Implied to Audience Nudity - ITAN

[sillywong]

Starting this thread to see if people are into my new concept: implied to audience nudity (aka ITAN). An ITAN participant is one that is covering their partial or full nudity towards the intended recipients of an image or performance, but showing themselves partially or fully to their co-performers, bystanders, or the people working on the product.

Here are some examples from naked calendars. Incase it isn’t clear what I mean, I’ll explain for each picture.

In pic 1, despite the students being completely naked, carefully placed props means both the photographer and the audience can’t see anything more than 3 bums (and an accidental nip slip). But everyone standing at the back undoubtedly has an excellent view of the breasts (and probably more) of the lasses twirling upside-down on their poles.

In pic 2, while everyone’s privacy has been skilfully maintained for the camera, you can only imagine the sorts of views those on the ground got of the climbers as they made their way up the wall.

In pic 3, we have the very definition of this idea - a naked girl proudly presenting herself to her naked friends, with the full view of her body kept secret to us, and her fellow models more coyly doing the same on the left, clearly more embarrassed about the situation.

In pic 4, the photographer is up close and personal with the subject, who is making no attempt to cover herself besides the wooden palette at her waist. Both people seem relaxed despite her total exposure to him, but we as the audience can only view her beauty from the rear.

[rudolfm]

There are tons of Charity Calendars filled with nude folks actually showing nothing.

[sillywong]

Originally Posted by rudolfm

There are tons of Charity Calendars filled with nude folks actually showing nothing.

Read my post carefully - that’s not what this is, and it’s not just about calendars. It’s about showing all to someone behind the scenes while showing nothing to the audience.

[sillywong]

Cropped or not, the photographer must have been able to see something here!

[BareAll]

Originally Posted by sillywong

Cropped or not, the photographer must have been able to see something here!

unfortunately I've determined this has been censored and that she has underwear on. she appears wearing underwear in a behind the scenes photo and if you blow this up big you can see where they blurred it out.

[twowide]

Just wonder how much "exposure" the Photographers of the "famous Page 3 Models" saw ? And was there a "tacit agreement" NOT to publish any such explicit views. Seem to recall something about "Photographic Models" appearing in 2 separate Catalogues. One just did "bikini/lingerie" shots. The other had Very Personal Details, vital statistics, favourite positions, cost of each separate "service", travel, accommodation, cum-inside, BJ, Anal, gang bang, BDSM, inter-racial, etc, etc. Natural Blondes were, it seems, Very High Priority Earners ! Wasn't there a Famous 1970's Trial of a British Cabinet Minister, and a "Fixer Osteopath", involved in such ?