Options

NSFW: Stephanie

ImageX Photography

ImageX Photography Registered Users Posts: 528 Major grins

August 11, 2011 edited August 13, 2011 in People

0

Comments

Options
lilmomma Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins

August 11, 2011 edited August 11, 2011

Great pictures!

One request though, Would you mind putting in something like "NSFW" in the title on stuff like this? This is something I could potentiallly get into some dog doo doo in at work if i opened it as the wrong person came by. And i'm sure i'm not the only one.

Thanks

0
Options
Bilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins

August 11, 2011 edited August 11, 2011

Beautiful model and well executed shoot.

Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
0
Options
ImageX Photography Registered Users Posts: 528 Major grins

August 11, 2011 edited August 11, 2011

lilmomma wrote: »

Great pictures!

One request though, Would you mind putting in something like "NSFW" in the title on stuff like this? This is something I could potentiallly get into some dog doo doo in at work if i opened it as the wrong person came by. And i'm sure i'm not the only one.

Thanks

Thanks. I'll mark my similar posts for now on.

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

Beautiful model and well executed shoot.

Thanks! She's awesome and has a great personality to match her good looks.

0
Options
dogwood Registered Users Posts: 2,572 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

lilmomma wrote: »

One request though, Would you mind putting in something like "NSFW" in the title on stuff like this? This is something I could potentiallly get into some dog doo doo in at work if i opened it as the wrong person came by. And i'm sure i'm not the only one.

What are you doing surfing dgrin at work while clearly being unsure if it's an appropriate website approved by your employer?

Seriously. All this NSFW cracks me up. I look at photos like this all the time at work. I'm a photographer. That's what I do for work. Are you saying a "not safe for work" label only applies to some people? Because these photos are completely "safe" for my work environment. Should we change it to NSFWIYSBWYEB ("not safe for work if you shouldn't be wasting your employers bandwidth")?

This is a photography forum. If you're not certain that your employer wants you to be here on their dime, you should probably not be here on their dime. Period. I doubt your employer is okay with you wasting time looking at landscape photos anymore than they are you looking at NSFW photos.

Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
website blog instagram facebook g+

0
Options
ImageX Photography Registered Users Posts: 528 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

I have to agree. I didn't think these were NSFW pics at all and didn't mark them as such when I originally posted them. These really are no worse than bikini shots and I feel that marking them NSFW is almost misleading. Not sure I want to do that.

0
Options
lilmomma Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

dogwood wrote: »

What are you doing surfing dgrin at work while clearly being unsure if it's an appropriate website approved by your employer?

Actually it is deemed appropriate by my work. Otherwise it would be blocked by the internet filter.

dogwood wrote: »

Seriously. All this NSFW cracks me up. I look at photos like this all the time at work. I'm a photographer. That's what I do for work. Are you saying a "not safe for work" label only applies to some people? Because these photos are completely "safe" for my work environment. Should we change it to NSFWIYSBWYEB ("not safe for work if you shouldn't be wasting your employers bandwidth")?

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that browsing this forum was only for full time photographers. I must have missed that in the terms and conditions when signing up.

So, by what you are saying, even nude photos are safe for your work environment since you are a full time photographer and looking at photos is part of what you do. Well, why not just get rid of the NSFW or NUDE or 18+ all together? Hell, get rid of the Go Figure subcategory! I think your logic is severly flawed. Because they are safe for your work doesn't deem them safe for EVERYONE. So yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, as you have also confirmed...NSFW only applies to some people. People who aren't full time photographers. So maybe it should be NSFWIYANAFTP.

All I was asking is please consider that some of us who do this as a hobby outside our regular jobs may open the thread to expect one thing and instead get some almost bare boobs flashed in our face. It's just human courtesy, that's all. Some kind of indication that it might be a touch racy. I wouldn't have even opened the thread had there been a hint of a warning. It's an internet wide photography forum respect thing. Is it really hurting you that bad to have a few extra letters in the title? Seriously. Get off your high horse.

dogwood wrote: »

This is a photography forum. If you're not certain that your employer wants you to be here on their dime, you should probably not be here on their dime. Period. I doubt your employer is okay with you wasting time looking at landscape photos anymore than they are you looking at NSFW photos.

And finally......PLEASE do not presume to know anything about me, what my employer allows, and what I can and cannot do. Not that it's any of your business, but I earn every pretty penny I make in my career that substantially contributes to my family's great quality of life. Thanks.

ImageX Photography wrote: »

Thanks. I'll mark my similar posts for now on.

ImageX Photography wrote: »

I have to agree. I didn't think these were NSFW pics at all and didn't mark them as such when I originally posted them. These really are no worse than bikini shots and I feel that marking them NSFW is almost misleading. Not sure I want to do that.

....... make up your mind.

0
Options
jpc Registered Users Posts: 840 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

I see points on both sides of this, but I think Dogwood slammed the door a little hard. Maybe the problem is the Not Safe For Work label. How about TNA?

http://www.jpcirre.com

please visit: www.babyelephants.net
0
Options
ImageX Photography Registered Users Posts: 528 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

lilmomma wrote: »

Actually it is deemed appropriate by my work. Otherwise it would be blocked by the internet filter.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that browsing this forum was only for full time photographers. I must have missed that in the terms and conditions when signing up.

So, by what you are saying, even nude photos are safe for your work environment since you are a full time photographer and looking at photos is part of what you do. Well, why not just get rid of the NSFW or NUDE or 18+ all together? Hell, get rid of the Go Figure subcategory! I think your logic is severly flawed. Because they are safe for your work doesn't deem them safe for EVERYONE. So yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, as you have also confirmed...NSFW only applies to some people. People who aren't full time photographers. So maybe it should be NSFWIYANAFTP.

All I was asking is please consider that some of us who do this as a hobby outside our regular jobs may open the thread to expect one thing and instead get some almost bare boobs flashed in our face. It's just human courtesy, that's all. Some kind of indication that it might be a touch racy. I wouldn't have even opened the thread had there been a hint of a warning. It's an internet wide photography forum respect thing. Is it really hurting you that bad to have a few extra letters in the title? Seriously. Get off your high horse.

And finally......PLEASE do not presume to know anything about me, what my employer allows, and what I can and cannot do. Not that it's any of your business, but I earn every pretty penny I make in my career that substantially contributes to my family's great quality of life. Thanks.

....... make up your mind.

Thanks for cluttering up my thread. These shots are no worse than a bikini and are not nsfw.

0
Options
lilmomma Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

ImageX Photography wrote: »

Thanks for cluttering up my thread. These shots are no worse than a bikini and are not nsfw.

Ok maybe everyone is taking the NSFW acronym too literally. True, they are not worse than a bikini, and I did not open your bikini thread, being that it was labeled with the words "girls" and "bikini" and I was at work.

So, Hillary is NSFW (apparently worse than a bikini) but Stephanie and Angel are not. Clear as mud.

0
Options
zoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

I always though NSFW meant Not Suitable For Wife to catch you looking at....guess it accomplishes the same purpose .
Beautiful model, beautiful photos. Really nice work.
That last shot is special.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
0
Options
briandelion Registered Users Posts: 512 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

I thought it meant "Non- Sexy Formal Wear." Seriously though, lillmomma's initial comment wasn't unreasonable but the reaction to it was condescending. Back on track, very nice work!

"Photography is not about the thing photographed.
It is about how that thing looks photographed." Garry Winogrand

Avatar credit: photograph by Duane Michals- picture of me, 'Smash Palace' album
0
Options
Jeffro Registered Users Posts: 1,941 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

lilmomma wrote: »

Great pictures!

One request though, Would you mind putting in something like "NSFW" in the title on stuff like this? This is something I could potentiallly get into some dog doo doo in at work if i opened it as the wrong person came by. And i'm sure i'm not the only one.

Thanks

NSFW tag or not, shouldn't you be working, not surfing? <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif" border="0" alt="" >rofl < Humor. Not serious. To be taken lightly.

Nice shots X. <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/thumb.gif" border="0" alt="" >

Always lurking, sometimes participating.
0
Options
lilmomma Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

Jeffro wrote: »

NSFW tag or not, shouldn't you be working, not surfing? rofl

Nice shots X.

Really????????????? Come on now dude. You're about 8 hrs late to that party.

Ok for all of my DGRIN bosses: I have down time some days during my job, due to the nature of what I do. Not to mention lunch breaks and such. That's more explanation that I am required to give. Guaranteed none your dollars are affected by me doing what is perfectly allowed at my place of employment. Apparently some of you have a problem with it, so please, show me the DGRIN policy that prohibits non full time photographers from browsing at their work.

0
Options
anonymouscuban Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 4,586 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

OK guys. If you want to continue this debate, please take it over to the Big Picture forum. I'd like to get this thread back on track. I've labeled it as NSFW. Although I don't find the material objectionable and it is perfectly appropriate for the People forum, I do understand that some people are surfing from places where this may not be appropriate.

To the OP... I wouldn't worry too much about the NSFW label discouraging people from viewing your thread. Actually, I find that threads labeled as such get more hits that ones that don't. NSFW threads are the first ones I check out. It really is just a courtesy so please don't let it discourage you from sharing your work. I've enjoyed the photos you've contributed thus far and look forward to you sharing more with all of us.

Thanks all.

Alex

"I'm not yelling. I'm Cuban. That's how we talk."

Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums

My Smug Site
0
Options
Jeffro Registered Users Posts: 1,941 Major grins

August 12, 2011 edited August 12, 2011

Always lurking, sometimes participating.
0
Options
TenThirteen Registered Users Posts: 488 Major grins

August 13, 2011 edited August 13, 2011

anonymouscuban wrote: »

To the OP... I wouldn't worry too much about the NSFW label discouraging people from viewing your thread. Actually, I find that threads labeled as such get more hits that ones that don't. NSFW threads are the first ones I check out. It really is just a courtesy so please don't let it discourage you from sharing your work. I've enjoyed the photos you've contributed thus far and look forward to you sharing more

+1000000000 (And I'm a girl, and I do look at this at work. But I am adept at using appropriate IE window sizes and Mach 10 scrolling techniques)

Canon Fan
0
Options
garratt15a Registered Users Posts: 71 Big grins

August 13, 2011 edited August 13, 2011

Why not just put great shots like this in the Go Figure and have done with it ?
A lot of fuss about nothing to me.

0

or Register to comment.