HOME | DD
the18thltrfotography β DSC 0613avw2 (1189)
by-nc-nd
#girl #sexy #beautiful #bottomless #female #model #seductive #sensual #tanktop #woman #astridvonwinter
Published: 2016-10-07 09:18:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 50468; Favourites: 715; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Astrid Von WinterRelated content
Comments: 46
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
The contrast between the benign nature of a school bus and the taboo element of nudity evokes a pendulum of emotions. Has a strong narrative element. I haven't felt emotions like these in quite a while.
π: 0 β©: 1
It really is a cool location
π: 0 β©: 0
Astrid is amazing! My go to model!
π: 0 β©: 1
VERY easy to believe 
π: 0 β©: 0
Beautiful and sexy!
I like the feel of freedom in it. A beautiful bottomless woman has a certain beautiful fascination which is hard to put into words.
PS: Don't get me wrong but i'm curious, why do so many shots take place on junkyards or decrepit buildings?
I never understood why phtotgraphers do this.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for the comments. I am a big fan of bottomless and try to incorporate it in my photography as much as possible.
Of course I can not speak for all photographers but I will try to help you understand the use of abandoned locations as photography settings. First for me, there are a couple reasons, right now it is a current focus in my photography and the models I have recently shoot with have asked or suggested shooting in an abandoned location. I try to find locations that fit the model,Β I much rather prefer to shoot in a cool condo or home, if you look at my full portfolio and website you will see far more images captured in homes and condos. Because I put the models and their wishes before mine recently I have looked for abandoned locations.Β
Other photographers may do the same but there are other advantages to shooting at abandoned locations. One is they are free. You will be surprised how much studio cost are just for a shoot that may last two hours, in some cases I have been quoted as having to pay more than my mortgage, $1200. Also, it can be hard finding an owner willing to let you shoot in their home or condo, even using websites like Airbnb where the same owner will let someone live in their homes for up to several months but not want you to shoot in the same home or condo for couple hours, even if you have perfect reviews. Or the owner will charge you more to shoot than they would for you to stay in their home or condo. I once found a condo that rented for $100 a night, very fair price, when I mentioned I wanted to use it as a shooting location the owner agreed but changed the price to $250 for two hours. Luckily for me I have established a group of great owners that allow me to use their homes or condos for a very fair price.
There is also preference, some photographers just prefer the aesthetic look of an abandoned location and a beautiful model. Lastly, there is seasonal, some photographers may shoot in homes or studios in the colder months for convenience and comfort of the model.
I am sure there are as many reasons as there are photographers but these are a few I can think of at the time. Recently, I have been shooting at a mix of homes and abandoned locations but will be returning to shooting at homes more often.
I hope all this added to your understanding.Β
π: 1 β©: 1
Ahh, ok that makes sense!
Thank your for taking your time to explain.
I had no idea that renting a place for shooting could be THAT expensive...
My question was more related to the artistic side of it. Please don't get me wrong, i don't think images on such a location are ugly or something like that.
I just don't see the correlation between a Beautiful, maybe naked Woman and a derelict and dirty building.
Is it because of the contrast between the beauty and the vigor of a woman and the lifeless, decay of the surrounding?
And if so, why are so many photographers doing the same thing?
(Ok not everyone is doing that, but it's noticeable.)
Please understand, this is not criticism towards you or your work, i just try to understand the reasoning.
π: 0 β©: 1
No need to explain you questioning to me. I am a person that is very very hard to offend, feel free to ask any question you may have.Β
I think the top reason are the ones I stated but aside from expenses the aesthetic and mood of shooting in an abandoned location may also give more of an artistic feel to the photography. I enjoy the images I have seen from others, I compare it to the a rose that grew from concrete.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah, i see.
I love the comparison of the Rose growing from a crack in concrete.
I like some images like it too, but from a emotional level i find it a bit hard to get connected to old abaondoned factories and places like it. Maybe it's just a personal thing.Β I don't know if that makes some sense for anyone.
Thanks, for explaining and thank you so much for your patience!
I know a lot of ppl getting very fast offended by questions like this, so thanks again!
π: 0 β©: 1
It makes perfect sense and you are welcome.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank You may friend and muse. I'm excited to shoot with you again and miss you very much.
