HOME | DD
emilyaddison —
Scorch
[NSFW]
Published: 2011-02-20 05:21:36 +0000 UTC; Views: 67645; Favourites: 1416; Downloads: 1817
Redirect to original
Description
Photographer: GW BurnsLocation: Costa Rica
I am posing on a giant formation of volcanic rock
Related content
Comments: 318
Wow!! I gotta say that is a daring pose, even for a nude picture. I like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I like the draping with the cloth and the scenery is interesting, but I can't say I like the lighting. Something about this picture gives me the feeling it should be a bit brighter. The shadows in the bottom right corner kind of take away from the whole thing in my opinion. You were probably working with natural lighting so there wasn't much you could do, I guess.
Also, what's the stuff at the top? It looks like something from the screencap in a video game. Is there a reason it's there that I'm missing?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That is the photographer's logo. GW, for G.W. Burns.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ahhh ok, thanks. That makes sense.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
what i found interesting in the comments is that they say showing female genitals is called pornography, but in the paintings i had seen in europe of naked bodies, only the men showed genitals, but girls werent allowed. So is still a machismo in art. Nice photo you have a great body but your face shines even better, congratulations on your DD.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
What I find even more fascinating about them is that when I suggest that they send me male nude suggestions, only one of them has bothered to do so, or even respond. I always welcome male nudes
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
im kind of old fashion dude, leave things to imagination, lately people want to see everything, ive remember old movies were you couldnt see the monster or death, but freaks you out more than watching bad cgi.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
A bit of ignorance on the comment-ors behalf, I fear. I do believe the DA classification of "pornography" is rather loose compared to some people's personal definitions (myself included). I remember their definition of pornographic nudes being along the lines of deliberately sexual portrayals of genitals. Rather than a photo like this, where it's a naked woman who's just standing there. Not my personal taste, but some clearly feel it's artistic. *shrug*
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah i had seen those, they are on wall papers, extreme close ups, its a shame because models faces are really nice. i dont mind close ups if they have a purpose a meaning, lately nudes are losing content
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As with some other things, there's a fine line between indulging in personal fantasy/fetish and artistic nude. My personal feelings on the matter is how the piece makes me feel. As a good general rule, I find them to be more artistic if I get more of a sense of beauty and awe from them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think some of the comments (can't speak for the ignorant ones) are in regards to female genitalia being so widely embraced by the community, often making front page, while male genitalia is quickly condemned and reported as pornography. I think the argument (or lack thereof) was more about if male genitals are pornographic, than female genitals should be deemed as such as well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i had seen photos with really bad taste, extreme close ups to female parts, not even composition on them
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nice photo!!
I just hope to see a handsome sculpted man in a similar pose soon as a DD, too, (and with full genitals exposed of course)! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd love to see any suggestions you have for similar male nudes!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The scenery is amazing down there, you picked a great location for the photo shoot, and your a Beautiful model!! <3
Very Nice photo, keep up the great work!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
LOVE the strong red and blue...and the beautiful model
~tommy
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
wohoo! i'm from Costa Rica...and this pic is so great! love it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow...very nice! Put a yellow "S" on that cloth (like cape) and Bam....ya got the most gorgeous Supergirl around...Killer Cool! I dig this pic.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
A very beautiful photo. Love the pose makes you look like you own everything around you in the shot and that you are the queen of all that surrounds you. Again a very beautiful photograph.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I find it rather disturbing and more than a little sexist that this photo gets a DD yet actual artistic nudes of guys get flagged as porn and deleted even though they are clearly not porn. Honestly, in my opinion, this is just nudity for the sake of nudity and the provocative pose and facial expression are what makes it such. Sorry. **shakes head** I realize you are likely a chaste woman and dedicated to your mate, but appearances are not always the truth and too many will judge on appearances. You do have a nice figure, but honestly this photo makes you look like a whore wanting someone to take her up on her rather blatant offer for free sex.
👍: 0 ⏩: 9
Wow.
A nude woman in a strong, self-possessed pose makes her look like a whore?
