Pinup and Porn.. where is the line? NWS!! SORRY!!!

[PunkGirl_Inc]

Ok.. so i was looking at this new site thing, pinupparkinglot.. or whatever.. it seems like, to me, that a LOT of pinup models are getting more and more edgy.. or.. naked..
I know there different categories of modeling, but where does the line get drawn as far as pinup style portfolios??
is this pinup?
http://www.pinupparkinglot.com/blog_uploads/2009/01/_mg_6551-editwe...

or should these be considered somethign else??
this?:
http://www.pinupparkinglot.com/blog_uploads/2009/01/angem-012608-ch...

ABSOLUTELY NO OFFENSE to the photographers or models.. these photos are beautiful.. but are they "pinups"?????

[2d1jh4f6bcokc]

Great topic here Punk Girl......................... These in my opinion are NOT pinup !!!! Pin up for me are the photo's that leave more to the imagination ...... That's my 2 cents.......................

[NolaChick™ {Madam}]

Pin up, in my mind, is the "tease" aspect of it. To me, it means no nudity, just the suggestion of sexiness. I don't think there is anything wrong with nude/fetish pin ups, but it's not what I think of when I think "classic pin up". On the other hand, Bettie Page went nakey and fetishy quite a bit, so I guess it's all personal opinion. I have nothing against any of it, though, as long as it isn't "nasty close up of a vagina" shots. Those are gross!

[Honey B Hooligan {Madam}]

I would say that both of these are more Fetish than Pin-Up.

That being said, they both have a Pin-Up "feel" to them...the hair, the lighting...although, in both photos, the women look like they're having orgasms....def. NOT Pin-Up.

Beautiful Fetish photos though! (and I agree with SF...what is she doing with that SHOE??? I mean, I love my shoes...but DAMN!)

[Ms. Niki]

To me this is NOT pin up, they insinuate masturbation and girl on girl action of which i do not think is classy at all or traditional pin up. I have no problem with these photos in general, but they do not fit the category of pin up to me. People need to remember that pin up is about the tease, not just letting it all hang out there!

[Poppy Fields]

Oooooooh this could get interesting!

IMO:

I would definitely classify these as "fetish".

They aren't porn, because they're too classy/refined/crisp. Porn - to me - implies a certain... lack of production value :) Slapped together, nasty models, nasty set and Attack of the 50" Vag!!!! Basically, porn is porn because it can't possibly be classified as "art", not even maybe; it exists for one purpose alone.
Summary: porn = body parts & lots of skin.

(Professional-grade) Fetish caters to specific tastes/categories. You need special costumes and sets and the final product is engineered, rather than *spread* CLICK *add another finger* CLICK and so on ;D Fetish looks good, like some effort went into it. It's a form of theatre.
Summary: fetish = components & scene; skin optional.

Really good fetish is absolutely art. The crossover happens when the subject/focus of the picture is no longer the situation or the props/costume, but the person or body being portrayed. I'm thinking of Annie Liebowitz's more controversial sets as an example. To draw the line: porn is fake, art is true.

(Classic) Pinup is a closer relation to fashion than fetish or porn. It is engineered, there are "situations", costume and props are generally integral, but the focus is divided between these. The girl is pretty, friendly, cute, accessible; never gorgeous (as she would then be unattainable) or intimidating in any way (unapproachable). The scene is non-threatening, feminine or comical and something everyone is familiar with: taking a bath, oops! strong wind gust, a day at the beach. Costuming and make up is sexy and saucy; titillating, but not wild and plays on common fantasies and desires, rather than full-blown fetishes. Pinup always works within a set of well-established boundaries; there is a lot of repetition, but it never gets old because it's just too gosh darn likeable! :)

Modern pinup draws from the classic standards and allows women to express themselves in a more accurate (to this time) manner, while honouring the ideals of the past: wilder hair, punk/goth/etc clothing, more aggressive expressions and body language. (Think of the development of pinup art from Nouveau to Deco to 30's to 50's... What was depicted was always appropriate to the time. Maybe a little scandalous, but never offensive.) BUT, the motivation is the same and the girl is still attractive and approachable. Most importantly, the humour remains.
Summary: pinup = balance & accessibility

Pinup vs. The Rest: the distinction is the sense of humour, the tease (as so many have said) and the equal importance of all elements in the picture.

