HOME | DD
ArtOriginal โ hips curve
Published: 2010-09-05 11:07:37 +0000 UTC; Views: 62745; Favourites: 1260; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
thank you for the lovely drawing
All images are Copyright ยฉ 2007-2011 ArtOriginal
Do not edit, copy, reproduce, modify, manimpulate or use my work without my direct written permission.
This is not stock photo! All rights reserved. Thank you.
Related content
Comments: 392
Actually, if that's what the artist wanted to post, then they're welcome to do so.
The response wouldn't be the same though. As one of the first commenters suggested, a giant person isn't as aesthetically pleasing as a trim one. It's got nothing to do with character content.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
But even if you take out the character content, it all comes down to we're looking at this person, this human as an object and not as what they really are. That's my real complaint about all of this.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Well... that's what models do.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
True, but I find it a real shame.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
In a photograph from a collection showcasing the human form? Yeah, in this case appearance is more important. Especially since a close-up of any part of the human body is *incapable* of showing the "content of their character".
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
So, someone with, say, more body fat or excess skin doesn't have a human form? Wow, how sad. And I wasn't saying the photo should show the content of their character- I was saying how everyone only cares about this model's appearance, and not the actual person.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Why should anyone care about the model's personality or character? That's not what the image is about. It's all about the aesthetic of the human form. And if the photographer had chosen to photograph a less fit model, that would apply as well.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I lol'ed hard at that reply...thats a prefect reply!
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Kinda puts the whole thing in perspective, huh?
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
I guess every girl with nice hips can make the front page these days.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
It's on the front page 'cause lot's of people clicked on it. Also, every cute kitten photo makes the front page these days. Are you attacking them too? Or is it just women's bodies you have a problem with?
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Do you attack everyone who states their oppinions? Or is it just on comments about women's bodies you have a problem with?
๐: 0 โฉ: 2
If it had been a comment i wouldn't have had a problem with it. You didn't criticize, you just attacked.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
But it was a comment. Attacking would have been like
"This shit isn't art, why did you post this?"
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Ok, fair enough. It was a comment. It was a weak, dismissive and unsupported comment, but it was a comment. In reply specifically to that comment: If all it takes to make the front page is a pair of curvy hips, then why isn't the front page full of similar pictures? Or if you mean all it takes is a picture of an attractive female, why isn't the front page full of nothing but those pictures? There are thousands and thousands of pictures of attractive females, many of them far more revealing and erotic and sexual in nature that did NOT make the front page. Your comment makes no sense.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
So out of all the other flaming, outrageous, and lengthy comments there were, you chose to criticize mine? I find that a little unfair as well. I can tell the photographer has some sort of fetish with the lower half of women's bodies just by glancing at their gallery. But from my personal point of view, the others were much more creative and compositional than this one. To me this looks like anyone could have taken a picture off the internet, cropped it down to the hips, and posted it. I just didn't see much artistic effort in it, and it kind of annoyed me. There was also another picture that made the front page by this deviant of a woman's hips that was more sexual and revealing, but ironically enough I respected it a bit more because I could see some artistic thought put into it. To be more clear, I'm not criticizing the sexual content so much as the amateurness of "hips curve." You may not think so as well, but that's just my opinion. And I'm sorry for any hostility my comments have caused.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
That's a fair enough criticism. The only reason I jumped on your original post is that it didn't include any of that kind of critique. And though you may not have seen it, I actually did criticize a whole bunch of the comments on this pic. And no, yours was not anywhere near the worst. Don't get me started on the trolls on this sight. Sorry if my responses seemed particularly hostile; they weren't intended as such.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Okay, thanks for understanding. I don't usually like to write long, drawn out critiques like I just did because I just find it boring that way. Plus I myself am too lazy to read long critiques anyway.