Warp wrote:
> 
> Ben Chambers <bdc### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> : Does that make it acceptable?
> 
>   I consider raytracing to be more "pure art" than commercial adds, so in
> my opinion nudity as art in raytracing is even more acceptable than nudity
> in commercial adds.

That depends on the context in both cases.

A woman wearing only underwear in Victoria's secrets ads is fine with me
since this is what the company is selling; however the Doritos ad where
a fully-clothed, but very sexy gal walks into a library and is sooo hot
that the sprinkler system starts is wrong by my standards.

The same goes for art.  The nudes in Gilles' pictures are usually in a
context where one might expect some flesh, whereas most sci-fi or
Dungeon & Dragon-type pics have the very nasty tendencies of showing
female characters wearing only chain-mail bikinis and similar apparels
which do not make much sense, in my opinion.

-- 
Francois Labreque | And a four year old carelessly banging on a toy
    flabreque     | piano is not only 'music', it's probably the last
        @         | moment of 'artistic purity' they'll ever enjoy
   videotron.ca   | before outside influences start corrupting their
                  | expression.    - Chris R.

Post a reply to this message