DAVIS AYER

I came across David Ayer work on a website called juxtapoz and found it extremely fascinating. I really like this idea of colour, he's made turned pictures of naked women into something quite surreal, which intrigues me. I can't work out if hiding the females faces makes the images less or more controversial, on one hand their identity is hidden but at the same time it feels like they're being used for them, rather than having their expressions in the image to lead the viewer know that she is happy with this. I really like effect he's used though on the image.  He does his work through double exposures which is another technic I could try. With the middle image I really like how the model has been given a camera too, it's this idea of everyone watching each other which I find interesting. With this as well, she seems to be more in control, you get this idea that she is having fun, rather than being made to stand in front of the camera, naked and uncomfortable. The colours in this image I would say are unnecessary, I don't feel they add anything to the image, I think it would be a strong image without it. 

IDEAS

Looking at my previous research so far I have come up with a few ideas…

1. I could use objects to represent private parts, such as balloons for breasts etc. This way I can include a naked body but not show their private parts, making the images have a more relaxed fun approach to them rather than a serious controversial note to them. With this I would still be able to use landscapes, but experiment with props and sorts instead. Definitely something to think about.

2. Creating a narrative, the issue I have with the images i've already taken would be that people jump to the wrong conclusion with them. Such as 'oh my god, men could have been staring at her, watching her, making her feel uncomfortable' (nonsense) however I can't stop people from thinking this, so with the help from my CP tutor, we came up with the idea that my images would have a narrative. Maybe the model is in control of the 'clicker' and takes the picture when he / she feels most comfortable. With this I would set the shoot up, so everything to do with camera settings, where the tripod is / or if I'm holding it, the landscape etc. This way, I can say that the model chose to press it, rather than I 'forced him or her' . 

Another way I could do this is by interviewing everyone I take pictures of. Ask them questions about how they feel, what it means to be naked etc. Ask them all the same ones, so there is a running theme. This way people can't make up their own 'story' of what is happening in the images etc as there will already be one with the image. 

3. I also thought about fabric concealing the body,  I was thinking either clear or black, so black conceals it completely, yet also creates a sense of shadows and light. However clear means you can still see the model nude, except there's still this image of viewing him or her. The only issue with this is that it might be hard to take the pictures not from a males perspective, but I suppose there isn't any harm in trying. 

4. I found this image by Amanda Jasnowski and I would love to try doing something like this.  I think it's absolutely stunning. Notice the arm pit hair as well, I absolutely love that the model is completely natural. 

Prue Stent

Stents 'Pink' series is something that probably isn't too relevant to my work but it really stood out to me - making me feel inspired if you wish. It's true, pink is never used enough or if it is, not very well. Prue Stent used this colour through out this serious to represent women, not just women though, the theme centres around feminism and the struggle women have with identity (see article at juxtapose). I really like this idea of creating a narrative through a colour. Red would give off the wrong connotations and blue would be stereotypically male, for example. I feel that pink was definitely the right colour. I feel like each image represents different things, like sex, struggle - in life,  calm, etc 

The females are naked, however the pink acts as a cover up, protection almost. It conceals them enough to make the image seem more innocent than it probably is. The colour being such a 'fun loving feminine' colour, makes it hard for you to speak negatively about these images in response to the girls being naked etc. 

This is something I could think about, although might be difficult now that it's already been done? Something I could try though, considering after recent feedbacks, I don't really have anything to lose. 

JANE RADSTROM

Jane Radstrom is an artist who considers her work to contemporary realism, in this series she wanted to focus on the nuances of body language and expression. 

"It is important to me that the girls are presented realistically, showing unidealized beauty and what I think of as a modern sense of confidence in candid moments, I hope that when you stand in front of a piece you can feel the presence of the person depicted.'

In my opinion I don't think she's done this, I feel as if she has done what I had unconsciously done on my shoots, created something that a man would have done. Although I like this idea of movement - something I could possible try with my own work - I feel like you don't look at the images as 'expressing candid moments' rather you look at them as if the females are teasing the males, the men are watching them, the women are putting on a show. Of course it's hard to say this is what's happening, as you can't see that from the painting, however this is how they make me feel. This is something I wouldn't want to have in my images, I don't want them to connote anything sexual and I feel that these do. 

