On 10/24/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I totally agree with your view Matt. BTW, are there any copyright issues with the images? I'm on a public machine, so I'm not going to dare checking...
I thought I'd probably feel the same way, after Matt's description, but fortunately I am on a laptop at home, so I was able to check. The pictures seem to be be completely in order.
There are no visible advertising watermarks on the image. The uploader, sbc01, correctly licensed his photographs under the GFDL. They're were clearly created primarily for demonstration rather than erotic purposes. Unlike in pornography, the poses show the whole body from head to toe, and a wide enough area around the body to show suspension ropes and the like in detail, and the use of the face and facial expression, a primary erotic tool in pornography, is almost totally absent here--even where the face is not completely concealed behind a mask or gag.
Matt removed one photograph on grounds of nudity. The model is lying flat on her tummy, gagged, and with her limbs tightly bound behind her. She is visibly wearing thong panties, the side strap of which can be seen at her left hip. She is obviously naked from the waist up but her pose completely conceals her breasts. Her crotch is out of sight, her buttocks are concealed by her bound wrists and hands. The viewpoint is a few feet above and to her left side, and her left shoulder and head are nearest to the camera.
Although I would hesitate to call this pose decent--the model is after all semi-naked and restrained in a manner that would be humiliating and upsetting in other contexts--in my opinion this is an excellent example of how to illustrate sexual bondage play.
In another photograph, illustrating vertical hogtie, the model is suspended in a vertical posture and pictured from behind and above her left shoulder. Again the buttocks are concealed behind bound hands and wrists. The model's right breast and naked nipple are exposed in profile and if you squint a bit, or use zoom on your image viewer, I supposed you might see something that might give a particularly sensitive American Superbowl viewer a small palpitation.