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.
trinko
 
Posts: 787

Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Post Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:47 pm


While i don't approve of nude photos in general i realize that nothing I say will cause PBase to ban them. But recently i've noticed a very offensive trend, full nudes in thumbnails of popular gallaries. I'm not talking about implied nudes--the gallary title says there will be nudity--or implicit nudity--you can tell that the subject is nude but you can't see anything--but shots where areas normally covered by the skimpiest of bikinis are shown.

To me there's a fundamental difference between having access to nudes and having them appear without warning. As an adult i find it very bothersome to be scrolling through the popular gallaries and see naked women. But a worse problem is that my children are getting interested in photography and at the present time I can't go cruising through the popular gallaries with them because i don't know when clearly inappropriate images will pop up.

I'd like to recommend that PBase fix this. One approach would be to add the image rating system that PhotoAccess has. Each image is rated, everyone's default setting is G, each user can set their threshold to whatever they want. If an image is rated higher than your threshold you just see a canned icon saying that the image is locked. This approach allows people who want to look at naked women to just change their settings once in a lifetime and then be unaware of any ratings while allowing kids etc to see the vast majority of non-exploitive imagery on PBase without worrying about accidentally being exposed to nude imagery.

Please don't talk to me about "artistic" nudes. I doubt i'd agree with you but it doesn't matter. I don't want my 12 year old son seing "artistic" nude photos even if an adult could appreciate them as art.

This issue is serious enough to me to cause me to have me considering leaving PBase and using another site. I don't know what caused this trend because until the last few weeks i can't remember seeing a real nude shot in the popular galleries, lots of galleries that said they contained nudity but no nude thumbnails. I really hope PBase can fix this and stay a family freiendly site.

Thanks.

trinko
 
Posts: 787

Time to pack i guess

Post Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:43 pm


well my pbase sub is going to run out soon and i haven't heard anything from Pbase on this. i was just looking through the popular galleries and there was a thumbnail of two naked women making out. Don't want to have the kids see that. :( I guess i'll just have to find another site. It's really too bad but think about it. If you walked into a mall camera store and they had a big picture of nudes on the wall would you bring your kids in? But my kids can see my computer screen and i refuse to have to work in hiding when using Pbase.

goislands
 
Posts: 152

Liberal "live and let live?"

Post Sun Jul 02, 2006 3:37 am


Please grow up.

This nudity hysteria is a cultural phenomemon in the US, one which puzzles me again and again. In Europe or Australia you will find topless women in public beaches in numbers. Nudity makes a regular appearance in the TV or on magazine covers. And all this is a part of our lifes since the 60th...

I am so shocked to find myself back in "dark ages" since I live in the US!!!

Thomas

trinko
 
Posts: 787

liberal oppression

Post Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:41 am


it's not immature to not want to have nudes pop up in front of my children. you don't see topless women walking around in Europe in department stores or supermarkets. it's a question of where nudity has to be tolerated. you seem to think everywhere is ok.

i always find it interesting that liberals feel that they should be able to do whatever they want and everyone else has to put up with it. for example if liberals don't find their children viewing naked women making out bothersome then those folks who do just have to live with it. on the other hand if the photo extolled smoking or say condemned abortion then it has to be banned.

what you consider dark ages is what most folks consider simple decency.

oh yeah and by the way those European countries are really advanced look at how they treat their minorities, not to mention Jews. so i'd not hold them up as the paragon of moral virtue.

bobfloyd
 
Posts: 393


Post Fri Jul 07, 2006 6:53 pm


Trinko,

This has been hotly debated since I signed up here a year ago. Several months ago I read through a post here in one of the Pbase forums about this very subject and a solution is supposedly on the way or so I am given to understand.

Also note that if you drop the Pbase staff a note about the photos that bother you they will check it out and often remove them from the Popular Galleries. One of the site admins went so far as to remove one of her own galleries because of nudity.

On a side note, I do find it interesting that it is almost always we Americans with our puritan values complaining about nudity here on Pbase. While I agree with you that nudity is not appropriate everywhere (your example of the department store is certainly accurate), I am dismayed that so many of my fellow countrymen consider censorship of the artistic world to be more acceptable than the artistic glorification of the human body. We are so afraid that our children will see something natural and beautiful while being so unconcerned with the level of violence they are exposed to. Don’t get me wrong, I too struggle with the issues of how much should be seen and when for children but I can’t help but wonder if maybe our kids would be better off we did not censor them so much.

dickh
 
Posts: 90

Re: Time to pack i guess

Post Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:33 pm


trinko wrote: i was just looking through the popular galleries and there was a thumbnail of two naked women making out.


Where? Where? Give us the link!!!

alexphotos
 
Posts: 561


Post Fri Jul 07, 2006 11:52 pm


bobfloyd wrote:I am dismayed that so many of my fellow countrymen consider censorship of the artistic world to be more acceptable than the artistic glorification of the human body. We are so afraid that our children will see something natural and beautiful while being so unconcerned with the level of violence they are exposed to. Don’t get me wrong, I too struggle with the issues of how much should be seen and when for children but I can’t help but wonder if maybe our kids would be better off we did not censor them so much.


I agree with Bob

Plz do not censor art, and we should censor violence. I think that a young, should not see a men get kill at a young age, but all kids have seen there mother naked it in the human nature.........

this is my 2 cents

ps :
dickh wrote:Where? Where? Give us the link!!!

LOL
Alexandre Trudeau-Dion aka ALEXPHOTOS http://www.pbase.com/alexphotos <=== http://www.Alexphotos.ca

andrys
 
Posts: 2701


Post Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 am


bobfloyd wrote:On a side note, I do find it interesting that it is almost always we Americans with our puritan values complaining about nudity here on Pbase. While I agree with you that nudity is not appropriate everywhere (your example of the department store is certainly accurate), I am dismayed that so many of my fellow countrymen consider censorship of the artistic world to be more acceptable than the artistic glorification of the human body. We are so afraid that our children will see something natural and beautiful while being so unconcerned with the level of violence they are exposed to. Don’t get me wrong, I too struggle with the issues of how much should be seen and when for children but I can’t help but wonder if maybe our kids would be better off we did not censor them so much.


You know? There's a lot of nonsense written about this from those
who just -slam anyone- who would like to see 'nudity' be IN a place
here where people seeking it can find it but not just pop up at -any-
time for anyone in any circumstances whatsoever. The dept store
analogy applies, why not.

And if they had popular-galleries FOR that type of thing, there'd
be no shortage of viewers or exposure. I'd say charge a bit extra
for that :-) Unhappily, what some say is 'art' is too often just
cheesy, while the sometimes beautiful and/or artful galleries suffer
from being lumped with them. BUT, if there is a special
place here for this, where those who wish to see a lot of it, easily,
can find it pronto, everyone wins.

It's hardly puritanical to want this hard-to-define area to
be available on a voluntary basis for the viewer.

Another idea, make Default 'Everything' but make it clear
upon first arriving at a gallery that people viewing can select
to have a filter active.

But everywhere in life, everyday, we don't see people
undressed and posing seductively (and I'm mainly talking about
whole galleries of nothing but this) unless we're in places
where that's usual. Imposing one's values on others goes
in both directions. So it makes sense to have some
optional filter.

bobfloyd
 
Posts: 393


Post Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:33 am


Andrys,

I understand and to some degree even agree with you. I just find it curious that it only seems to be we Americans who have this issue. I do not believe I have ever once seen someone from outside this country complain about nudes in the popular galleries. That speaks to me of some deep seeded social issue with the human body that only this country shares.

The department store analogy would be fine if this were Walmart online but it is not. This is an online photo gallery and as someone who has been in many real photo galleries I can tell you that there is nothing here that I would not expect to find in on the street corner. I certainly would not walk into a random photo gallery with a child if I did not already know what I would find there. Why do people continue to treat the internet as something different?

I support an optional filter. However, my guess is that once in place people will cry out to censor those artists who opt not to use it and we all know that some will do just that. What then? Where does it end?

trinko
 
Posts: 787

selective censorship

Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 12:07 am


i oppose nudes because to be honest they degrade women and teach people that human beings can be objects to be used rather than people to be loved. lots of people hide behind the title artist but in reality art in a traditional sense plays little part in their work.

if by puritanical you mean feeling that the human body or sex is evil then i concur that's wrong. but there's a big difference between being puritanical and saying that nudity is of no consequence.

in any case all i'm calling for is some way to avoid accidentally running across nudes. when my wife was a kid there was a certain park in Berkeley that her parents wouldn't drive by because it was apparently clothing optional. the point is they had warning. all i'm asking for is that the thumbnails be devoid of explicitly nudity in the popular galleries. sorta like asking people to not go shopping for a pot roast in the nude--a courtesy that even our less puritanical European brethren support.

PBase isn't like an art gallery. the vast majority of pictures are quite inoffensive. And Pbase wants folks of all ages to participate, just like Walmart. Anyway i find it a bit bothersome when people define requiring an opt in to see nudes as censorship. i haven't asked for the photos to be removed. that would be censorship. Of course i think everyone on this topic approves of censorship, it's just we don't agree on what should be censored. Before objecting answer this would you believe that all of the following photos should be shown
1) child pornography
2) a photo extolling racism
3) a photo extolling the murder of fill in your favorite gender, race, religious group
4) a series of photos showing how to assemble a bomb
5) photos of someone doing something they didn't want to be public that were taken illegally in a private location
6) photos showing security around critical sites
7) photos of people in the witness protection program
8) photos that extoll torture
9) faked photos that impugned peoples reputations
10) snuf photos
11)pro nazi photos
12) photos showing how to make nerve gas
etc
the bottom line is that anyone with any sort of moral compass finds some things so objectionable as to agree that society has an obligation to limit their spread. hence they support censorship in those cases. the reason we have a first amendment is to limit the censorship to the minimal cases we can all agree on.


Anyway i hope PBase comes up with a solution or lets me know they're working on one before my sub runs up. Hate to leave for no reason.

andrys
 
Posts: 2701


Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 12:16 am


bobfloyd wrote:Andrys,

I understand and to some degree even agree with you. I just find it curious that it only seems to be we Americans who have this issue.


It might have something to do with the fact that pbase is an American
photo base with servers in America?

The department store analogy would be fine if this were Walmart online but it is not. This is an online photo gallery


Try that with Kodak Easyshare / Flickr / Myphotoalbum.com / Smugmug /
or any of the galleries online that are "photo galleries" for the world to
browse.

Some of you feel (for the other side of the same coin) that it's only
your personal ideas of subject matter in photo galleries that must be
implemented by pbase, but pbase mgmt knows that the audience is
wide-based and that galleries of wonderful photos of all types are
opened in homes and offices everywhere, not in department stores,
but in homes and offices, when people want to just look at inspiring
photos, or want to show their photos of friends and family at play, etc.

Having the porno-style pictures in most-popular galleries suddenly
popping up, that people have been pointing us to lately, is hardly what
most people really care to see popping up willy, nilly (so to speak) even
if some of you guys want that. And I mean the type even srijith found
truly quite pure-porn in nature.

and as someone who has been in many real photo galleries I can tell you that there is nothing here that I would not expect to find in on the street corner.


So walk down the street and go to a corner photo gallery ;-)

All the shots of a woman showing her slit, through 'artistic' stair
grills may be what you yourself term ordinary 'nude' shots and
only about 'the human body' in a reverse-puritanical view that
shows no differentiation between shots that appreciate the human
body for its form and that which goes for those who want something
to inspire their dicks ... but there is such a thing as trivializations of
only-sexualizing the female body so that if a young boy saw this
popping up everywhere in everyday photogalleries online (which
all have ready access to) this will become the idea of what females
are mainly good for.
For some of us females, this is just cheapening of what women are.
I would like to see galleries of just nude men, posed fairly
artlessly but with erect (or not) penises so you could all decide
if that is really what photography is all about. And you'd like them
suddenly popping up everywhere because they were 'popular'...

The question is how pbase wants to focus and for what subject
matter it wants to be known.

They could have an artistic section for more pornographic-type
displays, make it a premium place and no doubt make a lot of
money. It would stay in its own section, be admired for what it
is, and make money for all concerned, since it obviously makes
money for people elsewhere on cyberspace.

One group on mp3.com (music recordings) made $300,000
from mp3.com in 'play for pay' at 3c per listen by the audience.
during the year. They did this by having an admission fee to a porn
gallery that said people would first have to go to mp3.com
and play one of their songs. So, there's money to be made from
a very eager audience, one not exactly focused on photography
itself.

