Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brainstorming Solutions for Hiding Tattoos

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Brainstorming Solutions for Hiding Tattoos

    Hi guys,

    I know this topic has been discussed again and again and again. But, unlike most of the other threads, the purpose of this one is NOT just to complain, but to find actual solutions that work and compromises so that everyone involved can reach an agreement and be happy and satisfied.

    I have seen time and time again members coming to the boards complaining about girls keeping their clothing during shoots. And I have also seen many shoots where the models themselves seemed very distracted by their own clothing, trying to keep it in place to hide their tattoos, and this made them seem uncomfortable. For example, in the girl-girl with Beatrix and Carmen, Carmen keeps her t-shirt and skirt in an effort to hide the tattoos on her back and on her leg--which were clearly visible several times anyway. So basically she kept clothing that she had to keep adjusting several times in order to hide tattoos that weren't even hidden--obviously this method did not work and was a distraction for both the models and the members alike. In my most recent girl-girl shoot (which is not yet online), I had to keep on my shirt as well as a sweater tied around my waist throughout the entire shoot. When I was told this, my excitement level about the upcoming shoot dropped by about 50 %. Am I saying that I did not enjoy my shoot? Of course not, my shoot was fabulous and I loved it, BUT I must say that my clothing was a huge distraction and it took something away from my shoot. I feel that the shoot had the potential to be better if I hadn't been busy worrying about my clothing that was in the way.

    AW has made it clear that hiding tattoos is, for them, absolutely necessary. And that's their right to make this decision. It's their website, they decide what kind of content they want to produce and release, and they make the rules. I have no arguments against that. I love and respect AW for everything they do, and they hold a special place in my heart, and I definitely don't want to criticize their decisions. However, I think there must be a BETTER way for AW to keep their values in place, that also pleases the members and the models.

    I will start by offering my own solution. A while back AW considered using photoshop to hide blemishes and/or tattoos in photos, and a lot of members replied instead of photoshop why don't they just use makeup? I personally think this is a very simple solution that doesn't compromise AW's values or style. I still think women shouldn't be allowed to wear unnatural-looking makeup on their face, but a bit of makeup to hide tattoos or extremely distracting blemishes should be allowed, as it doesn't hide the girl's natural beauty or take something away from the shoot, and it will stay in place without her having to think about it or it distracting her. I also think that SOME clothing, such as socks or a cropped sweater that opens in the front, is okay--just not something tied around the model's body that will inevitably slip, or something that is worn in an unnatural way. For example, the sweater in Chiara's solo seems perfectly natural and not distracting at all, because it is worn properly and hides only the tops of her arms while still displaying all of the rest of her body.

    Again, this thread is NOT to complain about the tattoo rule, but to offer up solutions that would hide tattoos in a less inconvenient manner.
    Therefore, if anyone has any creative ideas, please share them in this thread!!
    Last edited by Jada; 16 June 2015, 09:52 AM.

    #2
    Thank you Jada !

    Thank you! I agree with your excellent compromise proposal !

    Comment


      #3
      I was recently looking at the stills from Jada and Kenji's shoot. At one point Jada has her dress positioned clearly to hide her tattoos, in a way nobody would be wearing their clothing if having sex in real life. I find this kind of thing distracting and at odds with the natural philosophy that Abby Winters promotes itself with.

      More and more young women these days have tattoos. I can understand Abby Winters not wanting to shoot women with extensive tattoos (such as full sleeve tattoos), however I don't understand why women with smaller subtle tattoos like the beautiful Jada's need to be hidden. If there isn't a way of hiding the tattoos where the models can still be shot in a natural manner, I would prefer that small tattoos be shown. I feel the Abby Winters natural aesthetic should come ahead of any taboo against shooting models with tattoos.
      Last edited by trebor; 16 June 2015, 05:26 PM.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by trebor View Post
        I was recently looking at the stills from Jada and Kenji's shoot. At one point Jada has her dress positioned clearly to hide her tattoos, in a way nobody would be wearing their clothing if having sex in real life. I find this kind of thing distracting and at odds with the natural philosophy that Abby Winters promotes itself with.

