Hi........
Although I am not in his league.................
google
"Vargas"
In the 40's and 50's there were scads of innocent
pinup type photos or illustrations.
They never showed any more of a lady
than she would show in a bathing suit.
They were not then or now porn!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I DON'T SHOOT PORN!
They were generally cute but suggestive.
They are making quite a come back....................
And I was born in the mid 50s.
I wasn't there all that much my self.
As I have stated many times before.
I don't shoot landscapes, or seascapes
or rocks and trees or products or anything
that doesn't involve people.
I am very commercial.
I shoot photos that make people look pretty
(or handsome as the case may be)
Russ
Lea Murphy wrote:
Well, for one thing, I wasn't around in the 40-50s and didn't recognize this as a pin-up (which could, arguably, be considered soft porn back in the day).
I didn't say I thought it was soft porn, I meant to be asking if it was supposed to be soft porn.
Clearly I don't grasp this image.
Enlighten me.
Lea
On May 9, 2010, at 8:29 PM, R. E. Baker wrote:
Lea Murphy wrote:
Russ Baker - Tamara If the last image sort of gave me the creeps this image totally gives me the creeps. What, pray tell, is going on here and why? Is she in a theater production? Is this some sort of softish porn? Your lighting is nice. I may have considered a background that more complimented her outfit...too many colors going on for my taste.
You think the idea of a cute girl in a
pretty costume "ala 40's-50's Pin up"
is soft core porn?
Oh boy........
Where have you been?
Russ
R.E. Baker
Photography
your kids . my camera . we'll click
www.leamurphy.com
