[removed]

When in doubt, use the female form as an easy out. 👌

What do you mean?

In the cacophony of art featuring nude women, I appreciate this one.

The focus on the face, the intention, agency and relatability of the model.

It’s a life drawing study, a damn good one

Here before the lock

Probably just that this sub is a good 70% images of naked white women in various mediums

Even if that was true, why is that bad?

Well, I'm guessing they are a part of the loud crowd that think the human body should be banned from art, that we should pretend it doesn't exists, and everyone should adjust and create work just to please them.
Luckily, I've been around long enough to not care, and will continue study the subject in the world all humans share - whenever I want to :) I find it interesting when people who have contributed 0 posts of art to the reddit try to lecture me on what art is (like it was an objective thing).

It's boring.

Art is supposed to make you think

Thank you. Yes, I don't put focus on sexuality and I was learned with classroom studies. The human body is a challenge, and also something we all share, therefor it is interesting as a subject to me.

I do draw men sometimes, all though I'm better at women - most models that was put in front of me when I studied were female. I am aware that it could be weird though, that a guy is painting (often younger) nude women, so that's something I am thinking about.

[removed]

Interesting, when I browsed the subreddit before posting I saw none

I do agree that many posts are simply porn-lite (and sometimes not even that). But this is a fucking good painting, which captures the form and flow of the body excellently. While it is a nude woman (with a fulsome bosom…) I don’t think is the same category of other objectified pictures.

Disregard reddit opinions, grind art. This is the way.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, when you paint the light and shadows do you idealize the light or do you stay accurate to life with all its complexities.

Thanks, yes I found it funny when checked the commenters complaining and it turns out they poste no artwork themselves, just putting their "opinions" under other people's posts.

In this I followed the natural light first but then changed it a bit, because I did not think the image worked, thanks for asking :) For example the background was dark irl.

Stop the whining and create /r/ArtNonNude

If you posted all the historical art ever made in r/art the prudes here would whine that there's so much nudity (gasp! a nude woman in art??) Grow up, y'all. In a world full of actual porn a classical, platonic appreciation for the human body would not be remiss.

[removed]

this is a great example of how artistic nudity is and what should be considered as fine on this page. even if the figure was female, its clear done for artistic purposes and centers on the figure, not the figures nudity

[removed]

It’s not about being prude. It’s that most of the nude women pieces on here are like bad 70’s pinup girls. Objectified, lifeless, and badly drawn.

[removed]

Are you suggesting that this one is?

Because I feel I managed to neither make it a pinup or objectified or, if I might say so, badly drawn... even if I (as always) feels there is room for improvment.

I'm not talking about those posts. I'm talking about this one.

No, not at all. I was replying to a comment about r/art and nudity in general. I think this one is well done and actual art

10-15%. I see so many of these arguments that I frequently count.

Everyone exaggerates. It is 10-15%. And also your piece is incredible.

The model has agency, and is relatable? I see this as "more art, less porn" but I think your weird choice is "random bullshit go!"

You didn't mention this post at all in your first comment.

Really? There was a photograph of a naked woman playing chess with a cat not too long ago. It had quite a few upvotes for something that wasn’t particularly interesting. I noticed a few of the comments thought it was a painting when it wasn’t so maybe that had something to do with it.

Agency: the model is employed as a life drawing figure. She knows that she will be portrayed, and she chose how. She is an active partner in the art making process.

Relatable: artists commonly have some experience with life drawing.

Ahh ok. I saw no indication that this was a model posting for a painting, vs a photograph used for reference. But I guess you made sure you had the facts before you made your comment.

Cheers!

How long did the model pose for the painting?

[deleted]

I was on this post in my first comment, dude 😂

Yes, but you made a meta-comment about the sub as a whole.

Based on what I saw on this post.

Okay then turn off nsfw and you'll get all the other stuff

Yeah I saw that after posting. However, one post does not 70% make. While scrolling through many more posts I think I saw one more nude women, and one of a man (which got praised and no discussion about nudity - at that time I read).I also saw what very much looked like a pinup, although you could not see nipples... But there were no off topic discussion about the whole subreddit under that post at that time (could be now, as it was some hours ago I looked).

It was from a photo reference, but looked up the camera setting. The answer is 1/50 second :)

[removed]

I'll be honest. Where are people seeing this? I can agree that Frank Frazetta style women are just bad (not dissing him, but I think he turned to sex and violence later in his career to make a living), but I really don't see the oversexualized women on this page that everyone is rioting about. At this point it seems like artists could just draw a photo realistic copy of a figure and have people complain that they are porn afflicted minds.