Are there any kids doing the PAD thing?

[gpaai]

Howdy Folks!

First let me say that I am not a prude what so ever. I do get a little concerned when images like this: http://www.pbase.com/image/29146879 are posted on PAD without some sort of warning. I am as much for the nude form as the next person. I guess to me some just goes past what should be posted on the "front page" so to speak.

Just had to speak my mind...

Gary

Note to Mike Smith: Please don't think I am raggin' on your work, your work is good. I feel there just needs to be a warning for the under agers.

[djarvik]

100% agreed!

These kind of images are not supposed to be there, don't get me wrong, they are good and some really good.... but it's just not the place for them.

--------------
Alon Brik
http://www.photoaday.net

[herb1rm]

I am with you, these are clearly not PaD's, but Mr Smith is finding a new exposure for his existing galleries.

[scirburn]

I also agree this is not the place for these types of photos no matter how good they are.

[jillburhans]

Needless to say I sit here embarrassed because my daughter was sitting here when I clicked on the Meta Gallery.

I certainly do not approve and found it to be offensive. Looks like it came out of Hustler magazine. There is sensual photography and then there is porn. You decide.

[gpaai]

One thing that I found curious as well, is the fact that Mike doesn't allow comments to be posted on his images.

Gary

[dwinge]

Have you ever heard of the paininting by Paul Chabas called "September Morn"? As I remember the story, back at the turn of the century a very intelligent fellow owned a struggling art store, business was off due to a serious downturned economy. So one day he has an idea, he takes this painting 'September Morn' and puts it in the front window of his shop, then he has his son bring home some friends from school, he pays them all a nickle a piece to stand on the sidewalk and point, stare, gawk and otherwise make a commotion over the painting. Once he has this scene set up he calls the local press and complains about the shameful lewd and deplorable happenings down at the art store, needless to say the press shows up, the police show up then the customer's show up all to see what the fuss is about. He sold quite a few copies of that painting.
Here is a photo of the original painting...
http://images.overstock.com/f/102/3117/ ... 921350.jpg
David

[gpaai]

Great story David. It's obvious that Mike is drawing a lot of atention to himself by doing what he is doing. I had no problem with most he posted, but the latest one just struck a chord. I know, I know, just what he wanted right?

Gary

[dwinge]

Not at all Gary, posting in here is a far cry from calling CNN, I'm not sure why I told that story in all honesty. I want to find an answer.
I am very torn with this, I am a Libertarian politically and a big defender of freedom, on the other hand I hate porn and the porn industry with a passion, especially for what they have done to the Internet, and at the same time my belief forces me to defend them. The fact is, this guy has 2 galleries and 49 images with 335,000 hits, is he the one to hold up to scrutiny?
I wish I had the answer, hell I wish I had a plan of any kind, but as long as people patronize it, what is there to do? Hooters is a thriving business, which speaks volumes for the society we are, can you imagine a world where people had respect and treated each other as they would want to be treated? If this was the case, Hooters would sit empty.
Today's post was actually artistic, even though I would prefer it be in an area that I could go if I wish, not just show up with the rest of the posts.
I don't know what else to say,
David

[1meven]

I think the picture was artistic and I didn't have a problem with it personaly...the only thing I honestly don't like about it showing up on the PaD link is that it wasn't taken on that day. It's a stock shot. Other than that...I think it's great art and not offensive in the least. Just another opinion though...

Meven

[clickaway]

I've written to Mike and he has said that he is to deselect this gallery as his PAD when he finds out how.

As for the photo, I didn't exactly find it offensive, but would have enjoyed it more had he used some side lighting. I found it way too 'in ya face'.

Ray

[aestus]

Just my opinion...

It seems to me that there are lots of people out there with "PAD" galleries who are not really doing what the spirit of PADing is about. This photo happens to be in one of those galleries.

There are also lots of nudes out there, and there are certainly more offensive pictures around, whether nude or not. Take a look at what the newspapers are printing in respect to the treatment of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers. Those images are far more offensive to me.

While I am in no position to offer a critique of the photographic technique, I can say what I like, and I like this. (BTW, if you haven't caught on just yet from my PAD's, I am a gay guy, so I'm not looking at the pornographic value here).

When I hear a song on the radio that I don't like, I turn it off or chnage stations. When I see a picture I don't like I move on to the next.

If kids are searching the net for porn, or even innocently doing homework, they come across far more graphic sexuality than this photo depicts. I am sure there are people out there who would insist that my nude SP showing my butt, or Ron's fantastic rear shot are also not appropriate. I say have a martini or two, relax, and look again. And maybe take a look at how kids view nudity. My friend has a two year old daughter who loves to take her clothes off at home, guests or not. She has no shame, and will have none until society instills it. Just what do we want our kids to think of their bodies anyway?

Again, just an opinion...

[typicalsloan]

I agree i dont think these photos should be on pad, there are other less public areas of pbase to display them, pad isnt one of them.

[mikesmith]

Dear Pbase-rs,

Re: my nudes gallery being listed as a PAD gallery: I have no idea how that happened, and more than a month ago when someone brought it to my attention I deselected it as a PAD. I do not have a PAD gallery, and have no interest in keeping one.

However, a couple of days ago an irate viewer attacked me once again for this image, which apparently still lingers in the PAD area. I have no idea how to remove it, and am sure I do not have the authorization to do so. This should be taken up with the folks who run pbase. Due to the most recent message, I discovered this thread.

I'm sorry if anyone was offended. My nude images aren't meant for general viewing; they are for reference by prospective clients and models considering posing for me. I have no interest in contaminating the minds of children, if nudes will actually do that any more than other, more socially acceptable, more accessible forms of media, e.g., reality TV. I guess that's a matter of opinion.

Mike Smith

[dwinge]

Hi Mike,
Thank you for taking the time to post a message here. I believe the reason one photo remains in the rotation in the meta gallery is because each time someone posts, they in a manner of speaking overwrite their previously posted photo and then that one remains until they post again. Perhaps what you could do is assign a gallery a "PAD" gallery and post something directing people to your galleries. This would be what I feel a simple temporary solution plus have the bonus of directing people to your other photos. Just my 2 cents.
David