Angel

ImageX Photography

grimace

Great lighting and wonderful eye contact.

zoomer

Great eyes....like that first shot. 3 is ok.
.....any more?

Hackbone

Sensual and playful......great job.

ImageX Photography

Thanks, guys. I have more.. including some nudes... but haven't processed them yet.

dogwood

Nice work (as usual).

One idea I ran across when I posted a "NSFW" rant on "the big picture" forum. If you put "lingerie" or "swimwear" (well, not on these) in your subject line, you can avoid that stupid and mis-labeled NSFW while still giving an idea of the content. Just an idea in case someone complains about this post or decides to label it NSFW.

ImageX Photography

dogwood wrote: »

Nice work (as usual).

One idea I ran across when I posted a "NSFW" rant on "the big picture" forum. If you put "lingerie" or "swimwear" (well, not on these) in your subject line, you can avoid that stupid and mis-labeled NSFW while still giving an idea of the content. Just an idea in case someone complains about this post or decides to label it NSFW.

Thanks, Dogwood. That's a pretty good idea. I feel better about doing that instead of mislabeling a clean post as NSFW just to satisfy some overly sensitive person. I missed your rant but I may have to go check it out.

Bilsen

Someday I want to be able to wrap light like this.

Beautiful technicals in this set.

sweet caroline

Cute!

Yes, I would label them. I don't find anything dirty about these, but I wouldn't want to open them around my 10 year old daughter, and maybe even my 14 year old daughter. I don't want to clutter up the go figure forum with images that aren't nudes or close to it, but I think a swimsuit or lingerie label would be fair. For what it's worth, "not safe for work" is actually an accurate label for most lingerie and swimsuit pics for mot typical working environments, as well. I teach half day, so I have some times when I am technically off work but still at the school and allowed to take care of personal business. And since part of what I do is to teach photography, I occasionally go to Dgrin for ideas. I would be unhappy to open a post with lingerie pictures while on campus, even if there were no students around. NSFW does not mean "dirty" just that it is probably sexy and inappropriate for most office situations.

dogwood

sweet caroline wrote: »

Cute!

Yes, I would label them. I don't find anything dirty about these, but I wouldn't want to open them around my 10 year old daughter, and maybe even my 14 year old daughter. I don't want to clutter up the go figure forum with images that aren't nudes or close to it, but I think a swimsuit or lingerie label would be fair. For what it's worth, "not safe for work" is actually an accurate label for most lingerie and swimsuit pics for mot typical working environments, as well. I teach half day, so I have some times when I am technically off work but still at the school and allowed to take care of personal business. And since part of what I do is to teach photography, I occasionally go to Dgrin for ideas. I would be unhappy to open a post with lingerie pictures while on campus, even if there were no students around. NSFW does not mean "dirty" just that it is probably sexy and inappropriate for most office situations.

Yay! We have a consensus of sorts. Something informative of the content of the photos (ie swimwear, lingerie, bikini) in the subject line seems like a good idea. And it's good SEO

I think my problem and Image X's problem with NSFW is that it's just not accurate. We all work in different places and a whole lot of creatives spend a whole lot of time shooting, editing, and looking at photos like this. Some of us even make our livings doing that. I mean I actively market to lingerie and swimwear companies. Like that's part of my work. So that whole NSFW label is disingenuous for many of us. But a label with the actual content -- that I can live with.

ImageX Photography

Thanks, everyone for the comments.

I personally feel that this is a photography site and should not have to cater to a very specific group of people based solely on where they are using a computer. Maybe they should watch what they do at work instead of making the site conform to them. If a woman in a bikini is NSFW, what is a 10 year old kid in a bathing suit? NSFW Child porn? What do you mark the picture of your kids running through a sprinkler on a hot summer day? NSFW Near nude? What's next?

These will likely be the last images that I am sharing here simply because I don't want to be forced to make up labels for LEGIT images just because a specific group of people want to play on the work computer. I thought this was a photography site and the whole NSFW issue is getting beyond ridiculous. At a glance, you would think the People section contains more risky images than the Go Figure section just by looking at all the titles. It's almost funny.... except that it's just dumb. A bare shoulder is NSFW?


Mods, if you could please remove ALL of my recent threads containing beautiful women I would appreciate it. I would do it if I could but it won't let me. They clearly aren't labeled correctly and don't belong here. Thanks.

sweet caroline

Sigh... I thought we were having an adult conversation and I was just adding my thoughts. In the years I've been posting on this forum, it has been a friendly community. I'm not sure where all the anger is coming from. I haven't seen any posts that seem like any one is up in arms about how you label your pics, but maybe I missed something. I didn't mean to offend.

Dogwood, thanks for expressing your view in a civilized manner.