Nice montage, Tanya - I like the progression of the images, with your son
basically turning around in the course of the series. The background looks
just as you intended it on my monitor - not totally high key, but some
texture left in it. The B&W conversion looks excellent. Nice job!
- MCC
A
Well, Tan,
'T'ain't my thang, I guess.
Not bad, but not particularly inspiring, to me at least.
I have a feeling that the media I'm forced to view it on isn't helping much.
Maybe if it were blowed up real big (as you suggest is your plan), so that
it covers like an entire wall, it might move
Tanja, Tanja, Tanja...
Don't take the pictures down. They're completely innocent. I can't
imagine anyone seeing them in any other way. And they're quite good as
well.
On Apr 12, 2004, at 11:22 AM, Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
BUT, Shel, this comment that you made;
"Here in the US what you'v
It is sad that the straw-man arguments about child porn so often
defer to these clearly innocent, not at all purient, pictures of
children. But so often these argumetns are used as a continuing
perjorative against any morality imposed on an "art" expression.
Let us not take the side of defendin
- Original Message -
From: "David Madsen"
Subject: RE: a little something i've been working on...
> Child porn laws are vague because the definition of porn is vague.
Most
> prosecutors are not going to go after parents taking bath tub
photos, but
> because the
EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 10:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
I keep forgetting that your statutes are mostly administe
Hi,
Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
As a result of this, I just tried to pull the image down but I can't connect
via ftp for some reason at the moment. Anyways, as soon as I can, it will
come down cause I just feel sick to think that anyone would see my little
boy in such a way, and even worse tha
I wish I could find the news stories about the particular
case in question.
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shel Belinkoff"
> Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
>
> > Well, according to what I've
iles
for a living. When you know what actually is out there, these are nothing.
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
&g
As someone so crudely posted, on one of my many lists, just because a
certain obnoxious woman legislator had all the female parts necessary,
that didn't make her a woman of the streets, did it?
Of course, the language was a bit -- well, a LOT -- more colorful, but
the gist is there.
I do unders
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
> Well, according to what I've read, the child in the bathtub
> had no "private parts" revealed either. The concern in some
> jurisdictions is n
to hurt a lot of
innocent parties doing it.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on.
> Bill,
>
> There are so many jurisdictions, and so many variations on
> "the law" that it w
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hi Tan ...
On my monitor the background looks a little different in
each shot. Some frames have more detail, others less. If
that' how the bg actually appears, imo, it distracts from
the montage.
Here in the US what you've done could be considered child
pornography in so
child was taken from the parents
pending the outcome of an investigation. There are more
details, of course.
shel
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shel Belinkoff"
> Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
>
> >
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: a little something i've been working on...
>
> Here in the US what you've done could be considered child
> pornography in some places.
Shel, explain this please. I thought Canada had some pretty
ri
Hi Tan,
Yep, photography sure is subjective ...
It could well be that you relate to the pics in a more
motherly fashion, both as a mother to the child and as a
"mother" to the photographs. I can certainly relate to
that.
As for the clid porn comment, don't take it too seriously.
The climate h
Hi Shel, thanks for taking the time to comment!
Shel said:
"On my monitor the background looks a little different in
each shot. Some frames have more detail, others less. If
that' how the bg actually appears, imo, it distracts from
the montage."
Yep, that's how it is meant to look, it is kind
Hi Tan ...
On my monitor the background looks a little different in
each shot. Some frames have more detail, others less. If
that' how the bg actually appears, imo, it distracts from
the montage.
Here in the US what you've done could be considered child
pornography in some places.
IAC, I like
Very nice, Tanja. The balance of graytones is very good. On my monitor
the only pure white is in the background.
Paul
On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:04 AM, Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
A figure study, fairygirl style...
*istD, FA 28-105m pz @ f9.5, 1/45, af360fgz, window light and white
reflector.
I mu
19 matches
Mail list logo
