sex in art: illustration v. realism
syz...@cdsnet.net
major goofs.
My husband and I are deeply involved in individual projects of creating
sexually explicit erotic fantasy art. There has been an ongoing
debate/question between us that I hope I might be able to find some answers
to. (I wasn't absolutely sure which groups to post to, so if you think this
question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
know.)
Questions: In the expression of erotic "art" is photo realism a decidedly
better turn on than an illustrative approach? If photo realism is the choice,
what is the fan cult appeal of anime, Frazetta, Soroyama, etc.? Could it be
that there is a gender bias to one form of expression v. the other? If women
had access to hardcore porn with a romantic and intimate tone, would they be
more interested in seeking it out and viewing it? And finally, does an
intensely arousing image require xxx explicitness and does the answer matter
if you are male, female, gay or lesbian?
Thanks!
--
karynna
http://www.Pornotopia.com
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
ilr
Liar!
*ilr hisses and throws a krusty krispy treat in their general direction*
The website's Not even remotely Furry.
I was hoping this wasn't just another stupid
scam, but it appears to be just that.
tali...@concentric.net
again I have very high standards in what I like in art. And a nice ass,
if it doesnt have a nice ass then, well, its just not art.. ummm, yeah..
give me a nice piece of 'tail' to look at! Mmm.. oh yeah, the picture
does not have to be xxx to be intecsely arousing, just the intension of a
sexual act is somtimes all it takes.
Four out of five voices in my head say im not crazy...
syz...@cdsnet.net
I am sorry I have offended. As I said, I am new to this newsgroup beast and
when I made a search on erotic art, and other pertinent keywords to find the
most appropriate place to post--alt.fan.furry consistantly arose. If you know
of a better place to post...I would be very grateful. My questions are
sincere, as I am working on defining the direction of my art in a way that is
consistant with my integrity and honor and in a way that will find some
erotic, and of course, purchase appeal since I really would like to make a
living at something that is dear to my heart and that I love to do.
Sorry, again for the appearance of "scam." What would be the correct way to
avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
syz...@cdsnet.net
tali...@concentric.net wrote:
> In article <6oe8lf$jja$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, syz...@cdsnet.net says...
> > Hi! I am brand new to this part of the internet, so hope I don't commit any
> > major goofs.
> >
> > My husband and I are deeply involved in individual projects of creating
> > sexually explicit erotic fantasy art. There has been an ongoing
> > debate/question between us that I hope I might be able to find some answers
> > to. (I wasn't absolutely sure which groups to post to, so if you think this
> > question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
> > know.)
> >
> > Questions: In the expression of erotic "art" is photo realism a decidedly
> > better turn on than an illustrative approach? If photo realism is the choice,
> > what is the fan cult appeal of anime, Frazetta, Soroyama, etc.? Could it be
> > that there is a gender bias to one form of expression v. the other? If women
> > had access to hardcore porn with a romantic and intimate tone, would they be
> > more interested in seeking it out and viewing it? And finally, does an
> > intensely arousing image require xxx explicitness and does the answer matter
> > if you are male, female, gay or lesbian?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > karynna
> > http://www.Pornotopia.com
> >
> > -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> > http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
> >
> again I have very high standards in what I like in art. And a nice ass,
> if it doesnt have a nice ass then, well, its just not art.. ummm, yeah..
> give me a nice piece of 'tail' to look at! Mmm.. oh yeah, the picture
> does not have to be xxx to be intecsely arousing, just the intension of a
> sexual act is somtimes all it takes.
>
> Four out of five voices in my head say im not crazy...
Thank you very much for the reply. I am finding some people are offended by my
post and are suspicious of my intentions. Geez, this is hard getting used to a
new venue. I hope I can work this all out.
Anyway, I hope I can get a lot more willing replys like yours. My husband is
pretty committed to the idea that realism is the most enticing approach. I am
not sure if I can argue this, it is just that my art wants to take the
illustrative approach and I wonder, if I stay true to my heart, am I going to
be able to find an audience with it.
Thanks again.
Allen Kitchen
syz...@cdsnet.net wrote in article <6ofsmg$m0j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> Sorry, again for the appearance of "scam." What would be the correct way
to
> avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
>
> karynna
> http://www.Pornotopia.com
Well. For starters, find a different URL. It instantly
makes you appear as a spammer.
Allen (still unconvinced, due to the URL)
Brendan Dunn
> Sorry, again for the appearance of "scam." What would be the correct way to
> avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
Well, that's one good way right there...looking back. Most spam/scammers
hit dozens of newsgroups, and never read a single one of them. It's quite
clear that you *are* actually reading this newsgroup. And that counts for
a lot, at least to me.
> karynna
> http://www.Pornotopia.com
As I think someone else mentioned, #2: Lose the URL. It puts you in the
same boat as the hornybabes.com domains...and that's not a crowd you want
to associate with if you would like the readers here to see you as a
legitimate business.
If your intentions are indeed sincere, then welcome! Plenty of others
have entered by stepping on toes, but have quickly been forgiven :)
-Brendan
-----------------------------------------------------
Brendan Dunn -- Roho bd...@uiuc.edu
FurCode1.2:FC~F4adm A C- D+ H++ M+ P+++ R T+++ W Z- Sm RLs/vm
a c+ln d- e+ f h+ i+wf p sm#
"Organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon compounds. Biochemistry
is the study of carbon compounds that crawl."
M. Mitchell Marmel
>
> Hi! I am brand new to this part of the internet, so hope I don't commit any
> major goofs.
Nope, although some newsreaders may blank out something that's
multiple-crossposted. :)
> My husband and I are deeply involved in individual projects of creating
> sexually explicit erotic fantasy art.
I took a quick look about your site. Very nice!
> There has been an ongoing
> debate/question between us that I hope I might be able to find some answers
> to. (I wasn't absolutely sure which groups to post to, so if you think this
> question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
> know.)
Nothing comes immediately to mind.
> Questions: In the expression of erotic "art" is photo realism a decidedly
> better turn on than an illustrative approach?
Hoo! Get that one figured out consistently, and your fortune is made. :)
> If photo realism is the choice,
> what is the fan cult appeal of anime, Frazetta, Soroyama, etc.?
Welp, I can only speak through personal experience, but I've found that it's a
matter of context. Personally, I like both; I can get just as much of a
charge from a well-turned out illustration as I can from a photographic
representation. As for the context part...the best way I can explain it is
that the two don't mix well, for the most part.
Example: Artist A does a color illo of Betsy the Busty Bunny frolicking about
in the altogether, then superimposes Betsy on a photograph of a sunny meadow.
Chances are, it won't work well, if for no other reason that the camera angles
and so forth probably won't blend well and it may even appear that Betsy is
tripping the light fantastic on top of the daffodils.
Next example: A photo of porn star Hervyista Grant is superimposed on a
painted background from, say, "The Bunnie-Wunnies Visit Weird Uncle Ernie".
Even if the painted portion of the image is made to fit the photo, the
transition can, again, be jarring.
Contrariwise, Busty running about near Uncle Ernie's place and Hervyista
frolicking in a meadow could be powerful turn-ons...
> Could it be
> that there is a gender bias to one form of expression v. the other?
Almost definitely. Most porn is made by men for men, and shows it.
> If women
> had access to hardcore porn with a romantic and intimate tone, would they be
> more interested in seeking it out and viewing it?
Possibly. Romance does sell, after all. The main problem would be
distribution; I've seen precious few women shopping in adult bookstores.
> And finally, does an
> intensely arousing image require xxx explicitness
Absolutely NOT. Indeed, xxx explicitness can actually be a turn-off.
Suggestiveness can be very sexy.
> and does the answer matter
> if you are male, female, gay or lesbian?
Speaking as a hetero male, I'm going to venture a guess that it doesn't,
really. What turns someone on is going to be mostly a function of individual personality.
-MMM-
David White
magazine and a Hustler magazine. Pull out the centerfolds in each magazine
and compare. The Hustler is, in my opinion, the epitome of photorealism
with every blemish and pimple with a high degree of raunch. The Playboy, on
the other hand, is more of an illustrative style with a bit more class and
considerable amounts of airbrushing. Now here is an example of the
difference in the audience they appeal to. If you look behind the seat of an
old log truck or a bathroom stall of some greasy-spoon on the side of the
road in the middle of nowhere you will more than likely find an issue of
Hustler. On the other hand, the Playboy could conceivably be found in a
doctors waiting room. I know several guys who have pictures from Playboys
framed and hanging on their walls. I usually see Hustler pictures stapled to
the wall of a garage restroom.
I prefer artwork done in the style of Oliva (my personal favorite ;), Vargas
and Sorayama. I like the fantasy aspects of it. I prefer the distillation
of a subject to its essential beauty and form. It's like this with me; what
is the point of doing photorealistic artwork when you can buy a smut
magazine and see dozens more like it or look at the spam pics posted to most
any newsgroup. Sex in art should be a value added commodity and not just a
straight representation.
I own an Oliva print, collected her trading cards, bought her books, learned
to airbrush and met her in person. I have Vargas and Sorayama artwork and
books and I have bought Playboys on occasion. I have yet to spend a nickel
on a Hustler.
BTW, I'm a 34 year old white hetero male industrial mechanic.
Peter da Silva
Allen Kitchen <all...@blkbox.com> wrote:
>syz...@cdsnet.net wrote in article <6ofsmg$m0j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>to
>> avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
>> karynna
>> http://www.Pornotopia.com
>Well. For starters, find a different URL. It instantly
>makes you appear as a spammer.
Huh? I know at least one guy who runs a porn site. He's certainly not a
spammer... he even gave a talk at Usenix on the complexities of running
a site with such a ... creatively malicious ... user base.
I'd say, hey, chill a little. And syzygy... you ought to have a look at
some of the furry sites to get an idea of the audience. www.furnation.com
is probably the best place for you to start.
(always remember, spam is about volume, not content)
--
This is The Reverend Peter da Silva's Boring Sig File - there are no references
to Wolves, Kibo, Discordianism, or The Church of the Subgenius in this document
syz...@cdsnet.net
>
> As I think someone else mentioned, #2: Lose the URL. It puts you in the
> same boat as the hornybabes.com domains...and that's not a crowd you want
> to associate with if you would like the readers here to see you as a
> legitimate business.
As you will notice, I have made the adjustments.
>
> If your intentions are indeed sincere, then welcome! Plenty of others
> have entered by stepping on toes, but have quickly been forgiven :)
Thanks for the assistance. I hope I am learning something here.
So far, I have received some pretty interesting responses, inspite of my
"green" meanderings.
I am finding that the appeal of realism v. illustration is generated by
context- -that at least with this group, illustration almost seems preferred.
I am wondering how much of this is driven by an already heightened love for
fantasy and the desire to give the non-human--human attributes. Do you
suppose that it requires this sort of sensibility for imagination to be able
to appreciate art in illustrative context? In other words, do you suppose
that those that are more inclined to find arousal in the photograph are less
developed in their ability to travel to the nether world of imagination?
I am also hearing quite often that explicitness is not synonomous with
arousal, that indeed sometimes it interferes. Perhaps suggestion and teasing
might be preferred in the heightening of arousal.
Where the themes of our art (my husband, too), most often are given to
creatures of fancy--again, would it be appealing if in some way--if we were
able to suggest a reality, the feeling of an actual universe, that could
support such fantasy through the technique of photo-realism? Or is it better
to keep the fantasy in the realm of dreams, which is more easly accomplished
through illustrative technique?
Are people like Olivia and Soroyama successful because their technique
suggests reality far more than it does fantasy? And is anime successful
because of it's far more fantastic ability? Do you think this purely and
issue of preference? No formula holds?
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes.
If you are of legal age--and are interested--as me for my web site url.
syz...@cdsnet.net
>
> I'd say, hey, chill a little. And syzygy... you ought to have a look at
> some of the furry sites to get an idea of the audience. www.furnation.com
> is probably the best place for you to start.
>
> (always remember, spam is about volume, not content)
I have been given some great references (I have also been referred here:
http:// www.yiffco.com) to start learning about this fandom. And am taking it
seriously. I think there probably are a lot of my site clientelle that would
appreciate an introduction to this world via some awesome links. Thanks.
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
syz...@cdsnet.net
"David White" <katm...@vidnet.net> wrote:
> I felt I just had to reply to this. Go out right now and buy a Playboy
> magazine and a Hustler magazine. Pull out the centerfolds in each magazine
> and compare. The Hustler is, in my opinion, the epitome of photorealism
> with every blemish and pimple with a high degree of raunch. The Playboy, on
> the other hand, is more of an illustrative style with a bit more class and
> considerable amounts of airbrushing. Now here is an example of the
> difference in the audience they appeal to. If you look behind the seat of an
> old log truck or a bathroom stall of some greasy-spoon on the side of the
> road in the middle of nowhere you will more than likely find an issue of
> Hustler. On the other hand, the Playboy could conceivably be found in a
> doctors waiting room. I know several guys who have pictures from Playboys
> framed and hanging on their walls. I usually see Hustler pictures stapled to
> the wall of a garage restroom.
Point well taken here. I would have to say that I certainly am hoping to
attract the sophistication of the playboy audience.
>
> I prefer artwork done in the style of Oliva (my personal favorite ;), Vargas
> and Sorayama. I like the fantasy aspects of it. I prefer the distillation
> of a subject to its essential beauty and form. It's like this with me; what
> is the point of doing photorealistic artwork when you can buy a smut
> magazine and see dozens more like it or look at the spam pics posted to most
> any newsgroup. Sex in art should be a value added commodity and not just a
> straight representation.
Since my husband and I are deeply involved in portraying the fantastic--we
are not going to find a photo opportunity of an extra-terrestrial copulating
with a beautiful girl in an alien environment or an octopus satisfying a
woman, or a wolf coputlating with a swan without lots of production
costs--(which we don't have, and don't really care to have--because this is
"art" afterall). Yet, given that we might have the capacity to animalize a
human figure as does Olivia or humanize a robot as does Soroyama--is it not
their ability to transpose this fantasy into the realm of reality that is so
attractive? Would they be as successful in their endeavors if their
techniques were more painterly, illustrative and abstract? Is it not their
capacity to give vitality/reality to the fantastic, rather than reduce
reality to the dream that is really working for them here?
Given all of the above, perhaps I can refine the question: IF we are producing
art with the intent to erotically arouse and pull the viewer into a world of
emotive wonder and we are using elements that are fantastical (mythological
creatures and environments) that do not have a photographic access, is the
"technique" of photo-realism or illustration more successful in achieving this
goal? Do we respond more to the fantasy idea, if it seems real through photo-
realism rather than if it is a pencil sketch or cartoon?
HStCloud
>Date: Tue, Jul 14, 1998 11:22 EDT
>Message-id: <6oft37$mij$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> I am finding some people are offended by my
>post and are suspicious of my intentions. Geez, this is hard getting used to
>a
>new venue. I hope I can work this all out.
>
>My husband is
>pretty committed to the idea that realism is the most enticing approach. I am
>not sure if I can argue this, it is just that my art wants to take the
>illustrative approach and I wonder,
>if I stay true to my heart, am I going to
>be able to find an audience with it.
>
>Thanks again.
Hi, Karynna!
This group gets hit by lots of spammers and trolls; too often, in fact! So a
lot of times even the most innocent of questions gets bounced on way too hard.
Sorry about that, it's the nature of the beast(s). ; }
I know of at least two fantasy artists who deal with anthropomorphic characters
who do very well indeed with sales, so you must be on the right track; others
here would know of yet other names that might help.
Check out Terrie Smith's artwork; she does fantasy, sf, etc., as well as furry
erotica. And I've met Heather Bruton, who lives up in Canada -- she rarely
goes home from a convention with many pieces left!
Of course, part of the key to this group's libido might be to have recognizable
characters involved in the artwork; I rarely find myself really involved in
artwork with characters I don't know. I can admire the techniques, though, and
see what works for me and what doesn't. Odds are, what appeals to you will
also appeal to other folks, females and/or males, depending on subject matter.
Take care --
HStCloud/Joy Riddle
HStCloud
all. And sexuality/sensuality does have a lot to do with some furry art.
Cut her some slack, guys. One fen's erotica isn't another one's. Okay?
I suspect we've all been hit by spammers and trolls so much we automatically
jump to the wrong conclusion at times . . .
Take care --
Harry/HStCloud/Joy Riddle
WitchCat 1
realistic approach, yet at the same time there are strong adherents of more
stylized illustrations, such as anime. The trick to erottica is to do a very
moving piece yet try to do it as tastefully as possible.
The thing to do is to find your style that you are the most comfortable with
and begin to circulate it on the market. At the same time, keep a close eye on
what is popular at the moment and perhaps incorporate some of popular appeal
into your work as well.
The name of the game in commercial art is adaptability. Don't hesitate to
change your style or subject matter based on demand.
WitchCat
Amy 'Amara' Pronovost
by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
To throw my 2 cents in, I don't do Erotica, but I respect well done
stuff.
Iprefer Illustarted and non photorealistic /implied/ erotica to 'show
me the money, honey' kind of stuff.
I like leaving it up to my imagination.
Amy :)
HStCloud
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 13:09 EDT
>Message-id: <6oinp4$3ks$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
>
> In other words, do you suppose that those that are more inclined to find
arousal in the photograph are less developed in their ability to travel to the
nether world of imagination?
>
Probably . . . and photgraphs can be reworked, too, until they become the
fantastic, but still seem possible if improbable.
>I am also hearing quite often that explicitness is not synonomous with
arousal, that indeed sometimes it interferes. Perhaps suggestion and teasing
might be preferred in the heightening of arousal.>
Less is more in a lot of people's cases of viewing pleasure . . . Suggestion
and teasing helps my fantasizing a lot!
>Where the themes of our art (my husband, too), most often are given to
creatures of fancy--again, would it be appealing if in some way--if we were
able to suggest a reality, the feeling of an actual universe, that could
support such fantasy through the technique of photo-realism? Or is it better to
keep the fantasy in the realm of dreams, which is more easly accomplished
through illustrative technique?
>
Both ways of illustrating appeal to different people; the problem may be in
finding the right people that your art appeals to . . . I do both cartoony and
realistic art, and both can sell well or fail dismally, depending on which
audience views it -- and that's not just for erotica, either! Recognizable
characters (say, Bettie Page) in certain manner of dress or undress might be
more one person's preference than another's . . .
>Are people like Olivia and Soroyama successful because their technique
suggests reality far more than it does fantasy? And is anime successful because
of it's far more fantastic ability? Do you think this purely an issue of
preference? No formula holds?>
The formula that works for one artist might not work for another; and Olivia
and Soroyama do idealize/stylize their work to a certain extent. It's not
like you could confuse Olivia with Frazetta, for instance! Or Soroyama with
Vallejo . . .
I think it just depends on if the piece finds the right, appreciative audience;
the problem is finding said audience and getting them to know what they want is
out there to be found!
HStCloud
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 13:52 EDT
>Message-id: <6oiq97$898$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
>
>IF we are producing art with the intent to erotically arouse and pull the
viewer into a world of emotive wonder and we are using elements that are
fantastical (mythological creatures and environments) that do not have a
photographic access, is the
"technique" of photo-realism or illustration more successful in achieving this
goal? Do we respond more to the fantasy idea, if it seems real through
photo-realism rather than if it is a pencil sketch or cartoon?
>
I prefer a realistic approach, but I also like some definitely artistic looking
pieces, too.
I'm not sure there is a concrete answer to your question; everyone has their
own sexual turn-ons, and it can change at any given moment . . . particularly
in the fantasy/sf categories . . .
Richard de Wylfin
marm...@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu wrote:
~syz...@cdsnet.net wrote:
...
~
~> And finally, does an
~> intensely arousing image require xxx explicitness
~
~Absolutely NOT. Indeed, xxx explicitness can actually be a turn-off.
~Suggestiveness can be very sexy.
Consider Margaret Carspecken's ostensibly G-rated pics of Marsha
Redfox. They're sexier than 99% of so-called "furry erotica" that
I have seen.
@vidnet.net David White
>
>Point well taken here. I would have to say that I certainly am hoping to
>attract the sophistication of the playboy audience.
>
I sould have looked at your site before replying ( I tried but couldn't
connect last night) to see examples of what you were refering to. With just
the brief tour I took on your site from what I have seen, I gotta say wow!
Here is my spin on your site, hate me if you must. You are presenting
Playboy quality artwork in a Hustler-esq format. Pornotopia? Come on, it
sounds like any other smut site I wouldn't go near. The words "Bazarre Sex"
will repel me instantly. Honestly, if I hadn't come across your posting on
this newsgroup and came across a link to your web site, I would have
considered it just another trailer-trash porn site and passed it by. I
think your husband's artwork diserves better than that. "The Offering" or
"Venus" coud easily be hung next to an Olivia or Sorayama and would not be
out of place. "The Sperm Queen" or "The Unit" or severial others could be
printed in a coffee table book with other surrealists and not stand out as
amaturish at all. I also seem to remember your husband's work appearing in
Airbrush Action magazine. I also hate to say it but it would be very
unlikely I would buy a membership to view your site and its contents. I
would rather be presented with a site that offers prints for sale and
original artwork. But thats just me.
To give life to that which does not exist is the essence of art, anything
else is just a photograph. Sorayama's robots would be no more impressive
than a comic book illistration if the chrome didn't shine as real chrome
does or if you didn't feel as though you could reach out and touch her metal
shoulder. It makes an impression. Olivia's work would be nowhere near as
popular if her subjects didn't look as though they were real and breathing.
Now don't get me wrong, the illistrative type or style has its place too, it
just doen't have the same impact. They just tickle two different parts of
the brain. You look at a Sorayama and think "wow, that looks so real"
whereas looking at a Nigel you think "that's a really cool drawing"
>Given all of the above, perhaps I can refine the question: IF we are
producing
>art with the intent to erotically arouse and pull the viewer into a world
of
>emotive wonder and we are using elements that are fantastical (mythological
>creatures and environments) that do not have a photographic access, is the
>"technique" of photo-realism or illustration more successful in achieving
this
>goal? Do we respond more to the fantasy idea, if it seems real through
photo-
>realism rather than if it is a pencil sketch or cartoon?
There is the essence of the discussion, which will get the lonely computer
nerds to plunk down their hard earned cash at your site, the realistic (or
photorealistic) air brush paintings similar to Olivia's or Vargas or will it
be the cartoon like Anime or comics style? In my estimation, neather. Buy a
smut photo archive from someone, add a Russian and Phillipino mail order
bride service, give away cool prizes and then spam the hell out of it. Be
sure to advertise in Hustler and staple your site's web address up in every
truckstop and garage in America. You'll make millions.
Then take your and your husband's art and put up a site that offers a full
color online catalog for $9.95 (refundable with a purchase over $50) and
sell prints and originals.
That, of course, is my two cents. Spend them wisely. :)
_____________________________________________________
David White aka Kathmandu
Visit my web page at http://www.vidnet.net/~katmandu Remove (x) from my
email address to reply or click here katm...@vidnet.net
"Bigger sword for more head splitting action" Actual quote from a Warrior
Nun action figure ad. I thought rulers were their weapons of choice.
Herman Miller
>I am finding that the appeal of realism v. illustration is generated by
>context- -that at least with this group, illustration almost seems preferred.
>I am wondering how much of this is driven by an already heightened love for
>fantasy and the desire to give the non-human--human attributes. Do you
>suppose that it requires this sort of sensibility for imagination to be able
>to appreciate art in illustrative context? In other words, do you suppose
>that those that are more inclined to find arousal in the photograph are less
>developed in their ability to travel to the nether world of imagination?
I think realism in the context of fantasy is important; rodent-people
should have the right kind of teeth, for instance. But I don't mind if
certain attractive features (bright eyes, bushy tails) are exaggerated for
an artistic effect. I even prefer looking at pictures of elves over humans
because of their exaggerated features. Large eyes in particular can be very
expressive. (How many artists draw sexy shrews and moles with accurately
tiny eyes, when wide-eyed rabbits are so much more appealing?) I think the
important thing is to *suggest* realism rather than imitating it perfectly;
for instance, to give fur the appearance of softness without drawing every
little hair. I don't prefer the more cartoonish styles personally, though
others obviously do.
--
alien/fairy/furry art--> +----------<http://www.io.com/~hmiller/>----------
Thryomanes /"If all Printers were determin'd not to print any
(Herman Miller) / thing till they were sure it would offend no body,
moc.oi @ rellimh <-/ there would be very little printed." -Ben Franklin
When sending email, please include the password GERBIL in the Subject line
to avoid the junk mail filter (http://www.io.com/~hmiller/junkmail.html).
mentor
(I wasn't absolutely sure which groups to post to, so if you think this
question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
know.)
try alt.binairies.pictures.fantasy-sci-fi
greetz
Da Mentor
syz...@cdsnet.net
"Allen Kitchen" <all...@blkbox.com> wrote:
>
>
> syz...@cdsnet.net wrote in article <6ofsmg$m0j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> > Sorry, again for the appearance of "scam." What would be the correct way
> to
> > avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
> >
> > karynna
> > http://www.Pornotopia.com
>
> Well. For starters, find a different URL. It instantly
> makes you appear as a spammer.
>
>
As you suggest, I have dropped the URL on my signature. "Pornotopia" however
is the beauty of the name, and will not be changed. But in keeping with what
I am rapidly learning--the site's url will no longer be offered freely with
out a specific request for it.
Thank you.
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
If you are
syz...@cdsnet.net
pe...@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) wrote:
> In article <01bdaf41$88849fd0$8f301bc6@spgspare>,
> Allen Kitchen <all...@blkbox.com> wrote:
> >syz...@cdsnet.net wrote in article <6ofsmg$m0j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >> Sorry, again for the appearance of "scam." What would be the correct way
> >to
> >> avoid this appearance? Please indulge my innocence here.
>
> >> karynna
> >> http://www.Pornotopia.com
>
> >Well. For starters, find a different URL. It instantly
> >makes you appear as a spammer.
>
> spammer... he even gave a talk at Usenix on the complexities of running
> a site with such a ... creatively malicious ... user base.
>
> some of the furry sites to get an idea of the audience. www.furnation.com
> is probably the best place for you to start.
>
> (always remember, spam is about volume, not content)
Thanks for the support here. I suppose the site name is a little shocking. Oh
well. It is exactly what the site is about. However, I have really
contemplated if I should cancel this post--since the topic has gotten so much
attention.
I am learning how this newsgroup thing works and am trying really hard to
avoid the mention of the URL any further--Unless someone specifically
requests it. And the content--while I have learned is only semi-furry is,
forgive me for tooting my horn but, it's the truth--great stuff!
Went to Las Vegas, the Tropicana where we exhibited at an annual Erotic Art
Show. Got great response!
syz...@cdsnet.net
tali...@concentric.net wrote:
> In article <6oe8lf$jja$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, syz...@cdsnet.net says...
> > major goofs.
> >
> > debate/question between us that I hope I might be able to find some answers
> > question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
> > know.)
> >
> > what is the fan cult appeal of anime, Frazetta, Soroyama, etc.? Could it be
> > that there is a gender bias to one form of expression v. the other? If women
> > had access to hardcore porn with a romantic and intimate tone, would they be
> > intensely arousing image require xxx explicitness and does the answer matter
> > if you are male, female, gay or lesbian?
> >
> > http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
> >
> again I have very high standards in what I like in art. And a nice ass,
> if it doesnt have a nice ass then, well, its just not art.. ummm, yeah..
> give me a nice piece of 'tail' to look at! Mmm.. oh yeah, the picture
> does not have to be xxx to be intecsely arousing, just the intension of a
> sexual act is somtimes all it takes.
>
> Four out of five voices in my head say im not crazy...
Thanks, I am finding quite a variety of response. Really glad to hear from
the alt.art group too. It really does seem to be a matter of context and
preferrence. The furry group has a decided bias for the illustrative
technique-- this is understandable given what their ulimate passions and
purposes are. Such fantasy cannot be found in the realm of realism--good
illustration, yes--but, believably real? no. The men seem divided on
softcore/hardcore and the women generally find the softcore more appealing.
The artists seem to feel approaching realism is part of the narrative task of
a fantasy piece.
I guess, our challenge as a site and as artists is finding a way to make
ourselves visible to the people who will truly appreciate our work. We are
getting great response--on a consistant level. But we know that our exposure,
so far, has been very limited--which makes the response we are getting very
encouraging. We have found that our fantasy themes are only semi-furry, and
so there must be a finer niche to approach.
To the point of the question. Sagemonn, my husband, loves to do the fantasy
thing with the realistic edge and hardcore. He is good at it and it is what
drives his crank. We realize there are not many people who want to hang this
stuff on their wall, but there are lots of other ways to appreciate the work
that is less intrusive to a person's public sensibilities. I, on the other
hand, enjoy a more romantic softcore illustrative approach-- I wondered if my
difference of approach would be a destructively competing objective to the
site. I think because of the great response I have received from this fandom,
I am deciding to believe that being true to my heart will only add diversity
and interest to the site--and only the people will tell.
Hail the furry club for the tremendous feedback! Sweet Journeys to you all.
>
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
If you are
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
syz...@cdsnet.net
am...@rat.org (Amy 'Amara' Pronovost) wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:52:39 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
Sorry it has found offense. Some are good natured and found the "drivel"
quite stimulating. Others, as you suggest, are incensed. Good for you! I like
a little controversy.
>
> To throw my 2 cents in, I don't do Erotica, but I respect well done
> stuff.
>
> Iprefer Illustarted and non photorealistic /implied/ erotica to 'show
> me the money, honey' kind of stuff.
>
> I like leaving it up to my imagination.
>
> Amy :)
I really appreciate your 2 cents. I am finding some pretty consistant
patterns to the responses--one being that the women do seem to prefer
suggestion rather than explicit reality. I am quite pleased and encouraged. I
think as the body of my work grows, there may be a good deal of people
(women) who will find some fun and entertainment from my work. This little
questionare as really helped me to find confindence is persuing the interest
of my heart "and" making it public.
Thank you! Sweet Journeys.
syz...@cdsnet.net
"David White" <katmandu (x)@vidnet.net> wrote:
>
> I sould have looked at your site before replying ( I tried but couldn't
> connect last night) to see examples of what you were refering to. With just
> the brief tour I took on your site from what I have seen, I gotta say wow!
Thank you!
>
> Here is my spin on your site, hate me if you must. You are presenting
> Playboy quality artwork in a Hustler-esq format. Pornotopia? Come on, it
> sounds like any other smut site I wouldn't go near. The words "Bazarre Sex"
> will repel me instantly. Honestly, if I hadn't come across your posting on
> this newsgroup and came across a link to your web site, I would have
> considered it just another trailer-trash porn site and passed it by. I
> think your husband's artwork diserves better than that. "The Offering" or
> "Venus" coud easily be hung next to an Olivia or Sorayama and would not be
> out of place. "The Sperm Queen" or "The Unit" or severial others could be
> printed in a coffee table book with other surrealists and not stand out as
> amaturish at all. I also seem to remember your husband's work appearing in
> Airbrush Action magazine. I also hate to say it but it would be very
> unlikely I would buy a membership to view your site and its contents. I
> would rather be presented with a site that offers prints for sale and
> original artwork. But thats just me.
It is you, but I am sure you represent a "silent" common mind. We have been
learning lots of things about ourselves and approach. I thank you much for
your opinion. It and others are really helping to guide us in our decisions.
We love what we do as artists and hope we can offer it up to the public in a
way that will offer some enjoyment--so approach and "tone" are of the utmost
importance. It has really been difficult to get feedback--especially from
those that arrive and leave. The questions--why--just can't be answered
adequately by log files.
>
>
> There is the essence of the discussion, which will get the lonely computer
> nerds to plunk down their hard earned cash at your site, the realistic (or
> photorealistic) air brush paintings similar to Olivia's or Vargas or will it
> be the cartoon like Anime or comics style? In my estimation, neather. Buy a
> smut photo archive from someone, add a Russian and Phillipino mail order
> bride service, give away cool prizes and then spam the hell out of it. Be
> sure to advertise in Hustler and staple your site's web address up in every
> truckstop and garage in America. You'll make millions.
> Then take your and your husband's art and put up a site that offers a full
> color online catalog for $9.95 (refundable with a purchase over $50) and
> sell prints and originals.
>
> That, of course, is my two cents. Spend them wisely. :)
Thank you very much! Sweet Journeys to you.
>
> _____________________________________________________
>
> David White aka Kathmandu
> Visit my web page at http://www.vidnet.net/~katmandu Remove (x) from my
> email address to reply or click here katm...@vidnet.net
>
> "Bigger sword for more head splitting action" Actual quote from a Warrior
> Nun action figure ad. I thought rulers were their weapons of choice.
>
> >
> >--
> >karynna
> >erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
> >mythological, and spiritual themes
> >
> >-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> >http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
>
>
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
If you are
syz...@cdsnet.net
>
> Check out Terrie Smith's artwork; she does fantasy, sf, etc., as well as furry
> erotica. And I've met Heather Bruton, who lives up in Canada -- she rarely
> goes home from a convention with many pieces left!
Will do this. I realize not having a full understanding of this group as been
a bit of a problem for me. What is exciting is that the introduction to what
the furry people are about is exciting and very..."inspiring!"
>
> Of course, part of the key to this group's libido might be to have recognizable
> characters involved in the artwork; I rarely find myself really involved in
> artwork with characters I don't know. I can admire the techniques, though, and
> see what works for me and what doesn't. Odds are, what appeals to you will
> also appeal to other folks, females and/or males, depending on subject matter.
As you have suggested, before...true to my heart. Let the chips fall where
they may. I will never know unless I do the work and put it out there.
Preferrence is the key to diversity and imagination is the key to creativity.
If they find a way to collide and make constuctive synergy happen--then
humanity is blessed. But how can such collisions occur unless the force of
the soul takes a leap of faith and expresses the depths of it passion?
>
> Take care --
>
> HStCloud/Joy Riddle
Sweet Journeys always!
syz...@cdsnet.net
Thank you for your comments! I am finding some very common responses and feel
very encouraged by them. I am learning tons and I really appreciate everyone's
feedback--both positive and negative.
Best to all!
syz...@cdsnet.net
mentor <da.m...@usa.net> wrote:
> syz...@cdsnet.net wrote:
>
> (I wasn't absolutely sure which groups to post to, so if you think this
> question might fair better some where else in particular, please let me
> know.)
>
>
> greetz
>
> Da Mentor
>
>
Thank you!
Joe Rosales
> Honestly, if I hadn't come across your posting on
> this newsgroup and came across a link to your web site, I would have
> considered it just another trailer-trash porn site and passed it by.
> I think your husband's artwork diserves better than that.
I concur. But it seems likely that the only models Kary and her husband
had to work off of was, unfortunately, other porno sites, which is what
their site looks like. I do not know enough about their business to
dictate, but it might be more appealing if it was set up more like a
fine art site -- less hard sell and whiz-bang verbiage, more dreamy
prose to match the imagery. An upscale approach would at least make
their site *feel* different, and product differentiation is the first
step to outselling your competitors.
> There is the essence of the discussion, which will get the lonely
> computer nerds to plunk down their hard earned cash at your site,...
Ha ha! A mercenary approach, for sure. But that would make this site
the same as any other. I think they might be on a better approach,
looking to make their site a destination instead of a stopover. And
"quality is the best possible sales gimmick."
I have to say, I find the whole question of "realistic vs illustration"
in erotica to be a philosophical point worthy of contemplation. For
"furry" stuff I would have almost certainly said "illo", but after a few
additional thoughts and some looking around (like the stuff at
http://www.fang.or.jp/~sil-fish/) I'm not so sure. The proponderance of
"real" erotica and pornography -- an iffy term, considering the
incredible amount of staging inherent in the product -- may simply be
due to its ease of production; much the same way the proponderance of
furry art instead of "real" furries is due to the fact that "real"
furries are much harder to make, build, photoprocess, etc.
After all, it's not as though Bob Sixpack has some sort of mental
barrier that prevents him from processing realistic commercials with
talking iguanas or snowboarding tigers. And witness the popularity of
Jessica Rabbit imagery when "Roger Rabbit" came out -- remember the
Playboy cover? I have to wonder if the use of the inherent exoticness
of anthros could just as easily be used in photo-type erotica to rope a
mundane audience. Perhaps Karynna will keep us informed on the
production of any "furry" material on her part, and its subsequent
impact (if any) on hits and sales.
Kary:
> But how can such collisions occur unless the force of
> the soul takes a leap of faith and expresses the depths of it passion?
You should write more stuff like that for your site.
> We love what we do as artists and hope we can offer it up to the
> public in a way that will offer some enjoyment--so approach and "tone"
> are of the utmost importance.
Well, pornography is the most visceral of all artwork. It's gotta come
from the heart! Or, well, some major body part.
-- Joe
syz...@cdsnet.net
>
> I concur. But it seems likely that the only models Kary and her husband
> had to work off of was, unfortunately, other porno sites, which is what
> their site looks like.
Actually, most of the images have been created using ourselves as resource
(that's me on the index page and through out). The xxx themes my husband
creates to are what he enjoys doing. It is not contrived to sell (although we
would not object to making a comfortable living off of this)--he enjoys the
explicit nature of his creations and would feel compromised as an artist if
he had to soften it up in order to sell. He told me this weekend that he
would prefer to give it all up (he can get dramatic--although he really means
it) rather than compromise his heart around this venture. If we can't find an
audience for our love--then so be it.
I do not know enough about their business to
> dictate, but it might be more appealing if it was set up more like a
> fine art site -- less hard sell and whiz-bang verbiage, more dreamy
> prose to match the imagery.
This is certainly a thought that has been considered all along. And I have to
say it has been a point of contention a time or two as my husband and I try to
make decisions on the best approach to make a viable presence on the internet.
My husband is of the opinion that our most potential market group is the
hardcore porn groupy. And that our task is to re-educate and lift
consciousness with this group. I believe that the "quality" client is going
to come from other places--science fiction, fantasy, anime, fetish and art
lovers. The problem is that the xxx themes are not going to go away and we
need to be responsible about not making ourselves too available to the
juvenile group. We are like no other erotic art site that we have found. Most
"art" sites we have come accross are of a "sensuous" nature--not exotically
hardcore. In truth, we are a brand new beast: serious art that indeed has the
flavor of hardcore porn. Finding a way to make a presence with the most
appreciative audience has been the greatest challenge of all (and having
someone buy our work "is" the highest of compliments).
An upscale approach would at least make
> their site *feel* different, and product differentiation is the first
> step to outselling your competitors.
We thought we were doing this. Apparently, from some points of veiw--we have
missed the mark.
>
> > There is the essence of the discussion, which will get the lonely
> > computer nerds to plunk down their hard earned cash at your site,...
>
> Ha ha! A mercenary approach, for sure. But that would make this site
> the same as any other. I think they might be on a better approach,
> looking to make their site a destination instead of a stopover. And
> "quality is the best possible sales gimmick."
Again, this has been our attempt--Originality and Quality are our major
offerings and this is what we try to emphasize. The fact that it seems to be
that we are missing the mark here would suggest that some seroius reassesments
need to be made.
>
> I have to say, I find the whole question of "realistic vs illustration"
> in erotica to be a philosophical point worthy of contemplation. For
> "furry" stuff I would have almost certainly said "illo", but after a few
> additional thoughts and some looking around (like the stuff at
> http://www.fang.or.jp/~sil-fish/) I'm not so sure.
I have checked this site out via another referral and found it very
inspiring. I do have some sketches that I think are genuinely furry although
not at all erotic.
The proponderance of
> "real" erotica and pornography -- an iffy term, considering the
> incredible amount of staging inherent in the product -- may simply be
> due to its ease of production; much the same way the proponderance of
> furry art instead of "real" furries is due to the fact that "real"
> furries are much harder to make, build, photoprocess, etc.
>
> After all, it's not as though Bob Sixpack has some sort of mental
> barrier that prevents him from processing realistic commercials with
> talking iguanas or snowboarding tigers. And witness the popularity of
> Jessica Rabbit imagery when "Roger Rabbit" came out -- remember the
> Playboy cover? I have to wonder if the use of the inherent exoticness
> of anthros could just as easily be used in photo-type erotica to rope a
> mundane audience. Perhaps Karynna will keep us informed on the
> production of any "furry" material on her part, and its subsequent
> impact (if any) on hits and sales.
I will certainly keep you posted, most of all I am cruising the sites that
have been referred to me by your gracious group and intend to provide my
current clients with a list of links introducing them to the wonder of your
fandom. I think it will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Kary:
> > But how can such collisions occur unless the force of
> > the soul takes a leap of faith and expresses the depths of it passion?
>
> You should write more stuff like that for your site.
I certainly would love to, it seems to me that the general web cruiser is not
inclined to reading however. I felt that it wouldn't be noticed let alone
appreciated.
>
> > We love what we do as artists and hope we can offer it up to the
> > public in a way that will offer some enjoyment--so approach and "tone"
> > are of the utmost importance.
>
> Well, pornography is the most visceral of all artwork. It's gotta come
> from the heart! Or, well, some major body part.
:)!
Sweet Journeys of the sincerest sort.
x,
Karynna
>
> -- Joe
>
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
If you are
Dale Farmer
: In article <MPG.1014bf404...@news.fysh.org>,
: tali...@concentric.net wrote:
:> In article <6oe8lf$jja$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, syz...@cdsnet.net says...
:> Personally I like anything that has a clean profesional look, but then
:> again I have very high standards in what I like in art. And a nice ass,
:> if it doesnt have a nice ass then, well, its just not art.. ummm, yeah..
:> give me a nice piece of 'tail' to look at! Mmm.. oh yeah, the picture
:> does not have to be xxx to be intecsely arousing, just the intension of a
:> sexual act is somtimes all it takes.
:>
:> Four out of five voices in my head say im not crazy...
: Thanks, I am finding quite a variety of response. Really glad to hear from
: the alt.art group too. It really does seem to be a matter of context and
: preferrence. The furry group has a decided bias for the illustrative
: technique-- this is understandable given what their ulimate passions and
: purposes are. Such fantasy cannot be found in the realm of realism--good
: illustration, yes--but, believably real? no. The men seem divided on
: softcore/hardcore and the women generally find the softcore more appealing.
: The artists seem to feel approaching realism is part of the narrative task of
: a fantasy piece.
I find that the appeal of pictures varies with both mood, alone
versus with others, and what my desires of the moment are. If I am
looking for a piece I can hang in the living room, where random guests
and family will see it, I avoid anything remotely pornographic or erotic.
Although one of my mothers college roommates was over to socialise and
took mom to task for having satanistic pictures on the wall. I had the
cover art from the Mecedes Lackey 'Chrome Circle' novel on the wall.
It had a dragon in it. sheesh.
For the bedroom, a much more private place that only close
friends, close family, and the cleaning service see, an erotic piece
might me appropriate. If I am in a 'frustrated' state, then something
harder might be apprieciated, Although I find that for me personally,
a well written text story with complementry illustrations provides
the better long term enjoyment. Any image that I look at after a while
gets, umm 'stale', in my mind, and not very exciting anymore. Pinups,
male and female, MM, MF, FF, whatever... All of these are appealing
at various times and moods. But badly drawn art, erotic or not, is
not appealling to me.
As with everything else, people are funny critters, perfectly
capable of holding mutually incompatible beliefs and behaving strangely.
Make the art that you want to see, and put it out there. If it fails
to produce adequate income, then you will have ot "Get a day job", to
support your preferred art style. What that day job is, whether it
is flipping burgers or drawing erotica/porn for the paying market is
not terribly relevant. The masters of the rennissance made their
day to day living by doing the moral equivelent of taking snapshots
of people and places. The Mona Lisa is probably the best known
example of the craft. Do what you want, but avoid starvation while
doing it.
--Dale (male-het)
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dale Farmer Dale at accessdotdigex.net Personal opinion. Sudbury, Mass.
