>>3510401>my man, you misinterpreted my statements flawlessly.Learn to communicate better.
>a photographer doesn't have to request nudes to consider doing a nude shoot probono. Not every request for nudes is in pursuit of some kind of perverted agenda. There are legitimate reasons to do so. Let's step back and think about this. How is it in any way better that a photographer doesn't ask for such, does the shoot and ends up with nudes of the model? Even if we assume the photog is just being 100% a GWC in what way is the case of not asking and still getting nudes that the photog got to take better?
>they can simply say "no".So, if the real answer is "maybe, depends on what you look like nude", then screw the opportunity for both of them. It's just a no.
>there doesn't have to be this creepy contingency of "if you do something for me first".Why is it creepy to see if she actually is what he actually wants to shoot before commiting to a free shoot? Again, if he doesn't ask and does the shoot, he gets to see her naked and photograph her. Only he's possibly out that time and effort if she's not what he was looking for. I cannot understand for even the briefest of moments how anyone argues for that possibility as somehow being less creepy.
>this was a classic example of a person in power attempting to use their power to exploit a person with less power.Or someone who values their time and doesn't waste it doing projects they don't particularly want to. Yeah, power dynamics are a thing, but just as free as the photographer is to say no, she's just as free to say no. There's tons of photographers out there. Just as he has no right to force her to pose for him, she has no right to force him to photograph her.
>why do you support and endorse this predatory behavior?Because this specific example and the specific case of
>free shoot>nudeit's not predatory to ask to see the model nude first. There are definitely other cases where it is predatory. (continued)