[Tune in later for my next thesis dissertation. Yikes, woman, cram it!]

[Betty Sue]

"porn is fake, art is true" I couldn't have said it any better!

Poppy Fields said:

Oooooooh this could get interesting!

IMO:

I would definitely classify these as "fetish".

They aren't porn, because they're too classy/refined/crisp. Porn - to me - implies a certain... lack of production value :) Slapped together, nasty models, nasty set and Attack of the 50" Vag!!!! Basically, porn is porn because it can't possibly be classified as "art", not even maybe; it exists for one purpose alone.
Summary: porn = body parts & lots of skin.

(Professional-grade) Fetish caters to specific tastes/categories. You need special costumes and sets and the final product is engineered, rather than *spread* CLICK *add another finger* CLICK and so on ;D Fetish looks good, like some effort went into it. It's a form of theatre.
Summary: fetish = components & scene; skin optional.

Really good fetish is absolutely art. The crossover happens when the subject/focus of the picture is no longer the situation or the props/costume, but the person or body being portrayed. I'm thinking of Annie Liebowitz's more controversial sets as an example. To draw the line: porn is fake, art is true.

(Classic) Pinup is a closer relation to fashion than fetish or porn. It is engineered, there are "situations", costume and props are generally integral, but the focus is divided between these. The girl is pretty, friendly, cute, accessible; never gorgeous (as she would then be unattainable) or intimidating in any way (unapproachable). The scene is non-threatening, feminine or comical and something everyone is familiar with: taking a bath, oops! strong wind gust, a day at the beach. Costuming and make up is sexy and saucy; titillating, but not wild and plays on common fantasies and desires, rather than full-blown fetishes. Pinup always works within a set of well-established boundaries; there is a lot of repetition, but it never gets old because it's just too gosh darn likeable! :)

Modern pinup draws from the classic standards and allows women to express themselves in a more accurate (to this time) manner, while honouring the ideals of the past: wilder hair, punk/goth/etc clothing, more aggressive expressions and body language. (Think of the development of pinup art from Nouveau to Deco to 30's to 50's... What was depicted was always appropriate to the time. Maybe a little scandalous, but never offensive.) BUT, the motivation is the same and the girl is still attractive and approachable. Most importantly, the humour remains.
Summary: pinup = balance & accessibility

Pinup vs. The Rest: the distinction is the sense of humour, the tease (as so many have said) and the equal importance of all elements in the picture.

[Tune in later for my next thesis dissertation. Yikes, woman, cram it!]

[Lil_Bit {★}]

I would have to agree with Honey.
Woowza Def Not Classic Pin-up.

Honey B Hooligan said:

I would say that both of these are more Fetish than Pin-Up.

That being said, they both have a Pin-Up "feel" to them...the hair, the lighting...although, in both photos, the women look like they're having orgasms....def. NOT Pin-Up.

Beautiful Fetish photos though! (and I agree with SF...what is she doing with that SHOE??? I mean, I love my shoes...but DAMN!)

[M.R. Borg]

well lets see here pin up vs. porn well lets see here i do belive that the pin up has many catagories i think and i mean that is my own personal thought. and the difference is that pin ups has a certian class to it, it is elegant and it more celebrates the womens body as porn just shows the body almost like what you would find at a meat market. i hope that kinda makes sence. and fetish shots can go both ways its a slipery slop.

p.s. sorry about the spelling, i just am not a good speller sorry.

