[maestro]

maestro on 8 Dezember, 2006 um 1412 Uhr #926

What makes a good fetish photo?

An amazingly beautiful model? Awesome clothes? A nice setting? Hidden traces of a play for dominance?
What is your definition of fetish pictures: Arne Jahn, Lithium Picnic or JTF ?

And why?

[navre]

navre on 8 Dezember, 2006 um 1558 Uhr #7036

Complicated question M…

A person’s choice of photography like poetry is hard to define in terms of like and dislike I can say that I like Back and white over color, I can say i prefer good looking models to ugly ones, average or skinney to plus sized ( fat for people gramaticly challanged), Models with tattoo’s or peircings to virgin skin. light bongade to extreme Bdsm, Subtle romance to all out porn. But still even if said shot had all of these elements it could still be wrong. to a certian extent art can not be posed or predispositioned, you work with words. models lighting and setting but when it comes down to it a good picture or poem happens, through the subtle manipulation of factors and what one likes others do not. every model can expressed beautifuly in any circumstance weather or not they fit the criteria mentioned above. what I’m trying to say is that a fat virgin skinned ugly girl can be in a photo and still under the right auspices beat any model that exseplifies the above mentioned likes. Art is life there is no set criteria as to what does or does not make a good photo in standardized uniformity. sure people will tell you this or that does but what it comes down to is does it say something to the person looking at it.

ok but if your asking about which of the three choices i prefeer i’ll take the third please….

you asked I ranted.

[robc666]

robc666 on 18 Dezember, 2006 um 2057 Uhr #7037

It depends on what you’re looking for, but a good fetish photo should contain some element of fetish. I know that sounds stupid, but you’d be surprised how many so called fetish pictures i’ve seen online have no real element of any fetish. Good looking model? Check. Some kind of pvc clothing? check. But nothing that really tugs at he eyeball, nothing that either excites or repels. Fetish is about so-called abnormailty, something that goes against the grain, so when we talk about fetish photos we should be talking about a picture that moves us either to arousal or disgust [which can be just as erotic as simple arousal] . this is something which is lacking in most of the run-of -the-mill fetish pictures that are available.
Sorry about the rant, but as you can tell i take my filth very seriously.

[maestro]

maestro on 29 Dezember, 2006 um 1528 Uhr #7038

Nav:
Exactly that’s what i wanted to find out, what people like over here 😉
I don’t plan on making art on demand in the future, but i don’t want to make stuff noone likes, either.

Rob:
I noticed that and i value it

The problem with these unfitting fetish photos is that there is no general name or definition for “awesome chick in debris” – for example on deviantart.com the fetish category is generally filled with these pictures (as is our gallery) because there is simply no other term for it. The high art is making these visually appealing or somewhat erotic, with the peak of using your mentioned fetish elements – but for now i concentrated on learning how to make photos at all, i plan on including this in the future, though

[navre]

navre on 29 Dezember, 2006 um 1609 Uhr #7039

art on demand…well since you mentioned it M. you could start with my likes lol ….luck and hope to see what you have in store for us. course you could always travel to holland and try to catch the camera shy Nav. in his natural element. carful thou it may break camera’s and be cause for an unweily ass whooping. its an agressive animal when cornered with a camera lens staring at it lol

[maestro]

maestro on 29 Dezember, 2006 um 1937 Uhr #7040

I’ll pack my sniper lenses 😈