HOME | DD

Published: 2011-01-08 13:56:08 +0000 UTC; Views: 95387; Favourites: 978; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
same shooting[link]
Related content
Comments: 83
HammerinInkminer [2018-04-05 01:56:20 +0000 UTC]
...this is one very nice shot and pose.
π: 0 β©: 0
t1ber1um [2011-08-29 04:09:48 +0000 UTC]
boot.. wait what did i say? .. i meant nice angle ..no ! what i'm trying to say is very nice photoghraph ..really .. damn! so h--! no i should stop writing before i write something stupid U.U
π: 0 β©: 0
S-eiji [2011-01-09 15:15:11 +0000 UTC]
Before I sit here and state my opinion on this...'art', can you explain to me what you were attempting to achieve?
π: 0 β©: 1
S-eiji In reply to aRT2MS [2011-01-21 15:39:37 +0000 UTC]
I'm still waiting for that explanation.
π: 0 β©: 1
aRT2MS In reply to S-eiji [2011-01-21 16:34:51 +0000 UTC]
ThereΒ΄s no way to explain it because is not.
BUT beauty is on the eye of the beholder.... i like sexy stuff and porn stuff, therefore i like this ass pic. Really pervy
π: 0 β©: 1
S-eiji In reply to aRT2MS [2011-01-22 14:35:11 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, but that's all this is. Pornography. It's supposed to be some kind of art, since it's been posted on this here website, but there is nothing artistic about it at all.
The lighting offers no atmosphere to the picture, and is dull and just bleak.
The pose doesn't seem to have been thought out at all. It's like she just jumped on the bed and he took a sneaky photo of her behind. In fact, that's ALL this picture looks like.
So yes. Forgive me if I ask some 'artists' to explain their work since the art itself offers no explanation. I never said anything against you liking this perverse picture. Whack off to it all you like.~
π: 0 β©: 1
aRT2MS In reply to S-eiji [2011-01-22 17:10:34 +0000 UTC]
Hey!
I just said it canΒ΄t be explained as art, because its not art (to me),
I was just saying, its only appeal is the pornografic content, and not a fullfiling artistic concept, like composition, lighting etc... so ppl might like it, for all the wrong reasons... never meant to disturb you or anger u un any way. i just donΒ΄t have a way with words...
π: 0 β©: 1
S-eiji In reply to aRT2MS [2011-01-26 20:23:15 +0000 UTC]
It's alright. I'm just expressing my opinion, not attacking you. :3
I get a bit passionate about these things sometimes.
But yes. This is only appealing to the pervs out there. No offense.
π: 0 β©: 1
aRT2MS In reply to S-eiji [2011-01-27 14:08:25 +0000 UTC]
Nonetaken!
I like it when ppl are able to say what they want, and defend their oppinion. I donΒ΄t have a way with word, so sometimes ppl tend to get angry at what i say because it has a whole different meaning to what am thinkin, so i thought i offended U in some way.
π: 0 β©: 2
Dib-justus In reply to aRT2MS [2014-01-05 06:52:29 +0000 UTC]
this is not pornagraphy... is she having sex? is there a penis in the picture? no. but simply a woman who is proud to show off her body as art. to her and/or the photographer this is art in their eyes. so that is why this picture is on this website. rather it is perverse or not it is art.
π: 0 β©: 0
S-eiji In reply to aRT2MS [2011-01-27 17:57:59 +0000 UTC]
No, I'm not offended at all.~
π: 0 β©: 1
Hells-Blood [2011-01-09 14:35:29 +0000 UTC]
If you constantly take photos of flowers in every possible view does that then make it "NOT" art. I'm tired of people declaring what's art and what's not. Get over it people, you don't go to a museum and start bitching at the staff there about their displays not being art if you don't like what you see there. I ran a multi million dollar art gallery warehouse for 15 years and saw some of the worst crap out there. This would have been a sight for sore eyes after all the crap I saw come and go through my warehouse doors. I'm willing to bet that if the greats of the past like Bouguereau, Alma-Tadema or Klimt and others of the sort had cameras a lot of these type of photos would be in museums across the world.... maybe even worse than this. Plain and simple, if you don't like go look at all the pretty flower photos and be done with it. Anyway to you you just keep doing you and forget all the silly sensitive people. I like it.