"Free the ISO 9000!" --Nomi Burstein
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amy 'Amara' Pronovost
by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
>In article <35af292e...@news.foxnet.net>,
> am...@rat.org (Amy 'Amara' Pronovost) wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:52:39 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
>> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
>
>Sorry it has found offense. Some are good natured and found the "drivel"
>quite stimulating. Others, as you suggest, are incensed. Good for you! I like
>a little controversy.
>
Nono, no offence.. that's just my reply header. :) Nothing to be
alarmed by ;)
Andrija Popovic
Pronovost) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 1998 02:46:57 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
>
> >In article <35af292e...@news.foxnet.net>,
> > am...@rat.org (Amy 'Amara' Pronovost) wrote:
> >> On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:52:39 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
> >> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
> >
> >Sorry it has found offense. Some are good natured and found the "drivel"
> >quite stimulating. Others, as you suggest, are incensed. Good for you! I like
> >a little controversy.
> >
>
> Nono, no offence.. that's just my reply header. :) Nothing to be
> alarmed by ;)
"I'm ok, we're ok, everyone's ok. How are you?" :)
Andrian
--
Andrija Popovic (vu...@concentric.net)
http://www.concentric.net/~vuk6/index.html
"Dreams do not vanish, so long as people do not abandon them."
--Phantom F. Harlock _Arcadia of My Youth_
David White
>(that's me on the index page and through out).
I believe he was refereing to the model or pattern for the web site. You are
very beautiful BTW.
The xxx themes my husband
>creates to are what he enjoys doing. It is not contrived to sell (although
we
>would not object to making a comfortable living off of this)--he enjoys the
>explicit nature of his creations and would feel compromised as an artist if
>he had to soften it up in order to sell. He told me this weekend that he
>would prefer to give it all up (he can get dramatic--although he really
means
>it) rather than compromise his heart around this venture. If we can't find
an
>audience for our love--then so be it.
Do not change anything in your art!!!!!! Doing something just to make money
without the love of doing it is just a job. We all know how inspired we get
at work, ". . .would you like fries with that?" :) There is an audience for
your work, trust me on this.
I just don't think I would ever give my credit card number to a site called
"Pornotopia" with the words "Bizzare XXX hardcore " in the title. Nope,
ain't gonna happen.
>
>I do not know enough about their business to
>> dictate, but it might be more appealing if it was set up more like a
>> fine art site -- less hard sell and whiz-bang verbiage, more dreamy
>> prose to match the imagery.
>
I agree. Perhaps maybe using both approaches may work. Have two gateways to
the art archive, one for the Joe Sixpacks of the world with porno sex for
sale and another gateway titled something like " The Erotic and Eclectic Art
of Sagemonn" or some other similar title. Present it as a more "fine art"
site with links to other similar art sites maybe offering prints and
originals for sale. Get exposure through discussions on various newsgroups
with samples and questions. Post some artwork on newsgroups such as
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.art.pin-up or alt.binaries.fine-art, but avoid
spamming like the plague. If you have a legitimate post always use the
abreaviation of the group's name like ABPEAP in the subject line. You will
not be ignored.
>This is certainly a thought that has been considered all along. And I have
to
>say it has been a point of contention a time or two as my husband and I try
to
>make decisions on the best approach to make a viable presence on the
internet.
>
>My husband is of the opinion that our most potential market group is the
>hardcore porn groupy. And that our task is to re-educate and lift
>consciousness with this group.
Good luck. I would tend to think the average porn groupy is going to look
at your site and go, "that's that artsey craftsy paintin' shit, I want
pictures of real women! Too bad they ain't got dirty pictures on my AOL"
I believe that the "quality" client is going
>to come from other places--science fiction, fantasy, anime, fetish and art
>lovers.
That is my point exactly.
The problem is that the xxx themes are not going to go away and we
>need to be responsible about not making ourselves too available to the
>juvenile group.
And I applaud your attitude.
We are like no other erotic art site that we have found. Most
>"art" sites we have come accross are of a "sensuous" nature--not exotically
>hardcore. In truth, we are a brand new beast: serious art that indeed has
the
>flavor of hardcore porn.
You haven't been to enough furry websites, obviously. ;) There are quite a
lot of artists out there who take exception to the words "hardcore porn" no
matter how explicit their work is. It seems when you go to the trouble of
doing beautifully painted and detailed artwork, calling it "porn" degrades
it to the level of a scribbling on a bathroom wall, to me anyway. H.R.
Gieger is a respected fine artist but a lot of the work he does is sexually
themed and in a lot of cases could be considered "hardcore porn." Few
associate his name with porn in anyway though. Which sounds better? Sagemonn
the Pornographer or Sagemonn the Erotic Artist. The first one sounds like a
photographer for Juggs Magazine.
Finding a way to make a presence with the most
>appreciative audience has been the greatest challenge of all (and having
>someone buy our work "is" the highest of compliments).
Ok, so how much is a print of "The Offering" ?
>
> An upscale approach would at least make
>> their site *feel* different, and product differentiation is the first
>> step to outselling your competitors.
Amen brother!
>
>We thought we were doing this. Apparently, from some points of veiw--we
have
>missed the mark.
Go to Yahoo or Alta-Vista and search for the words "hardcore porn" or
"bazzare XXX" and see the company you keep. If the site count is less than
10,000 I would be very suprised.
>>
>> I have to say, I find the whole question of "realistic vs illustration"
>> in erotica to be a philosophical point worthy of contemplation. For
>> "furry" stuff I would have almost certainly said "illo", but after a few
>> additional thoughts and some looking around (like the stuff at
>> http://www.fang.or.jp/~sil-fish/) I'm not so sure.
I am in the realistic camp myself, I strive for it in my sculpture and
computer art. But then I can get a "woody" from looking at a really well
done erotic cartoon too. To me it depends on the subject and how well done
it is. They each seem to tickle different parts of my brain but can achieve
the same result.
>>
>
>I certainly would love to, it seems to me that the general web cruiser is
not
>inclined to reading however. I felt that it wouldn't be noticed let alone
>appreciated.
Catering to the lowest common denominator usually results in only having the
lowest common denominator show up at your door.
BTW I love the sculptures, they are fantastic!!!!! (of course, being a
sculptor may have influenced me somewhat)
_____________________________________________________
David White aka Kathmandu
Visit my web page at http://www.vidnet.net/~katmandu or visit
http://www.db.yiffco.com and look under White, David . Remove (x) from my
Doodles
A lot of stuff. But that's not why I'm here.
I have heard much about this website, but I haven't been able to
locate the part of the thread listing the address. Donde esta?
Unca Spooge, curious [pink with purple polka dots]
Joe Rosales
>> husband had to work off of was, unfortunately, other porno sites,
>> which is what their site looks like.
>
I didn't mean the art, I meant the format of the site. The original
interface looked typical for a hardcore site, which was not what I
thought you were shooting for.
>> An upscale approach would at least make their
>> site *feel* different, and product differentiation is the first
>> step to outselling your competitors.
>
> We thought we were doing this. Apparently, from some points of veiw--
> we have missed the mark.
Actually, you've made changes in the site since you first posted here,
and took out some of the hard sell -- I approve. It certainly makes it
easier to take, and I think the work should sell itself.
David:
> Do not change anything in your art!!!!!!
I agree. (Without quite as many exclaimation points.)
> I just don't think I would ever give my credit card number to a site
> called "Pornotopia" with the words "Bizzare XXX hardcore " in the
> title. Nope, ain't gonna happen.
I think the "erotic artwork" approach would net more and higher-class
clients in the end. You'll get a fair number of the regular
ham-and-egger porn consumers anyway; but if you can get a clientele
that's not being served by the zillions of identical hardcore sites out
there, you have the potential to outstrip them (so to speak) in sales.
After all, "Swank" may sell a okay, but it doesn't sell anything like
Playboy or Boris Vallejo's calendars. If you could get *those* people
to buy memberships...
> Good luck. I would tend to think the average porn groupy is going to
> look at your site and go, "that's that artsey craftsy paintin' shit,
> I want pictures of real women!
I dunno. Is there such a thing as an "average" porn consumer? With the
numerous inconclusive discussions here about the existence of the
"average" furry fan, I think she might as well shoot for an upscale
market as any other. And as I stated previously, the core craftsmanship
and exoticness of the approach might (like Vallejo's work) net consumers
who wouldn't ordinarily buy flat-out porn. And if you can net upscale
consumers -- say, the people who would normally buy $50 art books of
Vallejo and Geiger -- you could make a lot of money off them.
Of course, it's nice to see *anything* of quality on the internet, or
anything that's worth the time it takes to load...!
-- Joe
syz...@cdsnet.net
am...@rat.org (Amy 'Amara' Pronovost) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 1998 02:46:57 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
>
> >In article <35af292e...@news.foxnet.net>,
> > am...@rat.org (Amy 'Amara' Pronovost) wrote:
> >> On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:52:39 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net was chased around
> >> by rabid Ewoks for posting this drivel!
> >
> >Sorry it has found offense. Some are good natured and found the "drivel"
> >quite stimulating. Others, as you suggest, are incensed. Good for you! I like
> >a little controversy.
> >
>
> Nono, no offence.. that's just my reply header. :) Nothing to be
> alarmed by ;)
Oops!! Thanks for the clarification.
syz...@cdsnet.net
Enjoy! And we are greatly appreciating all of the feedback. We are on a course
of action to make some serious changes here. Thank you!
x's!
>
--
karynna
erotic artist of fantasy, science-fiction,
mythological, and spiritual themes
If you are
David Lerner
One or two lines; it isn't spamming, and it advertises _everytime_ you
post a msg.
David L. Lerner (Dell)/jpc...@prodigy.com/Enter the Captain in his
underwear with a slice of bread stuck on the dildo on his forehead/Stage
direction from Christopher Durang's _TITANIC_
Doodles
Okay. The name just doesn't do the site justice, but if it sells...
>Enjoy! And we are greatly appreciating all of the feedback. We are on a course
>of action to make some serious changes here. Thank you!
A serious suggestion is to make the sign-up area of your website a
secure server. Otherwise, folks risk giving out too much information.
As for the content so far, it's quite good. Far more interesting and
varied material that the typical porn site. And quite interesting
art. Though I haven't seen anything I'd call furry on it. Which is
why I'm still wondering why you posted about it here. No real
complaints, as you're still contributing more content to the area than
the last dozen flame fests...
Unca Spooge, bemused. =};-3
David White
are
>> very beautiful BTW.
>
Hi, and I'm truely sorry to hear that you are feeling down. I hope it wasn't
my comments that caused him to pull out. Ya' gotta realise asking opinions
on the internet is like digging around in a box of cerial, you are bound to
come up with a handfull of fruits, nuts and flakes. The numbers should have
been the biggest determing factor and ignore the Kellog contingent. I hope
he desides to present his artwork again on the net in the future.
>I really want to thank everyone for their tremendous response and feedback!
I
>found it to be very enlightening. I was taking it to heart and working
towards
>solutions. For the past week and a half the site has seen a consistant rise
in
>its subscribership. Yet Sagemonn is pulling out of the deal and Pornotopia
is
>dead!
Although it was probably just coincidence, but your posts were a brilliant
marketing strategy! Instead of mindless spam which would be instantly
ignored, you began a serious discussion which did catch my and many other's
attention. Doing this here and doing the same with other newsgroups
increased those who actually saw and toured your site probably by thousands.