All hail the meek, mild and demure "proper" artistic nude!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That is such a nasty thing to say on this girls DA. She had nothing to do with being picked for a DD, and now she is going to have to read this just because your a sexist prude? How is this any different than a male in the same position?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am not sexist, nor am I prude. I'm actually female. Try actually reading the conversation. I have favourited a number of actual artistic nudes, both male and female. This image does not qualify as artistic nude. Soft porn fodder for Hustler or Playboy, yes. Artistic nude, not so much.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I read the entire conversation, and you keep mentioning that your not sexist and yet you would be perfectly happy if it was a nude male. If you have an issue with it being a DD then you bring it up with the mod, you do not comment on the artist calling her a whore. Oh i'm sorry you just said she "looked like a whore," like that makes any difference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
I said there is a disturbing sexist trend on DA that sexualized female nudes get rewarded and artistic nude males get flagged as porn and deleted. I have favourited quite a few nudes of BOTH sexes. When a person is sexualized like this, it makes them look bad, just like the girls you see in Hustler and Playboy. Did you also note that I complimented her on her figure and stated that I would guess she was probably a woman of virtue and that the image only made her look bad? Clearly not. A guy from France who's first language is not English could clearly grasp what I said, why can't you and the rest of the native English speakers? Oh wait, most only see what they want to see. My bad. And here I mistook most DA members to be actually reasonable intellectuals. O.o
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
she is totaly right, shes talking about the fact that nude art with males are "taged" as disgusting but the moment a female shows some skin everyone grabs his dick and is like "ohhh so beautiful O.O" but thats how the world works today so nvm.
in fact this is not nude art it is softporn, but to be honest i dont care about that shit, i watched this pic like 20 sec, and the only reason for that is bc i was distracted by her left breast, implants i guess.
and yes it makes a difference if she says "looked like a whore" bc thats exactly what she looks like, she probably tryed to look seducing but everything i can read in her face is "gimme your junk"
Greedings ;D
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
**nods** Thank you. There is a distinct difference between actual artistic nudes and soft core pornography. My primary issue is as you said, a sexualized female gets a DD while artistic nude males get deleted as pornography. **shakes head** I find it interesting that the people getting upset at me are either not reading what I actually said, jumping to quite the wrong conclusions, favouriting pornography, or posting pornography. Sexualization without intercourse is soft core pornography, but still pornography none the less. Actual intercourse is hard core pornography. Clearly people have not learned what these terms actually mean. **shrugs** Personally, images like this belong in a Hustler magazine, not on Deviant Art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
its not like they dotn read it, they just flip/switch everything so they use your own words to make them work against you.
its pretty simple for me, theres noting behind this.
no other purpose then to make 12y old horny, as long as there is no "meaning" in an Artistic nude shot its just a naked girl in front of a camera, the look makes it even worst.
Greedings ;D
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've been reading everything you've had to say, and I'm fascinated by your continued harassment of this poor model, when based on your very own journal about art nudes, "The only time I have ever made such a request is when the image actually violates the site ToS. Otherwise, if I do not like the work for whatever reason (style, subject matter, etc), I simply close that image and move on."
Artistic male nudes don't get deleted. Male nudes showing erections, and violating dA policy get deleted. I've featured -many- male nudes, many of which were far more sexualized than this image.
And while you feel like this belongs in Hustler, it does NOT violate dA policy, and therefore...belongs on dA. Just because it's not art to you, doesn't mean it's not art.
So, "close the image" and move on already.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually, I am not looking at the image nor have I since I posted my initial comment. Having sexually objectifying pornography showing up where I have to see them in my message center every third time I scroll through my messages and see the Daily Deviations at the bottom grants me the right to state my objection to it. As for my replies to people, I do not have to look at the photo to reply to them since all the replies to what I have said show up in my messages. And to go one step further, I can view the entire conversation by clicking where it says "posted a reply" and then click "top" to see the original comment and all the subsequent comments without ever looking at the picture again.
I find it amusing that you just had to go scouring my gallery and journals just so you can find some excuse to attack me yet again. **chuckles** And yes, a lot of artistic male nudes have been flagged as pornography and deleted while sexually objectified women are praised and protected pornography people are erroneously calling art. My entire statement in all of this has always been the hypocrisy regarding gender bias favouritism of artistic nudity and pornography, and the practice of praising the act of turning people (especially women) into sexual objects who's only validity in "art" is sex. Clearly you missed the point altogether, like pretty much all the others who attacked me for calling the "Scorch" photograph (and many other images in her gallery) pornography.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
oh, this time there should not be any miss understanding, this time you made your point pretty accurate.
I couldn't have said it any better.
Greedings ;D
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree with you completely! Gotta love those double standards!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you for so clearly seeing my point. **smiles** Double standards need to stop. Period.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I also looked at her gallery and I think most of it is soft porn. Though there is a one shot that is stunning and artistic.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
**nods** And it's probably the same one I think is actually artistic. **chuckles** Funny that, huh? Out of all those photos, only one is actually of artistic merit (maybe two) while most of the rest is soft core pornography.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Don't waste your time trying to reason with her. I tried. She is convinced that she is right
and this is somehow porn and not art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know it just pisses me off that this poor girl has to see that on her artwork and she didn't even do anything wrong. She didn't make it a DD, and it deserves it. It's a beautiful, strong piece of art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Don't worry too much. The model strikes me as a strong confident woman who won't
be upset just by one person's disapproval. I bet she's getting a kick out of all the
talk about it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
**chuckles** Thank you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>