Originally posted by Academic painter
All those things you said are just negative assumptions and not facts.

Which parts are negative assumptions not based on facts? Given it was common practice to use nude models in commissed paintings I think artists probably did use nude child models for their paintings.

I know many artists, painters that have painted their children as nudes and sculptures also nudes. and I know them well. No one never have molested their children in any way.

You have no proof of that and I have no idea if Ben henson got an erection when shotting those pictures. A mother painting their child playing naked on the beach is VERY different from strange men who troll school playgrounds eyeing off pretty children to photograph naked. If that was legally tolerated pedos would take up art photograhy and take advantage.

And there's something else... I very much doubt that you are and artist, and if you are, I doubt you have seen an Academy of fine arts. You most probably are old fashioned paranoid and angry Policeman that has no clue about art what so ever.

Wow getting to personal attacks already..? No I'm not a police man.. I am a woman who happens to be quite an good artist in her own right. The fact that you think people have to "qualify" to be good artists by your "academic" standards shows a very narrow minded view indeed. The fact that you assume I have no artistic ability just because I don't agree with you is just silly.

[edit on 12-1-2010 by riley]

I said you have been missing art history classes as you don t know about live models, not that you have no artist ability. Don't turn around my words, please? Thank you.
And yes, as one needs to finish Medical university to be a Doctor I think one can easy finish Academy of fine arts to be Academic painter. Yes I know that Academy of fine arts is the thing u need to have finished to prove you hav artist ability, and that u fully understand art or Academy of fine arts is not needed.

They must have been white kids.

National Geographic has been showing naked tribal peoples,including children, for decades. They don't count though, because many don't consider them "real people" apparently. Talk about racism and ethnocentrism.

Call it cultural and climate.

Originally posted by Deny Arrogance
They must have been white kids.

National Geographic has been showing naked tribal peoples,including children, for decades. They don't count though, because many don't consider them "real people" apparently. Talk about racism and ethnocentrism.

To end this endless artworks discussion... I have not seen the photos that were sized by the Police. Maybe they were to be sized. All I wanted to say is that nude models for posing in arts as painting or photographing should not be considered child porn if model is a child. But also no artist will take photos or paint any models no matter the age to show their genitals, there can be seen breasts but not downwards... it's not estetic to do such artwork, rather vulgar no matter what the models age is. But I have seen too many times course of this pedophilia paranoia that some good and quite estetic artwork was considered child porn just becourse of age of model, but there were no genitals to be seen, only upper part of body. And if painter paints nudes, he needs live model, specially for realism, naturalism and impressionism figure painting as it is most respected artwork in oil painting. No flowers or landscapes ever were so highly priced in art as figure painting and nude figure painting. But if one paints modern art, sure one does not need live model, but I also consider modern and abstract art a black stain in art painting rather than art. First one must know how to paint a high quality realism paintings and only than if so he can paint abstract art. Those who paint only abstract art and can not paint realism, course they don't have the
eye and hand to paint realism I do not consider artists. Course of those the word ART has lost it's real meaning in this world. And this days anything can be art if critics say it is. Once the art was considered a work that was done by a mans hand so good that not many could do the same. It was unique and perfectly done. This days everything can be art...
And let me tell you that some journalists have put donkeys tail in oil colors and that made an exhibition of those paintings. They told critics that those are works of a well known artist. And critics claimed those art works are work of a genius. So the journalists told them, well than the Donkey is a genius artist. This happened when the modern art and abstract art toke place in art history.
Almost anyone can paint some flowers and landscapes... but not many can paint high quality realism figure paintings or portraits. And those who can, they need live model to do so. They must learn anatomy of a human body on Academy of fine arts... they must understand how the muscles work, how they stretch and how they look stretched to do high quality nude figure painting and there's no genius to do so with out a live model.