hmmmm very good topic, specially since today we are all so busy to label everything in just one word from the first time we see it. I am not sure if it is not just ignorance or we just don't know the difference, but in many case i find myself wondering too:))). I don't have too much experience when it comes to art, but in my opinion art will always have a value, a message to send, a story to tell, a way to express what the artist ment, while porn and nudity in porn has always been just..nudity intented to satisfy a need! I may get a lot of negative responses to this, but this is my opinion!:P

well in fairness most of the art we from history has some form of nudity if you look at some of the churches it is there as well in greece in rome no matter where you look nudity in it self does not make porn...but nudity with intent of of sex ( oral or penitration ) and in some cases a vulger display becomes porn. the question of decency came up with a friend of mine which is a DA in NH and he showed me the rule of law which says that inorder for something to be concidered indecent it must be indecent to the mojority of the masses or population. hense during biker week wemen can flash in NH because it is not found to be indecent to the mojorety of the population at that time. and that is the letter of the law...so when we talk about art by what guide are we to say this is or is not porn.
it has alway been said that art means one to one person but something different to another. so it lays in the interpretation of the beholder.or its placement to the public.

i agree with you!:) There are many points of viewing this subject and also the way we interpret ART. It is not wrong to view in a church or a religious building just because sex has been viewd as the beggining of the world (the way the world came to Earth, so sex has been encouraged by the bible and by us, the population). So, from the religious point of view, there is no pornographic content, only art.
On the internet and in real life, sex is commercialized (gets something in return:money, pleasure, etc) and so, it is given a value ( a personal value, most of the times monetary). It is negatiated and paid for...this is why is considered pornographic material.

ok ....this is going good...so is it the act that got paid for or the end result... the art that is the porn? because you can buy art like the enternal kiss which is a male and female in the nude in an embrace kissing. the product being what you are buying or the models that got paid to pose?
and to have laws to ban one form or another becomes cesorship...remember we are talking about art and not prositution which we know is porn.so are we not making a moral judgement over an expressive form. and if that becomes the case does that no go agaist the freedom of expresstion? some hard ones here tonight this is fun get those brian cells going....hehehehe

really hard!!!!! you are making me think my friend..hehehe this is a night to remember..:) well, again i come and say it is how we interpret it and what was the initial intention of it. If the two models got paid to get painted..it is not a bad intention, right? :) This is what not the artist intended to creat..but in the case of porn, we all know why they are there and what the initial intention was..:))) am i making sense?:P

yes ...an artist can walk into a room with 100 nudes and pay them to form an act which confays sin or hell some of which would be sugistive...communicating the basic intent of wrong in order to move the subject the viewer to think or move in one way or another...ie swaying a feeling...creating a mood...but should that end pc be labeled as porn because it stirs a response good or bad? it got paid for or maybe not maybe it could have been commisioned by the male and female to hang in their bedroom. later to be found and placed on show?

do you think that in 30 years from now, porn will be considered an art?:)

30 years....sadly it is alread an art form that ranges in the billions. there art camera angles to study, lighting that sets the mood, writers that look at the playfulness of the scripts...also to create that mood of errotic tenson. do i think there is a place for it...sadly yes but that is another topic it is used to control certain groups.it alows them a release if unchecked their would be much more rapes. but is it art in the sense of the classics i would say no. but there are those that would sway the other way

opinions will be different, of course from yes, it will be an art to NO it will never be an art..hmmm i still prefer the classic art..

i don't mind art moving forward after all it is the voice of a people that have none...an expresstion of the heart. a time capsule which crosses all form of lang. but i do think it a sin to call art porn and porn art. when to me it so clear that the two are in different camps.

Art is a beautiful heart. it creates for happiness and goodness. Art will be purify human to beautiful destination. Porn is a sexual feelings and tend to make love finally. do you agree with me?

Art can also be sad and dark and so a hidden fear or an un spoken truth. porn is the desire of lustful minds.it can be a form of art as well in a tech sense...not everyone that trys to make a home made video or Photo shoot ends up with a good image...and there is some forms that just are plan sick...but in the end i do think it has a place for those who have a need for it in their lives.


don't forget to check out www.fallen-angel-design-studio.com