[Honey B Hooligan {Madam}]

this was extremely eloquently put! and I could not agree more! Porn is Raunchy and Tasteless. Pin-up is about the tease! "oops! my stalking fell down" **flash some leg and garter**

Poppy Fields said:

Oooooooh this could get interesting!

IMO:

I would definitely classify these as "fetish".

They aren't porn, because they're too classy/refined/crisp. Porn - to me - implies a certain... lack of production value :) Slapped together, nasty models, nasty set and Attack of the 50" Vag!!!! Basically, porn is porn because it can't possibly be classified as "art", not even maybe; it exists for one purpose alone.
Summary: porn = body parts & lots of skin.

(Professional-grade) Fetish caters to specific tastes/categories. You need special costumes and sets and the final product is engineered, rather than *spread* CLICK *add another finger* CLICK and so on ;D Fetish looks good, like some effort went into it. It's a form of theatre.
Summary: fetish = components & scene; skin optional.

Really good fetish is absolutely art. The crossover happens when the subject/focus of the picture is no longer the situation or the props/costume, but the person or body being portrayed. I'm thinking of Annie Liebowitz's more controversial sets as an example. To draw the line: porn is fake, art is true.

(Classic) Pinup is a closer relation to fashion than fetish or porn. It is engineered, there are "situations", costume and props are generally integral, but the focus is divided between these. The girl is pretty, friendly, cute, accessible; never gorgeous (as she would then be unattainable) or intimidating in any way (unapproachable). The scene is non-threatening, feminine or comical and something everyone is familiar with: taking a bath, oops! strong wind gust, a day at the beach. Costuming and make up is sexy and saucy; titillating, but not wild and plays on common fantasies and desires, rather than full-blown fetishes. Pinup always works within a set of well-established boundaries; there is a lot of repetition, but it never gets old because it's just too gosh darn likeable! :)

Modern pinup draws from the classic standards and allows women to express themselves in a more accurate (to this time) manner, while honouring the ideals of the past: wilder hair, punk/goth/etc clothing, more aggressive expressions and body language. (Think of the development of pinup art from Nouveau to Deco to 30's to 50's... What was depicted was always appropriate to the time. Maybe a little scandalous, but never offensive.) BUT, the motivation is the same and the girl is still attractive and approachable. Most importantly, the humour remains.
Summary: pinup = balance & accessibility

Pinup vs. The Rest: the distinction is the sense of humour, the tease (as so many have said) and the equal importance of all elements in the picture.

[Tune in later for my next thesis dissertation. Yikes, woman, cram it!]

[Poppy Fields]

Unless it was shoe fetish?

sfphotojournal said:

Honey B Hooligan said:

I would say that both of these are more Fetish than Pin-Up.

That being said, they both have a Pin-Up "feel" to them...the hair, the lighting...although, in both photos, the women look like they're having orgasms....def. NOT Pin-Up.

Beautiful Fetish photos though! (and I agree with SF...what is she doing with that SHOE??? I mean, I love my shoes...but DAMN!)

If they were stripper shoes then it would defintely porn.

[Clay Stephenson]

I think Fetish is the new Pin-Up. It's the taboo that our society is drawn to. The Pin-Up girl of yesteryear was the one to cross that line. Now you go to the bar and any given night there are clothes that would have had girls called not so nice names. But now a days it's acceptable. I think we look back to the pin-ups of the past for the innocence. Even though back in the day it was also quite Taboo.

Fetish is just an extension and evolution of Pin-Up along with Burlesque. They all fit. Porn leaves nothing to the imagination. Pin-Up is all about the glimpse and so is fetish to the same extent. And it's all about leaving it to the imagination.

Besides go back and watch some Bettie Page bondage movies. You'll see Fetish isn't really that different.

Lets talk in 50 years and see what's Taboo then compared to today.

[Dottie Darling]

I wouldn't call those pinup. I would say they are fetish. They may have been pinup inspired but they are not pinup.