π: 0 β©: 0
Eveey one has freedom...,......So they do what they want.........this site allows them to do that so thats why they do............its up to us either we ignore it or involve in it........
π: 0 β©: 2
What does this have to do with the photo? With all due respect, am just curious.
π: 0 β©: 1
Everyone mention that it is not posted on this site.......in short they criticise.......so thats why i share my opinion
π: 0 β©: 0
Well done. Erotic, and at the same time a hint of 'urbex'....an Earthy quality. An excellent render. Good art always 'sparks' Energy/emotion; but, this Energy/emotion comes from within the self, not the work of art. Each of us reacts to what we see with our own agendas.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank You and I agree.
π: 0 β©: 0
Gotta love the HATE. It's 2016 and we're still dealing with puritanical folks who are offended by an AMAZING photo of a women who isn't even showing her genitalia.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank You! And so true!
π: 0 β©: 0
For someone who takes such good photos you sure get a lot of hate.
Damn prudes.
Keep on keeping on
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank You. 99% of the time I ignore the hate and started to ignore it this time but the truth is so obvious.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Can I request that a Mature Content Sign be put on this image? You realize there are minors on this site, correct?
π: 0 β©: 1
I appreciate your comment and thank you more than you know or I can express. I do realize there are minors on this site. Have you asked the Pope or a museum curator the same question? You will see far more in the sculpture "David" and the paintings at the Sistine Chapel, a place or worship for Christians over the world and the private residence of the Pope, both created by Michelangelo, not to mention the many other works of great of art on display at museums over the world the include more nudity than you will see in this photo.
There are no breasts exposed (a very small amount of one lower breast is exposed but no nipple), you can not see the model's vagina or her butt. However, in "David" and the Sistine Chapel there are penis' and breasts fully exposed and on full display without shame but revered for minors to see.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
My problem is that there are young kids on this website, and when you post something suggestive, it should at least have a mature content warning. It is ILLEGAL for a minor to access any pornographic content. Some of the content from your page could be considered pornographic (that do not have a content warning).Β I'm not trying to infringe on your rights, I'm trying to give you a suggestion before someone or a child's parent reports your page for uncensored content.
You are correct in what you're saying about David, and the Sistine Chapel, however these were created in a time when these images were somewhat socially acceptable. People are having debates over whether today's society should censor these great works, and most are against it because of the historical - which is the key word here - value of the pieces.
The next sentence is not meant to offend you or your work in any way. Your works are not and should not be comparable to the works ofΒ Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Donatello, or any other renaissance artist. It is incredibly arrogant to do so.Β Your photographs have not been here for hundreds of years, and they aren't classic works of art to be marveled at in a museum. They are uncensored, borderline pornographic photographs on a website where minors are present.Β
You may say, "if kids don't want to see it, they don't have to look at it," but it isn't that simple. Your photos will show up under "undiscovered" or another tab that anyone can access. It isn't difficult for a minor to come across uncensored pornographic content on this website. I understand that you're not the only one, but you must understand that you share the internet with kids. This website in particular, is shared with many young kids and their parents may not want them seeing this content. All I'm saying is that you may get reported in the near future for your content.
π: 0 β©: 1
I am by no means offended. I am very open to respectful dialog but when you call me arrogant you are no longer respectful. You do not know me, my height, the color of my eyes or hair, you don't even know my phone number but yet you judge me. I did not compare myself to Michelangelo or any other artist, you did. I only stated that his art contains nudity, and gave him proper recognition. He will forever be far more talented than I ever hope to be. What you fail to realize in your narrowed minded thinking and rush to self righteous judgement is that I simply compared the fact that his great works of art, you admire, contains full nudity and this photo, you wish to censor, does not.Β
As for the content on my page, you know do not know of what you speak. I take extreme precaution in everything I post, if it contains visible full breast, vagina or butt I do label it correctly. In the case of this image none of the mentioned body parts are visible and she is not touching herself suggestively. In fact none of the poses the models I shoot with are suggestive, none are touching themselves in an erotic manor. The ones that come close are covering a body parts mentioned above.Β
The time when it was socially acceptable. I find that statement flawed at best and idiotic at worst. I ask what society are you referring? Some societies do not allow people to pray to God, some societies it is allowed to kill a spouse or child because they betrayed the "family honor". I hope I am wrong but the society you lead me to believe you belong, you know the one, is that hypocritical one that believes because something has been around for thousands of years is a great work of art even though it contains full nudity; however, when a bottomless woman only showing her legs, arms, head, neck and abdomen appears online begin to cry about a scandal someone has supposedly perpetrated. Did I mention that she is not even touching herself? Prostitution, slavery and dare I say Pornography have existed for millions of years does that make them great works of art. The human body has been here since Adam and Eve, my bible tells me they originally did not wear clothes and only hid their nakedness because of shame when they sinned against God, and should be celebrated, when done respectfully, Maybe "society" has shameful skeletons in its closet, like slavery, rape, genocide, thief and oppression of innocent, that it must hide itself and feels the need to tell others to hide as well.