You stirred up a little curiosity and that translated to more subscribers.
I hope to see you become a regular around here! And I gotta say it again,
you are beautiful! Talented too.
_____________________________________________________
David White aka Kathmandu
Visit my web page at http://www.vidnet.net/~katmandu Remove (x) from my
kar...@my-dejanews.com
"David White" <katm...@vidnet.net> wrote:
> >Actually, most of the images have been created using ourselves as resource
> >(that's me on the index page and through out).
>
> I believe he was refereing to the model or pattern for the web site. You are
> very beautiful BTW.
Thanks, reading that agiain today, really helps my blues.
I really want to thank everyone for their tremendous response and feedback! I
found it to be very enlightening. I was taking it to heart and working towards
solutions. For the past week and a half the site has seen a consistant rise in
its subscribership. Yet Sagemonn is pulling out of the deal and Pornotopia is
dead!
After I get finished cleaning up the mess. I will definitely be back just to
find out more about AFF.
Thanks. And Best Journeys always!
HStCloud
>Date: Fri, Jul 24, 1998 20:45 EDT
>Message-id: <6pb9ru$82b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>Yet Sagemonn is pulling out of the deal and Pornotopia is dead!
Sorry to hear about you having problems; don't hesitate to come back to AFF
once you work things out. I hope everything comes out well.
HStCloud/Joy-Joy
Doodles
>I really want to thank everyone for their tremendous response and feedback! I
>found it to be very enlightening. I was taking it to heart and working towards
>solutions. For the past week and a half the site has seen a consistant rise in
>its subscribership. Yet Sagemonn is pulling out of the deal and Pornotopia is
>dead!
Awwwww....
I am sorry to hear your project collapsed. But welcome to the insane
asylum.
Unca Spooge, always looking out for the new folks.
kar...@my-dejanews.com
"David White" <katm...@vidnet.net> wrote:
>
> Hi, and I'm truely sorry to hear that you are feeling down. I hope it wasn't
> my comments that caused him to pull out.
It has absolutely nothing to do with our discussion here. I found this forum
to extremely constructive. As I said, I felt we were on our way to some
seriously viable solutions. He is pulling out because of the personal
disolution of our relationship and maintaining such an effort...I don't know.
I am not really up to talking about this. I think everything is very wrong
about this. I am so angry about this loss. He's been wanting this for so long
and just as the site is really starting to take hole and make progress--he
runs over mole hill conflicts. But the reality is, if he doesn't have what it
takes to make it through the challenges then the failure is
inevitable--right?
>
> Although it was probably just coincidence, but your posts were a brilliant
> marketing strategy! Instead of mindless spam which would be instantly
> ignored, you began a serious discussion which did catch my and many other's
> attention. Doing this here and doing the same with other newsgroups
> increased those who actually saw and toured your site probably by thousands.
> You stirred up a little curiosity and that translated to more subscribers.
I don't know if it was this discussion or finally getting registered with
Yahoo, perhaps a combination, plus continuous promotional efforts (http://
www.janesguide.com has been a tremendous help--she has an awesome review page
for adult content)--but our subscription rate has been pretty consistantly
increased by 200% over the past week and a half! So, I am excruciatingly
bummed by his actions. If he will show on the internet again, I don't know. I
have been the entire website effort. If he tries to do it himself, he has a
tremendous learning curve to overcome--not that he is not capable--not sure
he is motivated. But there have been others who have been interested in
displaying his work on the internet--so perhaps he will take advantage of
those venues. In any case, if you are really interested continue to look for
the name Sagemonn or Daniel Miller.
Since all of my efforts have been Web administrator, I have had little time
to create content. I have been stuck in many ways about what to really create
and so in many ways I have avoided creating. This discussion has really
assisted me in overcoming some of my issues. So, I intend to find a way to be
about creating my own page and producing art beyond the stage of sketches.
Thanks to one of the Furry groupies, I have a wonderful idea going of a
wolfman and a catwoman.
>
> I hope to see you become a regular around here! And I gotta say it again,
> you are beautiful! Talented too.
Thanks. I will definitely be back, after I get all the messes around here
cleaned up!
>
> _____________________________________________________
>
> David White aka Kathmandu
> Visit my web page at http://www.vidnet.net/~katmandu Remove (x) from my
> email address to reply or click here katm...@vidnet.net
>
> "Bigger sword for more head splitting action" Actual quote from a Warrior
> Nun action figure ad. I thought rulers were their weapons of choice.
>
>
David Lerner
Here's wishing you a lot of strength and a bit of luck!!
Please let us know when you come back.
kar...@my-dejanews.com
JPC...@prodigy.com (David Lerner) wrote:
> On alt.fan.furry you mentioned things are a bit tough right now.
>
> Here's wishing you a lot of strength and a bit of luck!!
Thank you very much!!
>
> Please let us know when you come back.
I certainly will. Until then, Sweet Journeys to all!
>
> David L. Lerner (Dell)/jpc...@prodigy.com/Enter the Captain in his
> underwear with a slice of bread stuck on the dildo on his forehead/Stage
> direction from Christopher Durang's _TITANIC_
>
>
Allen Kitchen
kar...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<6pcr5t$lle$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> In article <6pbo0p$bke$1...@raccoon.fur.com>,
> "David White" <katm...@vidnet.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi, and I'm truely sorry to hear that you are feeling down. I hope it
wasn't
> > my comments that caused him to pull out.
>
> It has absolutely nothing to do with our discussion here. I found this
forum
> to extremely constructive. As I said, I felt we were on our way to some
> seriously viable solutions. He is pulling out because of the personal
> disolution of our relationship and maintaining such an effort...I don't
know.
> I am not really up to talking about this. I think everything is very
wrong
> about this. I am so angry about this loss. He's been wanting this for so
long
> and just as the site is really starting to take hole and make
progress--he
> runs over mole hill conflicts. But the reality is, if he doesn't have
what it
> takes to make it through the challenges then the failure is
> inevitable--right?
I thought he was your husband. And he may simply need breathing
space. Give him a day or two and try to remake contact. It is not
a nice thing for him to do, granted.
I'm very disheartened to hear about your breakup. I'm sorry you are
going through such a rough time. But think a moment: when you are
at the bottom, there's noway to go but up! And you have a whole group
of people here to chat with now as well.
May the great spirit guide you and whisper to you over the days to
come.
Allen Kitchen (shockwave)
http://www.blkbox.com/~osprey/
kar...@my-dejanews.com
>
> I thought he was your husband. And he may simply need breathing
> space. Give him a day or two and try to remake contact. It is not
> a nice thing for him to do, granted.
You are right, a few days to think things thru has been part of the solution.
We have both been under some extreme pressures and I guess this current
situation is one of our fumbles in trying to cope. But, I am very happy to
say that Pornotopia is "not" dead. He is giving me full ownership (with
continued regular content contributions) of the site and I am back to
impliment solutions that this group has so graciously inspired.
I am registering a new domain name: "ErosZona.com" today and will be designing
the site to meet the sensibilities of the sophisticated mindset of the Science
Fiction/Fantasy/Art lover crowd. I am very excited about this new adventure.
>
> I'm very disheartened to hear about your breakup. I'm sorry you are
> going through such a rough time. But think a moment: when you are
> at the bottom, there's noway to go but up! And you have a whole group
> of people here to chat with now as well.
We have come to some odd and creative solutions, but neither one of us have
been known to be conformists. Yet, I believe the situation has enlightened
our evolutionary paths via a slap or two up side the heads; "wake up! What do
we really want?" And so, we are making efforts towards steps to keep our
relationship in tact and be more capable of healthful intimacy.
>
> May the great spirit guide you and whisper to you over the days to
> come.
Thank you so much for your support and kindess. It is priceless to have such
tremendous energy to be uplifted by!
Allen, just a side note: I believe you have an affinity for the wolf. Another
AFF friend has guided me towards the creation of an image I am very excited
about. It is of a Wolfman over the shoulder of a catwoman (I hope she isn't
one of your non-affinities). I have already taken photo resource of my
husband and I to begin the project. I will keep you posted on the progress.
x's!
>
> Allen Kitchen (shockwave)
> http://www.blkbox.com/~osprey/
>
>
Allen Kitchen
kar...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<6pi8p2$p6b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> You are right, a few days to think things thru has been part of the
solution.
Good. Glad to hear it.
> Allen, just a side note: I believe you have an affinity for the wolf.
Another
> AFF friend has guided me towards the creation of an image I am very
excited
> about. It is of a Wolfman over the shoulder of a catwoman (I hope she
isn't
> one of your non-affinities). I have already taken photo resource of my
> husband and I to begin the project. I will keep you posted on the
progress.
I look forward to seeing it. *hug*
Allen Kitchen (shockwave)
syz...@cdsnet.net
JPC...@prodigy.com (David Lerner) wrote:
> You should put your URL in your sig.
>
> One or two lines; it isn't spamming, and it advertises _everytime_ you
> post a msg.
I got really ripped by the aff for doing this when I first posted. I imagine
it seemed like a spam attempt because I had posted to four different groups
(all I thought would have interest in the question.) I was absolutely brand
new to the situation and tried to plea my innocence right from the beginning.
I suspect there must be some real devious manipulators out there to have
created such a cautious response. The furry group has been the greatest of
helps and I have received one really nice response for alt.art.
I decided I would just let people ask me for the URL, if they were truely
interested.
>
> David L. Lerner (Dell)/jpc...@prodigy.com/Enter the Captain in his
> underwear with a slice of bread stuck on the dildo on his forehead/Stage
> direction from Christopher Durang's _TITANIC_
>
>
syz...@cdsnet.net
doo...@cheezies.primenet.com (Doodles) wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 16:10:08 GMT, syz...@cdsnet.net wrote:
>
> >http://www.Pornotopia.com
>
> Okay. The name just doesn't do the site justice, but if it sells...
Working on this. Thanks to all the feedback, I am furiously working on
creating a new site with a new domain name. I am hoping this site design will
truly appeal to all the serious science-fiction/fantasy art lovers.
>
> >Enjoy! And we are greatly appreciating all of the feedback. We are on a course
> >of action to make some serious changes here. Thank you!
>
> A serious suggestion is to make the sign-up area of your website a
> secure server. Otherwise, folks risk giving out too much information.
This is on the calendar and will be happening very soon. Yeah! I have been
bugging my server about it for over 6 mos now. I guess a few more of his
clients have made similar requests so now he's taking me seriously.
>
> As for the content so far, it's quite good. Far more interesting and
> varied material that the typical porn site. And quite interesting
> art. Though I haven't seen anything I'd call furry on it. Which is
> why I'm still wondering why you posted about it here. No real
> complaints, as you're still contributing more content to the area than
> the last dozen flame fests...
I have been told that most of what I thought might be furry is only
semi-furry and it is all located with in the pay site. We have images with
creatures like saytrs, harpies, minotaurs and such. I have an image of a wolf
copulating with a swan, but they don't have any humanisic features. I am
working on an image with a wolfman and a catwoman--I am very excited about
it.