π: 0 β©: 0
salem10 [2011-01-09 12:01:42 +0000 UTC]
you capture a "moment" in a way that it takes ones breath away - this moment is outstanding
π: 0 β©: 0
PernilleLarsen [2011-01-09 11:37:19 +0000 UTC]
I love this picture, actually. Not so much because it's art, but even if it isn't, it's infamous.
People might believe it doesn't deserve to be in the "popular last 8 hours", but by posting an opinion on the picture you make it more famous.
So congratz with the picture
I'm not going to start writing about my own opinion.
π: 0 β©: 0
Shi-girl [2011-01-09 09:22:02 +0000 UTC]
only reason I gave this more thought and actually paid attention to it was because I had no clue what it was.... so not worth it...
π: 0 β©: 0
hawaiianstile In reply to redslut [2011-01-09 08:11:06 +0000 UTC]
though it is sexy you are right it is not by any means art.
π: 0 β©: 0
Reinhold-Hoffmann [2011-01-08 22:52:47 +0000 UTC]
If i would take a pencil now and draw eyes on that butt and submit it. It would be...art
π: 0 β©: 1
Doodelay [2011-01-08 22:38:18 +0000 UTC]
"Why? I see this more as art than a lunchbox next to a toilet in a blank white room. Just as any person with sense would, but slap some famous artist's name on it and suddenly people rave about how "thoughtful" and "evocative" a piece it is. What they really mean is they have no idea what to think but refuse to appear confused or in some way uneducated."
Hit the nail right on the head.
its another form of art. its realistic sex appeal but not so much to someone would just whip it out and get to work. jeez people its something i admire on a regular.
This is natural art!
π: 0 β©: 0
Doodelay [2011-01-08 22:38:18 +0000 UTC]
"Why? I see this more as art than a lunchbox next to a toilet in a blank white room. Just as any person with sense would, but slap some famous artist's name on it and suddenly people rave about how "thoughtful" and "evocative" a piece it is. What they really mean is they have no idea what to think but refuse to appear confused or in some way uneducated."
Hit the nail right on the head.
its another form of art. its realistic sex appeal but not so much to someone would just whip it out and get to work. jeez people its something i admire on a regular.
This is natural art!
π: 0 β©: 0
Doodelay [2011-01-08 22:38:17 +0000 UTC]
"Why? I see this more as art than a lunchbox next to a toilet in a blank white room. Just as any person with sense would, but slap some famous artist's name on it and suddenly people rave about how "thoughtful" and "evocative" a piece it is. What they really mean is they have no idea what to think but refuse to appear confused or in some way uneducated."
Hit the nail right on the head.
its another form of art. its realistic sex appeal but not so much to someone would just whip it out and get to work. jeez people its something i admire on a regular.
This is natural art!
π: 0 β©: 0
The-Terminal-Show In reply to growley464 [2011-01-08 22:16:55 +0000 UTC]
Flagged as Spam
π: 0 β©: 1
growley464 In reply to The-Terminal-Show [2011-01-08 22:19:08 +0000 UTC]
It's depressing. There are tasteful nudes that convey a message, or have an impact, but this really is just bending over for the world to see.
π: 0 β©: 1
The-Terminal-Show In reply to growley464 [2011-01-08 22:35:15 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, and it's getting harder and harder to find the good ones. I now just rely on the few that get posted in the DD section. \:
π: 0 β©: 0
darkanddefiant [2011-01-08 21:58:18 +0000 UTC]
i really don't see how you thought this would classify as "art". from an artist's perspective this is a tasteless shot, focusing on the sexual nature. the topic isn't even in the shot, making me wonder if this shouldn't be renamed as "cunt" instead. and from what i've gathered so far, the only people who do approve are to busy fapping to this shot to even make a sensible statement.
π: 0 β©: 4
nightflight935 In reply to darkanddefiant [2011-01-09 13:06:27 +0000 UTC]
I agree. And there is too much crap like this around here. Which may explain why this site was named "deviantart"
π: 0 β©: 0
SarahJPhotography In reply to darkanddefiant [2011-01-09 09:51:48 +0000 UTC]
I also agree.
π: 0 β©: 0
otakushutin In reply to shurtugalgeek [2011-01-09 05:21:43 +0000 UTC]
also agreed. dA isn't a porn site. there's a big difference between tasteful sex appeal and nudes and just this.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>