Since I will not change the labeling on this photo or any other you may disagree with and will continue to label future photos I post how I believe they should be labeled, this will be the last I will say. There will be no more responses from me after this. In you judgement you fail to realize that I agree with you 100%, in fact I am on your side, by no means do I believe that children should look at or watch pornographic material but what you and others in your referenced "society" fail to realize is that nudity and pornography are not the same. In fact pornography does not have to contain nudity. There is a lot of pornography on this site but I have have a life and do not have the time to tell others what to do or what labels they should use. I leave that to the moderators of this website. Life is to short and to valuable to troll around a website to see who used a label or not. However, if you take it upon yourself to be apart of the volunteer Deviantart police force I commend you for wanting to keep our children free of pornography. I also ask that you take time to enjoy life, take a walk through a park, go sailing or rafting, spend time with your significant other, go to a museum, view the nudity there and smile as schools bring little seven and eight year old boys and girls on field trips to view the same nudity with you. Because if you don't Officer LittleLoseLyss you will find that "society" has changed the rules again on what is and what is not acceptable.
π: 0 β©: 0
why there is porno on this website ?
are you a pornstar girl ? are you proud of this picture ? your fkn nude. that's Β bad.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for your comment. I will not answer your first question, I believe it to be rhetorical because you and I both know the answer to porn on this website. The second and third question I will address, as well as your statement. No I am not a porn star girl and yes I am proud of this picture. You assume I am the model in this picture, therefore you are wrong on two counts, I am not and I am not "fkn nude". If I were that would not make me "bad" or a bad person.
My submission to you is that nudity is not porn. Do you consider "David" and the paintings at the Sistine Chapel, works by Michelangelo, as porn? What about the many other works of art on display at museums over the world that include nudity, are they porn? In fact, in the above photo there are no breasts exposed (a very small amount of one lower breast is exposed but no nipple), you can not see the model's vagina or her butt. However, in "David" and the paintings at the Sistine Chapel there are penis' and breasts fully exposed without shame, yet they are revered as beautiful works of art, not porn. Β
π: 0 β©: 1
(sorry for my bad english, i'm french, try to ignore it please..)
thanks for your answer (very calm, no like my comment, i'm sorry...)
your point about David is very interesting, i had'nt think about that, it's true...
i had badly read your picture... because of the suport i think ? (internet, you know...)
it's interesting.
again, sorry for the rudness of my comment. just, i'm realy (realy) boring about nude stuff on this site (even if it's can be justify in the idea of art, like yours). but it's clear : all the persons who submit nude art on this web site dont think as clear as you... and that's make me feel very incomfortable when i'm here.
i think my "anger" against all that deviantartists who can't explain their job like you do where in my comment and... that was not fair from me.
sorry.
i'll think about your reflexion the next time i see something that make me incomfortable like that.
however, i remember your photogaphy even if i wasn't go re-watching them now, that's prouve something : it was mark me. the "aim" of art so, it prouve you've make a good job and a good picture.
i'll add it in my fav for remember me your lesson the next time i'll searching for some inspiration.
thanks
π: 0 β©: 1
There is no need to apologize. I understand your comment was not to criticize but to express your opinion. As long as someone is respectful as you were and are I encourage comments, whether they are in approval or disapproval.
Like you I have become some what bored with nude photography. When I do shoot a model nude I like to add depth and reflection for the viewer, not just nude to be nude.
My french is very rusty but I do remember these words, Merci mon ami!
π: 0 β©: 1
Astrid is an awesome model and Thank You!
π: 0 β©: 1
Agreed! You're welcome!
π: 0 β©: 1
OMG I seem to be stalking you
π: 0 β©: 1