I certainly would not walk into a random photo gallery with a child if I did not already know what I would find there. Why do people continue to treat the internet as something different?


Because, precisely, people DON'T know what they might find here,
and they're at home rather than deciding to take everyone and head
toward a destination.

I support an optional filter. However, my guess is that once in place, people will cry out to censor those artists who opt not to use it and we all know that some will do just that. What then? Where does it end?


Could it be any easier? They get one opportunity to 'forget'
and after that their galleries are not available until they show they
can 'remember' to put them in the place for that (easily findable
via pbase's non-filtered option when/if they make one).

hmetal
 
Posts: 246

Re: Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:19 am


trinko wrote:While i don't approve of nude photos in general i realize that nothing I say will cause PBase to ban them. But recently i've noticed a very offensive trend, full nudes in thumbnails of popular gallaries. I'm not talking about implied nudes--the gallary title says there will be nudity--or implicit nudity--you can tell that the subject is nude but you can't see anything--but shots where areas normally covered by the skimpiest of bikinis are shown.


How dare you decide what we are all allowed to see in popular photos and galleries!?

I am tired of seeing photos of pet cats. Can I request that these be banned from popular photos?

I am tired of seeing photos of young girls in tight outfits on skates skating around a rink with one leg lifted in the air. It's pornographic in my opinion.

Get the point?

Yes, I am one of the ones whose images you abhor so much that you don't want to see them in popular photos even though OTHER PBASE MEMBERS VOTED THEM THERE.

PBase needs only to implement a flag that us art nude photographers can select when we upload a nude. Call it "mature content" or whatever you want to call the flag but do it ASAP so that stupid requests like, "please remove all nudity from popular photos" don't come up here every few weeks.

Also, I read the comment questioning shooters choosing not to self-moderate. Let them fall prey to the moderators/admins removing them from PBase meta galleries permanently. At least that would be better for those of us WILLING TO SELF-MODERATE than the status quo where we aren't even notified that our photos have been removed from popular photos/galleries!
Last edited by hmetal on Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
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

hmetal
 
Posts: 246


Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:34 am


andrys wrote:...All the shots of a woman showing her slit, through 'artistic' stair
grills..


Here we have the crux of the problem. You obviously find the female form to be an ugly thing.

Hell, if I walked around hearing and referring to a woman's anatomy being refered to as a "slit" 24/7, I'd be offended and think of it as ugly too.

I am more offended by your terminology for the female form than I have ever been by seeing nudes and porn.

Try to get some class and use proper terminology for the female form. Go ahead, you might just find you like it. You might sound like you have some class too.
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

bobfloyd
 
Posts: 393


Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 3:13 am


trinko wrote:i oppose nudes because to be honest they degrade women and teach people that human beings can be objects to be used rather than people to be loved.


This is your opinion and you are welcome too it. For the record, I was not singling out the nudes of women but all nudes. Do you also feel this way about Michelangelo's nude statues and nude paintings? How about Rubens? Any number of other works by the masters? Do they also "degrade" women?


Andrys wrote: Could it be any easier? They get one opportunity to 'forget'
and after that their galleries are not available until they show they
can 'remember' to put them in the place for that (easily findable
via pbase's non-filtered option when/if they make one).


Maybe I am just stupid but I read here sounds more like something required rather than something that is optional.

hmetal
 
Posts: 246


Post Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:28 am


bobfloyd wrote:
trinko wrote:i oppose nudes because to be honest they degrade women and teach people that human beings can be objects to be used rather than people to be loved.


This is your opinion and you are welcome too it. For the record, I was not singling out the nudes of women but all nudes. Do you also feel this way about Michelangelo's nude statues and nude paintings? How about Rubens? Any number of other works by the masters? Do they also "degrade" women?


It's an old trick that has been used to oppress and repress nude art and porn. People quite mistakenly think that they are speaking for the women in these images.

Yep! My wife is so degraded by me shooting her nude figure and posting it on my PAD that she comes up with the ideas and even asks, "why did you post that bird when we have other glamour images?" Maybe it's just me but when someone WANTS you to shoot them nude and allows you to post them in your gallery, it can't be too degrading.

It is too bad nude models are busy working and otherwise enjoying themselves in creating beautiful images. Otherwise, they could come in here and put to rest this "degrading" nonsense.
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

Next

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests