Board index PBase Feature Requests Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Feature Requests

Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Request changes or modifications.
bobfloyd
 
Posts: 394

Re: Even the French are doing it!

Post Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:08 pm


trinko wrote:i do watch what my kids view. however i shouldn't have to have the full burden. i mean when we go shopping or drop in to a Camera store i don't have to be constantly on the look out for nude people wandering around.


When you go shopping you have the weight of US society to back you up and that society loathes nudity in any form unless they can hide it (for the most part). The internet is an international place and not bound by the social constrants of the US. It is a place to be exposed to different cultures and learn how others view the world, expending who and what we are. Of course, in our typical fashion, we Americans think it should conform to how we see the world.

And for the record, when it comes to the internet, you do bare the full burden of what your kids see and where they go. That is why current home interent connection equipment comes with easy to use firewalls that can block access to certain IP addresses, full domains or little individual sites. That is why many providers provide parental controls in their access software. That is why Microsoft made the security settings in IE individual to the user account and not by whole machine. Everywhere around you there are controls that will allow you to practice life the way you think it should be and raise your kids in as big or small a world as you wish without inconveniencing your fellow man.

Nor do I want that burden. I have my hands full now. I do not want have to try to determine if the photo of a women breast feeding her new born is inside or outside what you consider appropriate. Or the shots of the paintball match I did over the weekend are too violent for some. Or if the shot of my dinner with a glass of wine offends others. Do you see where I am going with this? You are asking the world to figure out what you want and do not want you kids to see and to regulate it. This is not fair to the world as we can never get it right for you.

And yes, I have read your extreme examples of photos involving death and violent crimes. Please, those would be outside the limits of any society, not just ours in the US. Going to the far extreme where the examples are not acceptable to any but the tiniest percentage of even the most devient of any society is not really a supporting arguement and does not lend any strength to your case.

trinko wrote:France has banned toplessness--is that a word--and string bikini's on the beaches in Paris. See
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?from=rss_A%20Step%20Beyond&set_id=1&click_id=&art_id=iol1154336210588S513
So i guess it's not just us backward Americans. :)

And yes the article does point out that such attire, or the lack there of, is still fine at most French beaches. It does seem though that even the French, the worlds only truly civilized people believe there are reasons to limit nudity.


This proves nothing in reality. I have not noticed anyone in this thread pointing to the French as an example of anything. More to the point, I have not seen any French on Pbase calling for the removal of nudes from the popular galleries. Again, I only see Americans doing this and to date you have yet to address my question about why this is. I am left to conclude that you do not wish to answer the question.

For the record, a significant number of states in the US (I forget the actual number but it is somewhere just above or below half and includes CA, TX and NY) have what is refered to as topless equality laws on the books. These laws allow for women to go toples anywhere a man can legally go topless. Now, I will grant you that I have not seen it and I do live in one of those states but the point remains that is is legal many places. Women chose not to take advantage of it but that is all that is stopping them.

No one here is opposed to limiting nudity either. I have not seen a single post supporting total repeal of restrictions on all public nudity yet you continue to make statements which indicate that you think that is what those of us who disagree with you are after. Let me assure you that it is not. I do not, for example, what someone to walk into church on Sunday morning and sit down next to me naked. Nor do I wish to sit next a naked person on the airplane on my next business trip or sit at the next table in the resturant for dinner tonight. However, I do resent art being shoved off in a back corner because it contains a bare breast or too much thigh. Frankly, I think those sorts of thoughts are what has made the porn industry so big in America. I can't help but think that if we were more accepting and open with nudity as a sociaty that we might not spend so much time and money facinated with real porn.

matiasasun
 
Posts: 1493


Post Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:44 pm


I have spend over three years around here. As many of my fellow PBasers around these forums. And I have watched this discussion more than once, as we could all expect. I would agree that it has become more present in the last two years, but I guess it will be there untill photography and public places (or web places) exists on the face of the earth.

Thing is I have arrived to the conclusion that there is no photo. For what I have read here we might be sure that there are pixels, that most people define as the dots in the screen. But that´s what we have agreed so far. The rest is under discussion.

And I think the best possible example to describe my point is Slug´s Galería de los Muertos (Spanish for gallery of the death). The best example, in my opinion, is "Angry man with corpse" (Warning!, it seems real)

What was Slug shooting at? Why do we share pictures then?

Matias
Matias, Chile - http://www.pbase.com/matiasasun
Resources, HOWTOs, Samples and more! - http://pbasewiki.srijith.net/

ericvision
 

Re: Absolutism

Post Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:27 am


trinko wrote:I concur that not all people who approve of nude photography are "sexually liberated". i used that term because i thought it described those who use puritan in a pergorative sense.


Just like you use the word 'liberal' as a pejorative?
And yes, I'm a European. And a socialist to boot. Can I be saved?

kerrym
 
Posts: 311


Post Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:35 am


Just having a browse through the comments here... and there'll always be two sides of the fence. But I am intrigued by those who would promote nudity and how quick they try to condemn somebody who is trying to keep things clean and decent. Something getting a bit twisted in our society me-thinks.

I'm with the original poster, and see it as a simple request if somebody is wanting a flag or warning mark of some sort, so they don't have to view something they see as objectionable. That's not asking too much is it?
Kerry Mitchell NZ
http://www.pbase.com/kerrym

photoarrow
 
Posts: 354

my suggestion

Post Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:58 am


Earlier in the day I posted what I'm going to paraphrase below, so please excuse my "double posting", but I wasn't aware of this thread earlier...

How about a seperate Show-and-Tell department that allows non-pornographic nudes and risque shots, so the folks who want to avoid it can do just that, and the folks who DO want to see it can find it...

Side Note: I think the normal human being knows the difference between non-pornographic nudes, and those that are, so lets not start that...

vincebelford
 
Posts: 92

???!

Post Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:06 pm


So where does it stop? Who are the self appointed arbiters of good taste?
What's so awful about a naked body anyway? What else should we ban on pbase? I don't pretend to have the answers but until someone comes up with something really cool - if it ain't broke don't fix it!
Vince

umdphotozone
 
Posts: 1


Post Sun Aug 20, 2006 12:08 pm


I once saw in a current affairs magazine imported into the United Arab Emerates a bust of a woman that had been 'felt tipped out' as a crude form of censorship. On the same page in full graphic detail and colour was a picture of a 12 year old girl that had her guts ripped out by a snipers high powered bullet, but that was ok and not censored.

Here is trinco worried about his soon seing an "artistic" nude. What a twisted world we live in.

isogood
 
Posts: 24


Post Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:09 pm


there is many nudes in my galleries, but not popular at all...

:(

Perhaps because they are in museums galleries ?

andrys
 
Posts: 2701

Re: ???!

Post Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:50 am


vincebelford wrote:What else should we ban on pbase? I don't pretend to have the answers but until someone comes up with something really cool - if it ain't broke don't fix it
Vince


? Have you really been reading these threads? No one's "banning" or
proposing a ban on any images.

CURRENTLY, nude shots are removed from the Popular Galleries
which are the front desk representative for PBase. That's Slug's
choice. And his to make. Some would like whatever nudes to stay in
there, though, and some don't want that. But nothing's "banned" from
PBase or planned to be banned.

If something isn't broke, don't fix it? The gist of all this was that
people with nudes in their galleries WANT there to be a change that
will allow their popular nude images to stay in Popular Galleries --
they're sort of insisting that we have a site where people can
choose to filter nude or, more to the point, soft-porn images (there
-are- those as we've been shown).

People are trying to come to a happy medium. So, yes, some
consider it broken and don't want their nude pictures to be taken
out of the Popular Galleries (where they'd sort of dominate
otherwise, it seems, and some think not for their purely photographic
value).

For entertainment, please read the following, since when I read
it, I was reminded of our continual series of condemnations of
values held by others, on either side. But the key here will be
what Slug wants from or for this site. It seems to me that ultimately
there can be a fairly good compromise, but Slug also has to think
about bandwidth and cost.

http://www.thelocal.se/4656.html

erslyman
 
Posts: 4


Post Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:57 pm


Who objects to nude thumbnails? Are we that ashamed of the human body?



Tall Tales of The Bible Belt
http://evangelicalspectator.typepad.com

vincebelford
 
Posts: 92

Re: ???!

Post Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:04 pm


You’ve made my point quite nicely - you’ve spoken for Slug and for “some peopleâ€

andrys
 
Posts: 2701

Re: ???!

Post Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:34 am


[quote="vincebelford"]You’ve made my point quite nicely - you’ve spoken for Slug and for “some peopleâ€

hmetal
 
Posts: 246

Re: ???!

Post Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:34 am


andrys wrote:What you object to is that Slug decided to remove these
from "popular galleries" as a business decision.


Oh? How do you know Slug and/or Emily's motives? Do you have some golden key to the Slug and Emily Reason Dept. or are you just making assumptions like everyone else, yet trying to come off as authoritative?

If something isn't broke, don't fix it? The gist of all this was that
people with nudes in their galleries WANT there to be a change that
will allow their popular nude images to stay in Popular Galleries --
they're sort of insisting that we have a site where people can
choose to filter nude or, more to the point, soft-porn images (there
-are- those as we've been shown).


Therein lies the OPINION on your side. You feel that it "isn't broke." I beg to differ. It is broke in that my images are banned from Popular Galleries/Images because there is no better system in place to handle content filtering.

..yes, we know it's coming.... someday.


For entertainment, please read the following, since when I read
it, I was reminded of our continual series of condemnations of
values held by others, on either side. But the key here will be
what Slug wants from or for this site. It seems to me that ultimately
there can be a fairly good compromise, but Slug also has to think
about bandwidth and cost.


Some of us art nude/glamour shooters have intimated to Slug that we would pay extra if bandwidth is an issue, on the condition that we are provided with full accounting data of the bandwidth generated by our galleries/images.
Ray A. Akey
http://luminescentmemories.com - Luminescent Memories Photography
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmetal - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/hmetal/pad - My PAD
http://codemain.com - A small portfolio

ophelia_payne
 
Posts: 66


Post Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:52 am


My opinion for what it's worth

I agree that system of filtering or labelling or something to protect those who find nudes offensive would be helpful.

While I agree that the OP should feel comfortable in perusing PBase without encountering offensive material I do find the OP's post to be prudish, pious and deeply offensive.

I'm sufficiently adult to understand that the world is not shaped according to my principles and moral standards and I appreciate that other people inhabit their own universes with their own sets of morals, many of which I will find peculiar and nonsensical, but because we all have to share the same planet we have to find an amicable way forward if we can.

I think the best that we can do is to try to be respectful and to get on with each other as best we can. Starting a provocative and rather contemptuous OP is, I think not helpful in finding a way forward that most benefits the majority of people.

If the OP finds nudes so very disgusting and offensive he or she had better beware of visiting the Musee d'Orsay, Paris, for there, displayed for all to see is the famous and incredibly beautiful painting L'Origine du monde (The Origin of the World) by Gustave Courbet, an oil on canvas painted in 1866 and depicting a woman’s genitals. Those who are not afraid of the human body and who are interested in fine art can view this beautiful painting here http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/cour ... n.jpg.html

The OP had also better not research the photographic art market, as they will find that the most expensive photograph ever sold at auction is the exquisitely beautiful “Breastâ€

andrys
 
Posts: 2701

Re: ???!

Post Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:11 am


hmetal wrote:
andrys wrote:What you object to is that Slug decided to remove these
from "popular galleries" as a business decision.


Oh? How do you know Slug and/or Emily's motives? Do you have some golden key to the Slug and Emily Reason Dept. or are you just making assumptions like everyone else, yet trying to come off as authoritative?


What? I didn't give their 'motives' - I said it was a business
decision, which it obviously is. Otherwise it would be a PERSONAL
decision, which I'm sure it's not. It IS a business we're on.


If something isn't broke, don't fix it? The gist of all this was that people with nudes in their galleries WANT there to be a change that
will allow their popular nude images to stay in Popular Galleries --
they're sort of insisting that we have a site where people can
choose to filter nude or, more to the point, soft-porn images (there
-are- those as we've been shown).


Therein lies the OPINION on your side. You feel that it "isn't broke." I beg to differ. It is broke in that my images are banned from Popular Galleries/Images because there is no better system in place to handle content filtering.


Ray, you need to read more slowly. I was saying that people who want a
CHANGE (a change to stop preventing nudes in Popular Galleries) see
the system as 'broken' from their point of view. I said it as a question
and tried to show it IS broken, from your viewpoint.

For entertainment, please read the following, since when I read it, I was reminded of our continual series of condemnations of
values held by others, on either side. But the key here will be
what Slug wants from or for this site. It seems to me that ultimately
there can be a fairly good compromise, but Slug also has to think
about bandwidth and cost.


Some of us art nude/glamour shooters have intimated to Slug that we would pay extra if bandwidth is an issue, on the condition that we are provided with full accounting data of the bandwidth generated by our galleries/images.


That makes total sense to me. I realize that he might want to
also charge the audience something for that, as is usually done, to
cover that heavier bandwidth need.

I was thinking the other day, I wish I could upload 1024 x768
sometimes but I realize they would squish it so viewers would
see a low-res 800x600. Then I realized I bet they keep it to 800x600
to keep bandwidth lower, with so many people viewing so much all
at the same time.

I think that places like Flickr tend to have small images accentuated
probably for the same reason, but they have lots of ads, to pay for
what they do, which PBase doesn't have, which is a big part of its
draw for some of us.

PreviousNext

Board index PBase Feature Requests Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Bot] and 2 guests

cron