Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

More from DeviantArt


Submitted on
February 28, 2009


77,174 (1 today)
2 (who?)
Wow!! Almost 110,000 pageviews, two daily deviations, and hundreds of comments, and this is my first journal entry!!  I'm such a slacker!!

Thanks to all those who viewed my recent Daily Deviation, "Some of Its Parts"… featuring the amazing model Mandy.  I wish I could respond to all the over 300 comments this image has received in the past 24 hours, but I'd be at my keyboard for days!!  

All your comments were read and appreciated, whether your liked or disliked the image. Most of the comments were overwhelmingly positive. Even comments criticizing my post processing technique were appreciated, and will definitely be kept in mind as I create future images.

I do find in fascinating that the people who wrote the most negative comments (less than 10 at current count) have a tough time explaining why they found the work "disgusting" "inappropriate" "really ugly" or, in one case, think of the model as a "demon." (I nearly forced my morning tea through my nostrils laughing at that comment!!)

Yes, it takes all kinds.

Some technical info for those who asked: Image was shot with a single 3x4 foot soft box positioned over the model's head, feathered slightly forward. Post processing included some skin smoothing, a boost in contrast, a bit of dodging to make the eyes reappear from under the shadow, and, of course, B&W conversion.
  • Mood: Content
  • Listening to: NPR
  • Drinking: black tea, milk and sugar please!
Add a Comment:
CN-Foundation Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2013
All your "obscene, indecent, or profane" naked photos are intercepted and broadcast illegally by radio and by wire to schools when children type in "tom2001".  You have appropriately tagged these naked images so that they are not shown to unauthenticated viewers. GOOG is violating communications laws and showing these to anonymous people. I will explain EXACTLY why these images should not be shown to the anonymous but the laws violated are 18 U.S.C ,1462 and 18 U.S.C 2511 and 47 U.S.C 605. You are invited to seek to join in
Neeley v federal communications Commissioners, et al, (5:13-cv-5293) as a plaintiff and demand these crimes be punished and demand that Congress finally recognize the moral rights of an artists to keep these type creations from children. complaint in EVERY common file format. FREE docket mirror and all filings.
xiaojuan0724 Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2012
It could effectively disable a man with a simple touchCoach Wallets.
Sistheo Featured By Owner Jan 23, 2012
a soft box indeed - I hope her eyes didn't water. I disapprove of scrotes [males] fotoing fanny - it should be a gay-girl prerogative zzaaaaayyyyy!
JasonPaulHermann Featured By Owner May 21, 2010
A Demon? Seriously? LMAO.
lexxii Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2009  Hobbyist General Artist
^Congrats !
carlyerin Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2009
oh i LOVE NPR!

Congrats on teh DD! :)
irisdassault Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2009
Congratulations! I personally think it is a very strong image, and I just ***adore*** Mandy.
Emodnet Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2009
lol they called her a demon? XD
And i agree with Skaramine, i couldn't tell that anything was done to the image either, it was flawless. ^^

and about the negative comments, most ppl just don't know what they are even talking about, they just like to be immature and stuff. it's best to ignore them. Especially when the work you've posted is obviously loved by so many ppl :D
msFiBi Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2009
Oh yeah! =) All those "bad people" who posted negative replies are "demons" themselves and insane. They also have no right to be the owners of their own opinion because MOST of others have other opinion =)
tom2001 Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2009  Professional Photographer
Well, two things happening here:

Most of the people posting positive comments we able to explain concisely and succinctly WHY they liked the image.

The people posting negative comments never explained WHY they didn't like the image. I can only assume that those people who saw the image as "disgusting" "inappropriate" or "really ugly" have a problem viewing full frontal nudity, or a problem viewing an artistic nude photograph of a woman in an admittedly less that flattering light (it's certainly not a glamor shot!!).

I just have a real problem with people who level a personal attack the model, calling her a "demon." While it really is nobody's business, Mandy leads a pretty normal life when she's not in front of the camera. She's a home owner, a mother, and a partner (not mine). She's not Satan incarnate because she posed for me, or posed in such an open and revealing way.

Bottom line: I'll defend the models who I collaborate with me infinitely more than I'll defend my own photography. Love my stuff or hate it--- I really don't care. Just please don't personally attack a model for working with a photographer to create what some might consider an artistic image.
Add a Comment: