Trillonzine

Can Super-Busty, and Curvaceous Models Work Be Classified In an Artistic Sense The Same as Average Figured Models?

To do a little something different to day I thought I would as the admin express some thoughts.

If you’ve got the time let’s talk about whether or not curves denotes a stylish photo, or whether the general bustiness or curvaceousness of a model creates a different effect in a finished photographic shot.

Really the question is does the curvaceous form detract away from having a general and artistic view of a photo shot of a model?

Model Link

Do large breasts, in tight or revealing clothing or large hips or butt distract the eye from the rest of the make-up of the photo making it all about the body of the model.

Is it impossible to have large body features which might normally be thought of in a pornographic sense on web and be art at the same time?

This would seem to be a valid question just because of how the internet or industry of sex appeal have presented having large breast and butt.

model link

In the norm, these features are flaunted and can often be the highlight of the photo over anything which would be named ‘artistic’.

To be honest too, there are plenty of women with these rather ‘abstract’ body proportions and features who openly flaunt their natural gifts for the sake of attention either leading to their increased income or otherwise likes or followers.

It can be hard in this type of climate to see those women with above average body features and not think of it in this way when so many women do use their extra-proportionate bodies to boost their income, or even supplement it.

The question can become am I as a viewer to respect the likes of such a model, or do I view these displays for what they are?

What about those models with these extra proportions who aren’t looking to flaunt them for the sake of simply boosting their following without any added value? How does the light of this situation play out for them if they’re against showing off in such a superficial way?

Model Link

Anybody ever asked themselves this question? It’s not like it isn’t something to be aware of even if you’re not personally effected.

When is it a clear line in between pure exhibitionism, and exploitative means for sake of financial stability?

Truly, there’s no judgement to be placed on either one yet it becomes a difficult thing once one with such a gifted shape is looking to get into finer-class artistic work.

Yet there is difficulty in cross-association when in the mind you’re biggest association with a curvy shape paired with a tiny waist is the mass of women who flaunt it for maximum usefulness.

Generally, in western-trait society we’re used to a certain level of sexual stimulation being artistic, denoting a smaller figure yet when you go beyond that the sexuality has the ability to drown out the artistic nature.

That isn’t to say that large breast, and bottoms are innately un-artisic, rather they should be naturally more artistic. The problem is the prevalence of the use of such figures, which is the opposite of art, which is more pornographic.

The difference from erotic, and pornographic is the line between art and images used for sexual over-stimulation to the point of sexual release.

You might say that porn can be artistic, and this is probably true as some do try to come of in this manner but the overwhelming sort is far from the subtlety of what we call art.

Its the subtle nature which makes many things art. The hinting at, or the pointing to but not necessarily coming out and saying “hey check this out!” Such is more of a natural art flow, the concern of just a little but not to much as to eschew and distract from the message of it.

Not that all art exemplifies some sort of message, yet good art is at least left up to the probability of having its purpose left up to interpretation.

It’s probable to say that to see a plus figure in an artistic way, there must be at least some hint of subtlety there. Without it, we would probably associate it instantly with having exploitative means.

That’s nothing good, or wanted, to one wanting to come off as art.

To distract the senses from a interpretive art, to an over-stimulation of the sexually reproductive section of the brain would be a failure of the art of a thing in a way.

The generally perverted would not necessarily be something a majority of us would call art. Likewise the perverted persons creating perverted art, photographer or model would not be usually one looked at as an artist.

To create art in such a manner there must be a balance between the figure of subject, either the delivery or non-subject elements included in the complete whole.

If you’re gonna do perverted, you gotta do it right for people to call it art if at all.

That would be a large problem too- the following generations seem to be more about instant gratification, that of a perverted sort, than a slow and gradual appreciation of subtlety.

This no doubt is apparent in the minds of such creatives as well. This too should award them with at least some empathy in their pursuits of producing content.

In the wave of the pandemic it’s understandable during these tough times to look for any extra sources of income for more financial security. With that we can move forward with an increased sense of leniency.

In the wake of growing sites like OnlyFans becoming more mainstream this does imply the use of more sexually stimulating content from your favorite models, or influencers if that’s what you’d call them. People do need to make a living so this is only practical.

Noting that point, it would probably be said that what is mainly practical is not art in itself, but only something which serves a purpose- probably a more single-minded purpose.

If you’ve ever scrolled Instagram, there’s a distinctive difference between an account made for a practical single-minded purpose, and one which is more like a portfolio of work with a little bit of day-to-day life in there.

It’s nice to not only see the behind the scenes of any particular model, but also a little bit more into their personal aspects sprinkled with a little more personality. The port-personal model profile is the exact definition of this. The opposite would be the profile with the slew of shots accentuating the body, or body parts which imply a more teasing mentality.

The latter would be the non-artistic, of the two.

The difference between any profile, cache of photos (photo set,) or body of a model’s work would really seem to be the message or what their trying to convey.

This mean’s the difference between art, and sexual fan-based content.

Noting that the difference between model A, with large breast and also butt to be frank, and model B of same body type, would be the message conveyed by the body of work, or selectivity of how they choose to present themselves in their work.

This “selectivity” being what they’re allowing to hit the viewable surface in terms of personal brand, if you would call it that, and what they select to keep hidden.

This selectivity is the peak difference between the erotic model, and the pornographic and capitalistic model. While neither being good or bad, the usefulness of the work speaks to two different purposes. While one can be seen to have a more contributive air, and the other more of a selfish or for monetization purposes air.

The difference between the two is simply the selectivity of what is allowed to be shown on the surface, as it’s the body of work which more or less defines the brand of the model.

The brand is the important part, as when the brand is set in a more extreme and sexually charged sense it’s no doubt hard to change that and be seen in a more modest sense.

In effect the fans of sexual pornographic content wont be around when you wish to change and be more active in using your content in a more holistic worldview to contribute art to society.

In closing, can you view a model with a particularly large set of natural gifts as art? Yes, you can, but in total it depends on how she is branding herself.

Art is art for the most part when there is a message for the overall good. It mostly stops being art when it turns and instead focuses on personal gain rather than the holistic effect.

It’s possible to view a busty, curvy gal as art when this does exist, yet in the climate of the internet where such personal gain centered work exists it can be hard to point out the gold in the rough.

Maybe It’s all about the model’s sense for that selectivity in the end?

Leave a Reply

error: xx001277 xxx x-)
%d bloggers like this: