures. Like I said, it's great to hear positive reactions to them. :)
 
Wow...that's far more responses than I thought I'd get! Needless to say beautiful women are still posing to this day for whatever reason. Whether it's pornographic/ artistic... I've always considered the female form to beautiful.:heart:
 
Etoile said:
Hustler definitely degrades women, but I can see myself posing in it as a springboard to something else.

What wouldn't I pose for? I'm not sure. I wouldn't mind kink scenes, foot photos, etc. I know people are jerking off to my pictures, and I don't have to watch so I don't really care. I think I wasn't clear about what I would and wouldn't want to be part of, though - you seemed to think that I wouldn't want to be a part of pornography. I would love to! I've done it before and I'd do it again. Even the OOB pictures are objectification and pornographic. They're not "pink" spreads, but I'd probably be willing to do that too. My main concern is knowing the target audience, I guess. If it's for a national magazine or a website I would have no problems with it. If there's a chance that it's just for the photographer's own wanking, then I wouldn't be interested.

And thank you for the compliment on the pictures. Like I said, it's great to hear positive reactions to them. :)
Thank you for the answer.

I think it's cool that you're confident enough not to be exploited and use the opportunity to express yourself. The typical image of a porn industry model is usually not as positive. It's good to see that it's not always the case.

Power to ya.
 
Etoile said:
Hustler definitely degrades women, but I can see myself posing in it as a springboard to something else.

What wouldn't I pose for? I'm not sure. I wouldn't mind kink scenes, foot photos, etc. I know people are jerking off to my pictures, and I don't have to watch so I don't really care. I think I wasn't clear about what I would and wouldn't want to be part of, though - you seemed to think that I wouldn't want to be a part of pornography. I would love to! I've done it before and I'd do it again. Even the OOB pictures are objectification and pornographic. They're not "pink" spreads, but I'd probably be willing to do that too. My main concern is knowing the target audience, I guess. If it's for a national magazine or a website I would have no problems with it. If there's a chance that it's just for the photographer's own wanking, then I wouldn't be interested.

And thank you for the compliment on the pictures. Like I said, it's great to hear positive reactions to them. :)

It's nice to hear someone so comfortable with this kind of thing. It's not for everyone but it seems as though you've kept a good perspective on things.;)
 
Etoile said:
I'm not familiar with Gallery, but I do know Hustler. I don't know how I would have felt if it had been Hustler. There's a much greater fame aspect there because Hustler has a bigger audience, but it's not sex-positive and women-positive like On Our Backs is. I think I'd have done it for Hustler, though.

Gallery is by far MUCH tamer than Hustler.

But now & then Larry Flynt also takes some pretty sharp witted barbs at what he considers society's hypocrisy every now & then.
 
Lust Engine said:
Gallery is by far MUCH tamer than Hustler.

But now & then Larry Flynt also takes some pretty sharp witted barbs at what he considers society's hypocrisy every now & then.
Ah, so Gallery is somewhere between Playboy and Hustler on the porn mag spectrum?
 
Good quality communication going on here!

The debate over the validity of photography being an artistic avenue has been fought over since the very dawn of photography its self and escalated when EastmanKodak started to mass produce the brownie camera.

What is art and what is pornography has been locked in debate even longer than that.

Why one picture appears to be "porographic" in color but is artistic when shot in black and white, is because black and white challenges the brain more than color. It forces the viewer to look more into the image. The view becomes more engauged as the brain takes more time to make sense of what is being seen.

Its somewhat equivalent to reading a novel and watching the movie adaptation of it.

The brain quickly recognizes color images and is quicker to pass judgment one way or another.

In front of me sits two books I HIGHLY recommend to anybody who is interested in researching deeper into this:

THE BODY, Photographs of The Human Form
and
LOVE and DESIRE, Photoworks

Both are by the same author, William A. Ewing
and are published by Chronicle Books.

Very resourceful.
 
Etoile said:
Ah, so Gallery is somewhere between Playboy and Hustler on the porn mag spectrum?

In my never to be humble opinion I think so... or at least it was last time I checked out an issue a few years back. I remember the biggest thing they had going was "The Girl Next Door"- a huge thing about getting amateurs into the magazine.

Some of entries were actually quite attractive, but it did seem to be a niche magazine. They still scattered a few professional model types in there along with an obligatory letters column.
 
Actually my magazine of choice for a few years there was Club. They definitely had gorgeous women, some hot stories and a mild sprinkling of the porno reviews. It never seemed too political nor did it take itself so seriously or funny. It was always about the beautiful women!;)
 
Lust Engine said:
In my never to be humble opinion I think so... or at least it was last time I checked out an issue a few years back. I remember the biggest thing they had going was "The Girl Next Door"- a huge thing about getting amateurs into the magazine.

Some of entries were actually quite attractive, but it did seem to be a niche magazine. They still scattered a few professional model types in there along with an obligatory letters column.


Hustler has the Am section too, but calling it "Beaver Hunt" just lowers the class level drastically :rolleyes:
 
James G 5 said:
Hustler has the Am section too, but calling it "Beaver Hunt" just lowers the class level drastically :rolleyes:

But I was always surprised by just how many entries they got every month too.
 
James G 5 said:
Lots of people want attention :D
Actually, there are some websites around that make this easier. The issue of On Our Backs that I got yesterday includes the following review:
Thatstrangegirl.com
Thatstrangegirl is a female-owned and -operated amateur alternaporn site. Alternaporn is the Internet's latest craze that lets any punk rocker armed with a digital camera and DIY spunk become a bona fide porn mogul. But this one is different. There is a strong sense of beautiful, awkward reality among the boys and girls at Thatstrangegirl, and it doesn't give you a sneaking suspicion that you're ogling cookie cutter porn types who've been shoehorned into Hot Topic outfits. These models are the real deal: nerds, geeks, and punks with imperfect bodies who are willing to bare it all in the name of pornographic inquiry.
That was the first I'd heard of this site, but I've considered joining SuicideGirls.com too.
 
Etoile said:
Actually, there are some websites around that make this easier. The issue of On Our Backs that I got yesterday includes the following review:
That was the first I'd heard of this site, but I've considered joining SuicideGirls.com too.

SuicideGirls is cool, they were in town the other day for a live gig & I heard good stuff :D
 
Etoile said:
Actually, there are some websites around that make this easier. The issue of On Our Backs that I got yesterday includes the following review:
That was the first I'd heard of this site, but I've considered joining SuicideGirls.com too.

I say go for it...it sounds very upbeat!;)
 
Lust Engine said:
I say go for it...it sounds very upbeat!;)


Just share the links with us if you do it ;)
We can look & pretend you like boys :p
 
James G 5 said:
Just share the links with us if you do it ;)
We can look & pretend you like boys :p

Etoile likes boys... but in her own special way that's all. ;)
 
James G 5 said:
True enough :D

which way IS that exactly? On toast?

I've learned never to question a lady on her taste. I just sit back & enjoy it all unfolding before me.:cool:
 
Lust Engine said:
I've learned never to question a lady on her taste. I just sit back & enjoy it all unfolding before me.:cool:
That is giving me a mental picture of a woman spreading her legs while in a seated position. Nice visual, LE, thanks! :D
 
Etoile said:
That is giving me a mental picture of a woman spreading her legs while in a seated position. Nice visual, LE, thanks! :D


My favorite kind of flower to watch bloom ;)
 
Back
Top