>
> Unca Spooge, bemused. =};-3
>
syz...@cdsnet.net
Dale Farmer <da...@access5.digex.net> wrote:
> syz...@cdsnet.net wrote:
> : In article <MPG.1014bf404...@news.fysh.org>,
> : tali...@concentric.net wrote:
> :> In article <6oe8lf$jja$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, syz...@cdsnet.net says...
> :> >
> Make the art that you want to see, and put it out there. If it fails
> to produce adequate income, then you will have ot "Get a day job", to
> support your preferred art style. What that day job is, whether it
> is flipping burgers or drawing erotica/porn for the paying market is
> not terribly relevant. The masters of the rennissance made their
> day to day living by doing the moral equivelent of taking snapshots
> of people and places. The Mona Lisa is probably the best known
> example of the craft. Do what you want, but avoid starvation while
> doing it.
I have been greatly inspired by this group and am currnetly working
on some stuff. I admit I have been what seemed terminally stuck for
several months where producing art was a dread curse. It was always
safer investing energy in site management. I had a purpose when I
asked this question and the answers have been very enligtening and
tremendously helpful. But I have recieved an added bonus: I really
feel motivated to take the risks and be okay with doing what I want.
I guess they call it "going out on a limb," "leap of faith,"
whatever. I am glad I want to make art again! Thank you!
>
> --Dale (male-het)
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Dale Farmer Dale at accessdotdigex.net Personal opinion. Sudbury, Mass.
> "Free the ISO 9000!" --Nomi Burstein
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
Persephone
disturbing look at Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, S&M,
Transvestitism........and more.
visit: www.persephones.com
An unusual erotic art site.......
syz...@cdsnet.net
having my url on my name tag. How does everyone feel about this message?)
I checked out parts of this sight and the content is decidedly fetish!
The question as per the orginal question--is this type of illustrative effort
effectively arousing? Or is there another intent--especially since the focus
seems to be perverism and how the "disturbal factor" relates to the arousal
appeal?
There are so many tastes and preferrances. Why does fur prefer fantasy of an
animal nature? Is there something subconsciously perverse in this--and
therefore arousing? Is the question even relevant since only a fraction of
furry art is truly erotic anyway and not the focus of the fandom anyway?
Again, is the art here of a visual nature that arouses? And is it preferred?
Still working on a wolfman humping cheeta girl image and am working on a
butterfly woman image!
x's,
In article <6rd154$141$1...@supernews.com>,
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
>(When I started this conversation to begin with, I got really chewed for
>having my url on my name tag. How does everyone feel about this message?)
>
>I checked out parts of this sight and the content is decidedly fetish!
>
>The question as per the orginal question--is this type of illustrative effort
>effectively arousing? Or is there another intent--especially since the focus
>seems to be perverism and how the "disturbal factor" relates to the arousal
>appeal?
>
>There are so many tastes and preferrances. Why does fur prefer fantasy of an
>animal nature? Is there something subconsciously perverse in this--and
>therefore arousing? Is the question even relevant since only a fraction of
>furry art is truly erotic anyway and not the focus of the fandom anyway?
>
>Again, is the art here of a visual nature that arouses? And is it preferred?
>
I suspect that the major drive in furry erotica isn't fetishism or some
such, but simply having a sexual image, with a fantasy buffer.
For example, in mainstream erotic images for guys, having two females in
some kind of sexual activity can be very appealing, but I would contend
it has nothing to do with any particular kink, but simply that by not
having a "competative" male image in the scene, the viewer can better
enjoy the image of sexual activity. Simularly, in some media fandom
fanfic, the so-called "slash" fiction, women get off on the image of male
couples in idealized romatic or erotic scenes without 'the other woman"
who would spoil their sexual fantasy.
And so it goes with furry erotica. The fantasy/idealized erotic content,
without the intimidation/reality issues of a "real woman"(or man).
There are kinks and even pathological stuff in some furry subjects, as
with any erotic genre, but furry erotica as a whole is hardly some
particularly nasty or twisted catagory.
syz...@cdsnet.net
bev...@netcom.com (Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci) wrote:
> In article <6rios1$qb$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <syz...@cdsnet.net> wrote:
> >I checked out parts of this sight and the content is decidedly fetish!
I am wondering if the web site that called their attention to me here is of
the variety that creates "artistic content" that is both appealing and
arousing? The content is what "they call" perverse--so I am wondering what
kind of reaction the site is getting here, if any? Again I pose the question:
... is the art here of a visual nature that arouses? And is it preferred?
> >
> If you want a serious answer-
> I suspect that the major drive in furry erotica isn't fetishism or some
> such, but simply having a sexual image, with a fantasy buffer.
>
> For example, in mainstream erotic images for guys, having two females in
> some kind of sexual activity can be very appealing, but I would contend
> it has nothing to do with any particular kink, but simply that by not
> having a "competative" male image in the scene, the viewer can better
> enjoy the image of sexual activity. Simularly, in some media fandom
> fanfic, the so-called "slash" fiction, women get off on the image of male
> couples in idealized romatic or erotic scenes without 'the other woman"
> who would spoil their sexual fantasy.
I understand this completely and feel inclined to this explaination. But, I
was only able to refer to my own perspective. I enjoy much of the furry
erotica-- because for me, just sexuality can have such an animal primal sort
of verve to it anyway...it is not uncommon for me to play the role of some
sort of anthropomorphic animal in my mind while in the "reality" of my sex
play.
>
> There are kinks and even pathological stuff in some furry subjects, as
> with any erotic genre, but furry erotica as a whole is hardly some
> particularly nasty or twisted catagory.
Perverse is such a relative term of judgement. What really is "nasty,"
"twisted," "perverted," "kinky," "pathological?" Is it as the site in
question suggests--the mind that can not "get off" unless the fetish is the
focus, rather than "the mutually involved relationship" that allows for the
playing of the fetish?
This all diverges from the my personal motivation in the creation of this
conversation in the first place. I make art and often furry themes are
involved. I do not choose to see them in the least bit as "pathological or
perverse." The human mind is gifted with the capacity to imagine. The power
of the imagination is unquestionably real. How this power is used towards or
away from a person's "and" humanity's evolutionary progression--to me, is
what becomes vital about this gift.
Fantasy is a domain, where exploration of all sorts can be explored with out
the consequences of reality. Reality demands a particular responsibility in
life not only towards survival, but towards evolutionary improvement. Through
fantasy, we can determine with a high degree of understanding which dreams
are best kept as dreams and which demand the action of condensing them into
reality. My art is about fantasy as play that is meant to stay in the dream
world.
How much money and energy is put into the world of imagination/fantasy of any
form. Whether it ought to be important is besides the point. Society puts
their money where it is important to them---and I suggest that fantasy is the
highest money making venture of all history--whether it is vicarious
enjoyment of a sports event, voyeuristic involvement in a soap drama, the
emotive sensation music evokes, the dream of a downright fabulous novel, the
idea of societal reform and perfection, the understanding of physics and the
wish to land on the moon, the desire to "conquer" the world and the
enemy/neighbor/sibling/mate, the wish to make life easier--fantasy makes some
of this reality and is the priority of the mind next to survival. I will go
so far as to say that, imagination (as I am confidant Einstein would agree)
is "the" key to evolutionary maturation. So, the choices become---what do we
imagine, what do we keep as dreams and what do we make real? Because within
these choices lie our evolutionary salvation or extintion?
Play, in an artistic fantasy world is exploration, joy and laughter, safety
and enlightenment--it does not require physical manifestation to be
beneficial--in fact, it may "only" be beneficial as an imagination. Is it
easier to keep these fantasies as dreams if they can be manifest in ways that
that offer them a media for reality--art, music, literature, movies? And
then, are such fantasies attractive only as the "subject content" and the
"style of the art" is preferred by the audience? I suspect, so.
Help! I am loose, I am on a soap box rampage! This dejanew experiece,
particularly with the generous assistance of the furry fandom has enlightened
me at least to this degree: there is a wide range of tastes and what works
for one does not mean it doesn't work for another. There may be preferrences
that are more popular than others, but there seems to be room for all
possibilities. Sagemonn will continue to make art towards a more realistic
hardcore style and Karynna is still establishing her style. She is inclined
however, to portray the feminine fantasies of emotion and relationship,
beauty, power and security. This does not require the hard reality of
intermingled genitalia and orifices, but the images are no less stirring or
arousing, I believe, for the feminine fantasy. I suggest the furry fantasy is
a matter of preferrence for "style"...nothing else.
Thanks for the feedback!
ilr
> and Karynna is still establishing her style. She is inclined
> however, to portray the feminine fantasies of emotion and relationship,
> beauty, power and security. This does not require the hard reality of
> intermingled genitalia and orifices, but the images are no less stirring or
> arousing, I believe, for the feminine fantasy.
I'd say I prefer that aspect more. I wish I could do
that kind of art myself, but I don't know where to start.
Like other artists, when it comes to the erotica, I try
to take the mindset, aspect, display, or what ever you
wish to call it that's already out there. Try to improve
on it a little. And add a hint of what I like to it.
Most the time, it works, it's a little trite, but a few
compliments come in. And that's all I really want.
Someone here accused me of drawing porn for
money, but I consider selling out like that an uninspired
thing to do when it comes to erotica.
I'm wondering if I could beg a few of those images off
you when they're finished? I know if you only put them in
the pay-section of your site, I'll never see them. I probably
just sound like a cheap skate, but when it comes to such a
strong emotion(can I say that?) or the beauty I see in a
sexual coupling(especially furries, it's cute =), money only
cheapens the fantasy. So I really hope you'll share it.
Especially the Anthropomorphic themed ones, I don't know
if you have a complete connection to "fur.artwork.erotica"
but it would be most appreciated there. If you don't have
a complete connection, you could get one by adding
"news.fysh.org" to your nntp server list. Include your
site addy and you'll probably get some customers. :)
> I suggest the furry fantasy is
> a matter of preferrence for "style"...nothing else.
I might say there's prejudice towards style in the
FFandom. Stuff that doesn't have a comic book
appearance often seems out of place and ignored.
(which subsequently labels us as a Disney/Wb porn
fandom). ---> Flame on!
I'm gone!
-ilr
syz...@cdsnet.net
A tad, eh? Good for you...I really got carried away. :)
>
> > and Karynna is still establishing her style. She is inclined
> > however, to portray the feminine fantasies of emotion and relationship,
> > beauty, power and security. This does not require the hard reality of
> > intermingled genitalia and orifices, but the images are no less stirring or
> > arousing, I believe, for the feminine fantasy.
>
> I'd say I prefer that aspect more. I wish I could do
> that kind of art myself, but I don't know where to start.
The place to start, that works for me, is: truly where do you go when you
have your own fantasies. What is the story? What are the arousing moments?
What is the environment? When you are making love--what images flash in your
mind as the throws of ecstacy overcome you? And then, you use your artistic
creativity to depict that climactic moment in the genre of your style. That
is what is fantastic about the mind. You have the capacity to imagine it if
from many angels and feel the moments that appeal to you most.
If you are just wanting to do some pin-up sort of work, then you are doing
something I think there is already a lot of and it becomes difficult to
remain fully original. But if you are wanting to portray moments that are
emotive and full of passion?--look to the intensity of your own feelings and
what makes you churn. As an artist, you are already very visual and so the
answers are right there in your minds eye.
You may find yourself butting up against an issue that I think this whole
conversation has helped me resolve--but, will my audience like it? Some will
and some will not--it is all a matter of preference. What is sure, at least
in my mind--if it comes from the intensity of your being and you "loved"
making the art, that will become very evident in your piece. I believe quite
strongly, that people are naturally attracted to products that come from that
energy. If it is forced and contrived, that is felt too--and people are
naturally less attracted to it.
> Someone here accused me of drawing porn for
> money, but I consider selling out like that an uninspired
> thing to do when it comes to erotica.
Please forgive me, but we all have to make a living and if we are good at
something and love doing it--exactly what is it about society that says that
is uninspired if we are making money off of it? If I am able to make
something that you would enjoy having, are you against showing me your
appreciation through supporting me in the ability to continue making you
more?
Is any master of their art form selling out if they offer their goods for a
fee? If we had an ideal society where everyone were supported regardless of
their contributions--perhaps. But society demands that we support ourselves
and that the dollar is "God." How is anybody able to be about enjoying their
lives if they are going to be forced to feel guilty for making money off of
something they love to do? Do you think Michael Jordan, Mel Gibson, Picasso
could ever consider doing anything else? They all are/were fabulously
wealthy. Are they sell outs?
If people like what you are doing and want you to do more, then the best way
they can achieve their desire is through assisting you in fulfilling your
desires--this means being deserving of compensation. No? No one can do really
good anything if all they can worry about is the burdens of surviving.
Money cheapens through prostitution. Prostitution is when I am offering a
service or product that someone is willing to pay money for, but I do it
"only" for the money. The only way, this can happen is if I don't feel that I
have a choice about how I make my money or I really don't love what I am
doing.
I get paid to contruct ads for a newspaper. It is not even the slightest
dignity towards what I am capable of or skilled to do, let alone what my
heart would choose--it is definitely prositution. This is how money cheapens.
I am not able to make enough money off of what I love (creating erotica)--so
I am forced to seek avenues that cheapen "me." Exactly how inspired is all of
this?
> I'm wondering if I could beg a few of those images off
> you when they're finished? I know if you only put them in
> the pay-section of your site, I'll never see them. I probably
> just sound like a cheap skate, but when it comes to such a
> strong emotion(can I say that?) or the beauty I see in a
> sexual coupling(especially furries, it's cute =), money only
> cheapens the fantasy.
Given what I have said, I don't understand this comment. However,
> So I really hope you'll share it.
> Especially the Anthropomorphic themed ones,
when ever someone does what they love...they do it because they have too.
Money is not the motivation--doing it is. And sharing it becomes a choice
that makes sense if one hopes to secure the appreciation of those that would
choose to support them in being able to continue their love.
>
> > I suggest the furry fantasy is
> > a matter of preferrence for "style"...nothing else.
>
> I might say there's prejudice towards style in the
> FFandom. Stuff that doesn't have a comic book
> appearance often seems out of place and ignored.
> (which subsequently labels us as a Disney/Wb porn
> fandom).
Do you think this mentality can be overcome? I have to say, my work does not
support the comic book appearance. And quite frankly, I believe that is the
beauty of it.
Sweet Journeys,
x,
ilr
> A tad, eh? Good for you...I really got carried away. :)
from the usual structure of discussion we have here. : )
> >
> > > and Karynna is still establishing her style. She is inclined
> > > however, to portray the feminine fantasies of emotion and relationship,
> > > beauty, power and security. This does not require the hard reality of
> > > intermingled genitalia and orifices, but the images are no less stirring or
> > > arousing, I believe, for the feminine fantasy.
> >
> > I'd say I prefer that aspect more. I wish I could do
>
> The place to start, that works for me, is: truly where do you go when you
> have your own fantasies. What is the story? What are the arousing moments?
> What is the environment? When you are making love--what images flash in your
> mind as the throws of ecstacy overcome you? And then, you use your artistic
> creativity to depict that climactic moment in the genre of your style. That
Bummer, (I doubt many are reading this thread so I'll say it),
I can't recall and use those experiences because I've never
had, umm.. relations.
>
> If you are just wanting to do some pin-up sort of work, then you are doing
> something I think there is already a lot of and it becomes difficult to
> remain fully original. But if you are wanting to portray moments that are
> emotive and full of passion?--look to the intensity of your own feelings and
> what makes you churn. As an artist, you are already very visual and so the
> answers are right there in your minds eye.
>
I could and will try ^that though, thank you :)
>
> Please forgive me, but we all have to make a living and if we are good at
> something and love doing it--
I understand that. There are many pro's here who follow the
same, and I wouldn't doubt the capita itself could motivate
them to do better, but for me, and me only, its a personal
belief such as socialism. I'll try to refrain from voicing
it in the future. Sorry if I was preaching politics.
> something they love to do? Do you think Michael Jordan <
Well, this is just meant to be taken in good humor, but
we all saw his cologne, some of us even smelled it. ):P
>
> > I'm wondering if I could beg a few of those images off
> > you when they're finished? I know if you only put them in
> > the pay-section of your site, I'll never see them. I probably
> > just sound like a cheap skate, but when it comes to such a
> > strong emotion(can I say that?) or the beauty I see in a
> > sexual coupling(especially furries, it's cute =), money only
> > cheapens the fantasy.
> Given what I have said, I don't understand this comment. However,
I'm not trying to bamboozle some free erotica out of you, I understand it
can also be a business for you and I'll respect your beliefs. The images
you mentioned though sound too powerful to simply be described in a
few lines of text, you would have too add quite a "tad" more since a
picture is worth 1000 words. All I desire is an example, furry_or_not
>
> when ever someone does what they love...they do it because they have too.
> Money is not the motivation--doing it is. And sharing it becomes a choice
> that makes sense if one hopes to secure the appreciation of those that would
> choose to support them in being able to continue their love.
>
I am sorry I can barely even support myself, I have
though sent $10 to the artist Brian O'Connel, and
offered $40 to Jim Groat. Neither replied. I still
stand by my principles most of the time, but not
because my good intentions accomplished nothing.
Your Site is neither a Mundane-porn-Site nor
a Furry-Paysite, so don't count me out yet.
But I'd rather be more than just a customer.
> >
> > I might say there's prejudice towards style in the
> > FFandom. Stuff that doesn't have a comic book
> > appearance often seems out of place and ignored.
> > (which subsequently labels us as a Disney/Wb porn
> > fandom).
>
> Do you think this mentality can be overcome? I have to say, my work does not
> support the comic book appearance. And quite frankly, I believe that is the
> beauty of it.
Which is why I made that remark about Diz/WB :)
Thx,
-ilr
syz...@cdsnet.net
"ilr" <i...@rof.net> wrote:
> had, umm.. relations.
This may be to your advantage. You are not ingnorant and I bet you certainly
have a personal fantasy world. And you haven't been tainted by all that can
go wrong in such a relationship yet, so the dreams you have probably do not
get fizzled by the reality pimple butts, bad breath, and selfish lovers. The
"power" of your fantasy is what you turn to. You "know" what works for you,
this is your foundation. (By the way if this is because of youth and a
personal choice, I applaud you.)
> >
> > If you are just wanting to do some pin-up sort of work, then you are doing
> > something I think there is already a lot of and it becomes difficult to
> > remain fully original. But if you are wanting to portray moments that are
> > emotive and full of passion?--look to the intensity of your own feelings and
> > what makes you churn. As an artist, you are already very visual and so the
> > answers are right there in your minds eye.
> >
> I could and will try ^that though, thank you :)
>
> >
> > Please forgive me, but we all have to make a living and if we are good at
> > something and love doing it--
>
> I understand that. There are many pro's here who follow the
> same, and I wouldn't doubt the capita itself could motivate
> them to do better, but for me, and me only, its a personal
> belief such as socialism. I'll try to refrain from voicing
> it in the future. Sorry if I was preaching politics.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And we all hold our opinions for
reasons that suit our goals. It must become obvious that the reason we both
struggle with our own survival is because of societal beliefs about what
should be supported and what should not. If we look to nature as a model, we
can see that every individual must make a way for itself--regardless of the
structure of its societal organization. "And" nature seems to have a heavy
investment in balance and symbiotic exchange. I suggest humanity is not
exempt from these principles. "Nothing" is ever "free" but, as a society and
individuals we can choose to make the price of living enjoyable instead of
painful.
Some of the reason I am creating these images is as a token of my appreciation
for your involvement in offering insight that I believe has been vital to the
growth of my site and my vision as an erotic artist. So, when I get the images
to a point I feel comfortable with presenting, I will make an announcement.
>
> > >
> > > I might say there's prejudice towards style in the
> > > FFandom. Stuff that doesn't have a comic book
> > > appearance often seems out of place and ignored.
> > > (which subsequently labels us as a Disney/Wb porn
> > > fandom).
> >
> > Do you think this mentality can be overcome? I have to say, my work does not
> > support the comic book appearance. And quite frankly, I believe that is the
> > beauty of it.
>
> Which is why I made that remark about Diz/WB :)
> Thx,
Thank you!!!
HStCloud
reply.
Obviously, what is sensual to one person, furry or not, may not be sensual to
another . . . we each have our own ideas of what appeals to us, what doesn't
appeal to us, etc.
I'll admit to looking at the adult furry stuff as well as just the pin-up type
stuff; a lot of erotica isn't my cup of tea, but may well be someone else's,
and I hate censorship. In other words, I support all artists and their
visions, but I don't necesarily like all that I see, either . . .
I prefer sensual, suggestive images to hard core erotica, whether it's
super-realistic or not. And I don't have all that much sexual experience to
draw on, either, but I have read books, watched some stuff on HBO (yeah, I
know, that ain't much), and have my own mental world I play in from time to
time . . .
I think I'm just rambling . . . sorry.
Take care --
HStCloud/Joy Riddle
sola...@don'tmesswithtexas.net
>If you're a zoophile, then the attraction towards furerotica would be
>obvious ;) There is a lot of furry/sex crossover on the 'net - Yahoo lists
>Furries as a SciFi/Fantasy/Horror topic _and_ a Sexual Fetish.
Let us not forget that "furry" is also a widely-used term in the gay
community to refer to exceptionally hairy males... so Yahoo may not
necessarily be referring to the same thing in both of those listings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Fool! You have just signed the universe's death warrant!"
"I did? Uh... gee, I don't know if I'm authorized to sign that..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
solarfox@DON'TMESSWITHtexas.net (Gary Akins jr.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hug...@sonic.net
§ñühwö£f
other cultures.
--
http://signon.org/sign/protect-americas-wolves
www.friendsofanimals.org |www.snuhwolf.9f.com|
_____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
/ __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
_\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
/___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
Laurence "GreenReaper" Parry
That said, it does show a higher quality of discourse than currently avaialble. I removed a.f.f from Flayrah's footer last week because it's full of obscene spam.
--
Laurence "GreenReaper" Parry
§ñühwö£f
> Heh. You realize you just revived a thread that was 14 years old, right?
>
> That said, it does show a higher quality of discourse than currently avaialble. I removed a.f.f from Flayrah's footer last week because it's full of obscene spam.
>
--
http://signon.org/sign/protect-americas-wolves
www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.savewolves.org