        More and more young women these days have tattoos. I can understand Abby Winters not wanting to shoot women with extensive tattoos (such as full sleeve tattoos), however I don't understand why women with smaller subtle tattoos like the beautiful Jada's need to be hidden. If there isn't a way of hiding the tattoos where the models can still be shot in a natural manner, I would prefer that small tattoos be shown. I feel the Abby Winters natural aesthetic should come ahead of any taboo against shooting models with tattoos.
        This.

        I also think that Jada's compromise is a good one but I think that Abby Winters should reconsider their policy. Maybe they could take a poll of the users to see if they would be in favor of a change.

        Comment


          #5
          Again guys, AW has made it clear that they are unwilling to reconsider this policy. Please try to offer ideas instead of just bashing the policy.

          Comment


            #6
            The solution

            More seriously, there is no solution. Either show tattoos or don't shoot women with tattoos at all (sorry Jada).

            Comment


              #7
              Hi Jada
              I'm not totally sure there are too many option available on this one. Makeup/clothing or only shooting models without tattoos. Photoshop may work on image sets but can it be done to the video??

              Personally, given the current policy, I think that a tattoo concealer type products would be a much better option than the current trying to hide body art with unnaturally positioned clothing. As you mentioned it would be much more relaxing for the model during the shoot and would look more natural/real to the viewer.

              But a question for you Jada, if I may (and other models/members with tattoos). How would you feel about seeing pictures of yourself without the tattoo (concealed or photoshoped). Would it look strange to you? Not just strange but would you be as proud of the shoot as you would have been with either the clothing hiding the tattoo or your tattoo's being fully visible?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Jada View Post
                Again guys, AW has made it clear that they are unwilling to reconsider this policy. Please try to offer ideas instead of just bashing the policy.
                Sorry for reopening the whole tattoo debate, which I realize has been discussed extensively in the older thread (which you provided a lot of helpful feedback in). However your post above reminded me that concealing through clothing is sometimes a less than ideal solution for both people viewing the shoots and more importantly for the models themselves.

                I'm not sure I have any suggestions for constructive solutions to offer. I would definitely not like to see Photoshop and it would be criminal not to shoot a beautiful woman like you because of your tattoos. Your suggestion of using makeup is probably the best solution, though I'm not sure how practical it would be for girl-girl shoots where the makeup might rub off
                Last edited by trebor; 17 June 2015, 01:33 PM.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I think if it was heavy-duty makeup or stage makeup it would not easily rub off, as this makeup is intended to last a long time and to withstand sweat etc. Mrpinkeyes honestly it would not bother me in the slightest to see pictures of myself without my tattoos--in fact, I would much rather see pictures or videos of myself without tattoos, but where you can see my whole body, rather than images of myself with the large majority of my body concealed! Concealing my body with clothing makes me feel as though there is something to hide or I should be ashamed, which just isn't true. My body is beautiful and I want to show all of it, not have to hide part of it because of it being "unnatural"! I think that having my tattoos hidden with concealer or makeup would make me feel equally just as proud as if I were showing my tattoos, because it is still my body being shown and that's what counts. But hiding them with clothing honestly makes me feel SIGNIFICANTLY less proud of my own shoots.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Jada View Post
                    Concealing my body with clothing makes me feel as though there is something to hide or I should be ashamed, which just isn't true. My body is beautiful and I want to show all of it, not have to hide part of it because of it being "unnatural"!.
                    Getting away from the context of Abby Winters, it bothers me that there is still so much tattoo shaming out there in society. Women are still too often made to feel shameful or morally corrupt for having tattoos. I think unfortunately some of this kind of thinking is still prevalent due to the expectation that women should be subservient to men.

                    Thanks for the additional info about the stage makeup. If it can be used for movies perhaps it could be a practical solution for Abby Winters.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I think all of the possible solutions have been proposed. Sorry if anything I said was misconstrued as bashing, it was meant as constructive criticism of the policy. I could be wrong but the rule is a pretty recent development isn't it? Some of my favorite models on here over the years (models that were fairly popular among the members too) have had tattoos. It's not a "thing" for me, some of my favorite models over the years have been completely tattoo-free as well. But yeah, I can't really think of any other solutions besides body makeup, photoshop or the awkward covering of tattoos with various pieces of clothing.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        BUT I must say that my clothing was a huge distraction and it took something away from my shoot
                        As one other suggestion perhaps those light summer dresses that unbutton down the front? I have pleasant memories of undoing those buttons (yes, I can remember that far back!). Worn without a bra underneath, or maybe a strapless or front opening bra, these would tend to hide most tattoos while not proving too bulky or unwieldy as to distract either model.