I feel the same about the image below also, in fact I feel worse about this one. Although you can understand the female depicted is beautiful, sexual, natural etc. Which are all things women want to be portrayed as. I still feel that this is very much aimed at men. This could be used to make women uncomfortable with themselves. Although the tones of the art work are helping to decrease the sexual connotations, its the actual position of her body that stops me from straying away from this notion. You can definitely see the confidence but I wouldn't say she has successfully shown 'unidealised beauty'. 

Rineke Dijkstra

DO THESE CHILDRED LOOK VULNERABLE? 

JOCK STURGESS

Jock Sturgess is an male photographer from America who specialises in nude portraiture. Some of his work was taken at a naturist resort in California or nude beaches, does this change the way we look at his images? By adding a narrative does this make it okay?  His books have been compared to child pornography, however Sturgess stresses that he has a strong relationship with his models and the girls family, whom both consented to the images. These girls were not forced to pose for this photographs. Does this change how we look at the images? knowing that the girls felt comfortable with the photograph?

"He has photographed some subjects over a series of decades, tracing their growth into adults, as well as created images of families spanning several generations. Sturges has attracted a significant amount of controversy over his works, which some deem as crossing a boundary in using children in his erotic imagery, but he continually receives public support against such criticisms" - Artnet

I'm looking at his images to see how they would compare with mine, or if i can get any ideas from them regarding my own work.  Heres an example of his work.

The girls in the image below aren't looking directly at the camera but at the same time they also don't appear to be vulnerable. I know the image quality isn't too good but they look comfortable. It remind me of a movement before the image is taken. The obvious negative to this picture would be how young they are, but Sturgess hasn't taken pictures of them in a sexual manner. They're naked, not nude.

I think this image is worse than the one above, however I still only see it as a beautiful form/body. Her pose is too sexual, although it's a positive that she doesn't look vulnerable, i feel that Sturgess crosses this line ever so slightly.  Also I find the girl watching her rather disturbing, I get this feeling of envy or jealousy. The naked model showing off.

Why doesn't the photographer show the whole make naked? 

Kim Kardashian and all that is wrong with this world.

Kim Kardashian, the celebrity wannabe, the girl who got famous from a sex tape, the women who married Kanye and single handedly made his gold digger tune come true and for this posts purpose, the 'lady' who attempted to break the internet last night. 

Thats right, Kim K has released a set of images revealing her bottom online. I mean, this hasn't been the first time she has done this if you count her numerous half naked 'selflies' on Instagram, but for some reason these ones annoyed me more. Before you make judgement on this post, I know previously I said that 'women should be allowed to pose how they want, should be able to feel comfortable with their body' etc. But this is different and let me tell you why.  She has quite obviously done this to receive a high level of male attention, she has done this to show off and make herself feel better. By doing this she obviously feels that she's going to get an extensive amount of positive satisfaction from it and some sort of ego boost. This is the world we live in, she bizarrely thinks this is a good way to gain compliments and to make herself feel better? I just don't get it… For one, her body isn't real. The bum is fake, I mean its obvious, it's a freak of nature.. I'm still trying to work out why anyone would do that to themselves? but the only answer I can conjure up would be 'trends and our society'. Back when I was at school if a girl had a huge behind she would have to face endless abuse, 'fat ass' 'wide load' etc now it's become fashionable to inject fluid and what ever else into your arse crack and call yourself a 'real women'. These images set us females back so many places now, it goes against what the likes of Knightly and other celebrities were desperately trying to change. Knightly revealed her real breasts, Kardashian revealed a fake arse.. see the difference?

Kim claims that her reasons for this is to shove a middle finger up at the haters, but in theory she has just given them more to comment on. Paper magazine are using her laughable celebrity status to gain readers for their magazine, they're using her: "for our winter issue, we gave ourselves one assignment: Break the Internet. There is no other person that we can think of who is up to the task, than one Kim Kardashian West" they also call her "a pop culture fascination, able to generate headlines just by leaving her house" surely this shows my point clearly?  If anything I think I'm more disappointed with Cosmopolitan magazine, who claim she looks 'smoking hot',  cosmo magazine is read by girls from the ages as young as 18 to ladies over the age of 40. What kind of message are they sending out when they say that a fake ass and a women oiled up is sexy?  

How does this help my work?

How not to take a picture of a naked girl of course. I would rather look at a photograph of a woman looking slightly vulnerable but real, then someone pleased with themselves because they're fake, it just sends the wrong message out to young girls.