Is a naked picture an art or a pornography ?

Is a naked picture an art or a pornography?

What is the difference between art and pornography in this case ?

 

Some people see it as art, some see it as pornography.

I see it as pornography, have voted for it.

 

Its not a valid question as it could be both or either or just plain neither

 

Sorry, but what about "naked picture of a kid ". I came to this question after reading an article .
I dont support pedophilia

In Australia ,Australia's arts community has defended a photographer whose exhibition of images of naked children was shut down.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1317162,00.html

 

It depends if lust is involved.

 

I'd need to see the picture in question (This thread is useless without pictures!)

 

Yes, With out picture how can say that it's art or pronography. Although you said it's a "naked picture of a kid " then 90% chance to be Art... But it's not my final comment I just say becouse mentiom it's a kid picture...

 

It can be either, Neither or both.

The intended or percieved purpose of it. If a picure is intended to arounse it's pornography, If someone is aroused by it, to them, It's pornography. If the intent is to depict the form of the body then it's art.

 

This is obviously not a yes or no question. If anyone cares, many of the US legal decisions on this topic shed light on what factors are relevant in determining whether something is or is not illegal pornography.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/prosecuting/overview.html


Personally, I feel like Potter Stewart did, I know it when I see it - although that is not an appropriate legal standard.

 

I would say it depends on what the purpose of the picture would be, if it was made to arouse people, then it's pornography, if its like pictures that have nudity and were made to reflect various culture or to represent something, then its art.

 

Is it ok to publish children naked picture that have nudity ? is it ok to publish naked pictures of children(for example 10-12 years old ) , if it is art ?

 

Ok guys here is one picture

http://www.smh.com.au/news/arts/he-...udiences-decide/2008/05/21/1211182887495.html

 

In a medical text, of course it is okay. In a child porn mag, it is not okay.

Do you not understand that is is not the nakedness but the context that is important?

 

In a medical text it is ok.
But is not a photographer making a children get naked in the name of art ( even if the context is ok not pornographic )?

 

In my opinion, it is not OK to take nude photographs of children 10-12 yr old, even for art. In a medical book, an artist can draw an illustration, it doesn't have to be a nude photograph of a real child.

 

The photographers quote sums up my opinion on this.
"It's like when you're standing in front of a picture of a road, it really does take you off into another region. It's your road, not my road."

Like most art the interpretation says far more about the person viewing it than it does about the artist. The belief that this photo is some how "pornographic" when neither the model or photographers intentions to create a pornographic image is an indictment on society, Not the photographer.

For someone to draw the conclusion that this image is pornographic means that their interpretation of a naked child is a sexual one, many other people will see very different things in this image. personally i see the fear of change (or the unknown) in the image.

The photo obviously isn't for everyone, But if you "get it", and more specifically understand how art works, I don't see anything wrong with viewing it.

 

But what about a picture of "underage models in baths together" photo by Miley Cirus

 

Depends.... Do you think a child in a bath is a sexual image?

This is the point. If nobody thinks a child in a bath is sexual, what's the problem? If you do think children in a bath is sexual, well, That's your problem and nobody can change how you interpret children in a specific situation regardless if an image of it exists or not.

Let's not get to the stage where we feel obliged to be outraged about soemthing without even trying to understand why.

 

No I dont think and you dont think . But In my opinion, it doesnt make it right if me and you dont think so . I find it not right. And I got what you mean

 

Neither.
Porn is people having sex. Not just being naked. And there is nothing artistic about naked pics no matter how much the liberal art students try to say there is.