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I don't know why people who don't like this photo are here. I think this is a beautiful shot. In my opinion the human body is art and is beautiful. There is nothing wrong with this picture. The girl is fully clothed. You see more skin on the beach. But I'm guessing that's not why people are angry. They are angry because they see something they find is not tasteful on the front page. I respect people opinions and I don't mind that people find this "trashy" or "junk". But if you didn't like this so much, why are you here? This picture (and others from this user) are getting more and more views because people who DON'T like it are here to hate. Anyone herd the saying "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all?" You saw the thumbnail before you clicked on this and you know what your about to see. And I understand comments that have constructive criticism (which I find is fine) but some of these comments are just hates. This is the 3rd one of =ArtOriginal's photographs that has been on the front page because of HATERS. 1st time is fine. 2nd time is already to much. But 3rd? Come on. I'm sorry if I have offended anyone (I really am. I understand your point of view) and I'm not trying to start a fight. But hey what am I to say? Everyone has the right to state their opinion. What I'm trying to say it just...don't troll/hate and leave it alone.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
Don't like the art? Go make your own. I, personally, love this. It's simple, beautiful, and not overly photoshop'd or crazy looking. Simple. <3.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
has a nice soft look to it. I like it.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I can see both sides of everyone's arguements, though I don't feel as if it needs to be dissed. I don't care about the pageviews, I care about the art. Everyone trolling this picture should think the same too. So instead of ripping on a person's art, go out and make your own. It's a nice shot though, I must say. Maybe not as dynamic, or altered, or even flashy as some other pictures, but it's simply pretty.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I find this photo so sexy. I don't know why, I mean, you have some nice nude photos but this one is one of the best ones you have in my opinion. Kudos again!
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I'm almost in love with your sensual photographies !
Keep up the Good Work
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
Oh. come on people, its just a stomach, don't we all have one? Why is this even popular? T.T
Take a picture of a sunset for a change, then maybe we'll talk.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Oh right; That's so much better. O_______o
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
I'll take a sunset- or sunrise, for that matter- over staring at some random chick's stomach on the front page.
๐: 0 โฉ: 2
Well, I'm just saying, they're BOTH cliche and unoriginal and boring. But yeah, I guess I agree.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Yes, that is true, they are cliche- However, at least with sunsets and sunrises you see variations in colors, size, and general shape. Unlike in these photos.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Like I said, they're BOTH unoriginal; These photos and most sunset ones. But like I said, I still agree I'd rather see a sunset.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Well, I'm glad we can agree.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
Also on the front page is yet another kitten photo. Nothing special about it beyond the subjective cuteness of the kitten. Much like the literally dozens of simple kitten pics on the front page almost every single day for weeks. I don't see you or any of these other "critics" jumping on those. Yet for some reason the partially uncovered abdomen of a woman sets you all into a frenzy. I dunno, but the hypocrisy smells like it's got a tinge of misogyny as well.
๐: 0 โฉ: 2
Just like to add: I have the criticism you're talking about for kittens on the front page :/ because I'm tired of seeing the same stuff on the front page. Just as it applies to this image.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
Last I checked, kittens aren't humans, and thus not held to the same standards of a human. If you were to take a picture of a cat's belly, people would just say, 'Oh, that's a cat's belly'. If you take a picture of a female's stomach, like here, it's considered erotic. See the difference? Really, the comparison is rather superfluous. My concern with this photo is how sexually driven our society is and how it's these kinds of photos that merely add fuel to the fire.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
But why do you consider this a particularly sexual or erotic picture? There are literally hundreds of more revealing, erotic and sexual photos on this site every single day. Not to mention the thousands of erotic drawings and paintings and cgi. If eroticism or sexuality were the reason this was so popular, wouldn't the more explicit and revealing pics be even more so? You may not see anything more in this image than eroticism, but that doesn't mean that others don't see more.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
Dear god, what has become of dA... I bet at the very least, half the people on these comments have no idea how dA looked like in early 00's... such an "original art photo" would have never had so many incentives...
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
HA!
MY HIPS ARE CURVIER.
..but I also have scoliosis. ._.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
*_* Her skin is so perfect. T.T
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
I love this picture because it's purely erogenous. Something so simple as a woman laying on her side can be suggestive, even without any nudity.
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
I LOVE YOUR LINES...!!!!!
NICE PIC...!!!!
๐: 0 โฉ: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>