Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

fotos. look.

0 views
Skip to first unread message

bethbethbeth

unread,
Jul 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/17/97
to

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--------------140F3913BB9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

tell me what you think.

click on these vvvvvvv

--------------140F3913BB9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="art.htm"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="art.htm"
Content-Base: "http://www.netwave.net/members/liamna/
cafe/art/art.htm"

<BASE HREF="http://www.netwave.net/members/liamna/cafe/art/art.htm">

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "//IETF//DTD HTML//EN//2.0">
<HTML>
<! Sample Template for a HTML Document created by Aardvark Pro Version 2>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Document Title</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BACKGROUND="" BGCOLOR="#000000" TEXT="#FFFFFF" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#78009F" ALINK="#FF0000">

<BODY>
<BR>
<CENTER><IMG SRC="arthaus1.jpg" BORDER="1" WIDTH="256" HEIGHT="178" ALT="Gallery" usemap="#arthaus1"></CENTER>

<CENTER><A HREF="http://www.netwave.net/members/liamna/cafe/cafe.htm"><IMG SRC="back.gif" BORDER="0" WIDTH="98" HEIGHT="34" ALT=""></A>
<BR>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE="2">
<A HREF="http://www.netwave.net/members/liamna/cafe/art/foto.htm">fotos</A>

<A HREF="http://www.netwave.net/members/liamna/cafe/art/other.htm"> other</A>

</FONT></CENTER>

<map name="arthaus1">
<area shape="rect" coords="164,51,255,67" href="foto.htm" target="lovely fotos">
<area shape="polygon" alt="spiffy artwork" coords="18,85,30,86,3,92,3,26,115,35,116,63,9,92,9,92,9,92,9,91,9,91,9,91,9,91" href="other.htm" target="spiffy artwork">
<area shape="polygon" coords="147,7,131,0,132,98,149,103,148,5,144,5" href="nerfbatl.htm">
<area shape="default" nohref>
</map>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--------------140F3913BB9--


Geary Ritter

unread,
Jul 18, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/18/97
to lia...@netwave.net

Beth, I completely agree with all of your statements, concerning our
prudish amerikan culture. I believe them and I'm glad to hear someone
standing up. You don't find this bias in many parts of Europe, or other
parts of the world. But, although I agree whole-heartedly with your
statements, I'm not sure they are well aimed at your point.

B&w is divorced from the reality, the real-lifeness of color. That's a
given. The question is...is the artist/photographer using b&w because
he's afraid of the stark realism of a naked body in color (read
sinfulness), or because the artist isn't interested in conveying realism.
Painters don't feel that they work MUST be visibly realistic to be
"art", so why should photographers feel any differently. So much depends
on what the artist is trying to convey. Color or the lack of, is just
one of the many tools to be use to make the statement.

Plus, on a personal level, I've seen b&w nude photographs that invoked a
stronger erotic response in me than a more "true-to-life" color shot.
That probably has to do with my upbringing and the fact that my first
exposure to a naked woman (other than my mother) as a young boy involved
finding a b&w "girlie" magazine at a neighbor's house. BTW, I'm drawn to
garter belts and seamless stockings, probably for the same reason.

0 new messages