Friday, August 04, 2006


I've been toying with the idea of posting a section for G-rated portraits on my website. I love doing erotica, and I have every intention of continuing with it, but when I started taking pictures, I took portraits, and I kinda miss that. So I've been accumulating portraits I've taken over the years, but I have a bit of a dilemma.

My mother is an executive at a Jewish non-profit which specializes in family programming, and I often volunteer to take pictures of the events. I've taken a few portraits of children at these events that I really like, and I wish I could show them off, but doing so raises two questions:
1. Is it a [really] bad idea for me, an erotic photographer, to post these portraits of children on my website in a clearly labeled G-rated portrait category, even if there is absolutely nothing offensive or sexual about them?
2. Is it a bad idea to post a G-rated portrait category simply because it strays from what I'm best known for, and it compromises the "effectiveness" of the site, or would it show I can take more than dirty pictures?

If I did make this new category, there would certainly be plenty of portraits of adults, but would it be wrong to include children because of the content of the rest of the site?


Anonymous Tracy said...

for many years I kept my nude vs not nude photos separate - comepletely different urls. I have them on the same site now but I htink I have enough of different kinds of work to balance it out. Just as many flower pics as kid pics as rock bands, couple of weddings, etc etc etc. It certainly was a big concern of mine having family photos on the same site with my nudes - esp with xxxporn sites linking to me. being such a small fish in a big pond now it doesn't concern me as much, there is too much out there more interesting if people are pervy, and I think that I have enough diverse images on my site to not freak people out. As much.

1:17 PM  
Blogger stinker said...

hi sam
sometimes in life you gotta do what the "normal" people do to pay the bills or play along with the game. Go for it, but rename or what ever you have to do. That way the "normal" ones can go there and see the kinky things we like...-p

8:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

re: number 2, i think the quality of the erotic photos is a good sign that you would be totally capable of taking high-quality non-erotic photos. but if it were me I wouldn't put kid photos near sex ones. if nothing else, you'd want those kids to be able to see the photos of themselves online, right?

continuing to send good job-hunt wishes your way,
cajun ralph

10:18 PM  
Blogger Samantha Wolov said...

yeah, see i'm thinking kids+sex photos=really bad idea. plus, i dont have model release forms. so yeah, no kiddies on the site.

10:24 PM  
Blogger Chris Rywalt said...

I wouldn't worry about the proximity of kid photos to erotic photos. But I've been told by a couple of different, fairly savvy people that one of the problems with my site (the gallery, not the blog) is my paintings are all over the map. While I'm proud of everything that's up there, it is confusing to a viewer, I guess, to see "childlike sweetness" followed by "heavy fucking images," to use quotes from my reviewer.

So I'd say you should keep them separate only for that reason. Maybe have two different sites with different domains. The erotic one can point to the G-rated one (but maybe not vice versa).

7:06 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home