                        Before our marriage my wife and I were sometimes obliged to keep some clothing on for more than obvious reasons. While this was never a hindrance, in fact I admit to it being somewhat of a turn-on at times, I can nonetheless appreciate Jada's thoughts. There is a distinct difference in a loving couple coming together for mutual pleasure as an expression of that love as opposed to two who have only just met and are about to be joined by arrangement. In the former case there is little that could distract!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I have been a little disconcerted viewing what I assume is camouflage clothing in recent shoots and want to float an idea. Like the no-penis-photos account preference option available to members, could there also be a tattoos-okay preference setting? (default = not-okay) Then the stills session of a shoot could include a few extra shots at the end with no clothing, and those shots would be tagged so that the code that displays stills would include them or not, reflecting the viewing member's preference and based on what it finds as it checks each tag setting. Not ideal, but would let me fully enjoy what I am guessing are beautiful legs, feet, shoulders, etc. I don't expect there is a practical way to do this with video.

                          That said, I have to say I am confused by recent shoots with several tattoos visible, including a girl-girl where one model is wearing stockings, a top, and a thigh-thing while there is no attempt to hide the tattoo on her partner. I had guessed the policy was just 'no tattoos visible ever' but it is something more complex. I always want to figure things out - don't have a good success rate - but am wondering what the policy is...
                          Last edited by simono; 10 August 2015, 04:34 PM.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            There are solo, boy/girl, girl/girl, and IM categories. What about adding a category specifically for shoots with models who have tattoos or piercings or whatnot? You could call them "AWlternative" shoots, and people can view them, or not, according to their preferences. Maybe add a "Hide AWlternative (I'm way too proud of myself for that) content," the same way you can hide boy/girl shoots.

                            Also, the custom zip feature works great if you like some, but not all, of a set. Maybe you could keep tattoos covered for a majority of the shoot, then remove the "camouflage" for the final third or so, for people who don't mind seeing ink.

                            I don't know anything about stage make-up, so my concerns may sound idiotic, but I mean... if I can tell the model is using make-up to cover a tattoo, I'd rather just see the tattoo.

                            Not that I'm complaining. The site is great as it is. Personally, tattoos never did much for me (present company excepted!); but I'd hate to see a potentially fantastic model turned away because she has some.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by mdj812 View Post
                              There are solo, boy/girl, girl/girl, and IM categories. What about adding a category specifically for shoots with models who have tattoos or piercings or whatnot? You could call them "AWlternative" shoots, and people can view them, or not, according to their preferences. Maybe add a "Hide AWlternative (I'm way too proud of myself for that) content," the same way you can hide boy/girl shoots.
                              I had been thinking of something like that too. I think your idea is better than what I was thinking, and you've inspired me to share mine anyway. I had thought AW should just create a new site. The new site could have tattooed women, boy/girl shoots, and maybe even those old 'after dark' shoots that they used to do. What I'm saying is, keep the main AbbyWinters site as it always has been and then have this other site for the newer things.

                              People who don't like the stuff on the new site could just not subscribe. With two sites, Abby Winters could eventually grow into a whole network of sites.

                              But, I think your idea is better because it keeps everything on one site still so I won't have to pay a subscription to two sites.

                              And, I agree with you, using makeup to cover up tattoos would be distracting. What they're doing now is distracting already. Just try not to shoot models who have tattoos, please.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Tattoos are a part of the Girls, a part of her personality.
                                They should not be hidden!

                                EDIT: The same applies for scars, birthmarks, etc.
                                Last edited by Tomm77; 14 August 2015, 03:55 PM.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Like the no-penis-photos account preference option available to members, could there also be a tattoos-okay preference setting?
                                  This seems to me to be the perfect answer to this vexed question which will obviously continue to be raised, regardless that Izzy has clearly stated the AW policy. I have offered some possible clothing solutions elsewhere but ultimately the size, design and location of tattoos creates so many grey areas within the policy that I cannot see anything but ongoing controversy over this issue.

                                  There will obviously be some prospective models too heavily tattooed to be acceptable even to those like myself who are ambivalent about body art, but for those who are accepted the "preference option" will surely provide all members with the most simple and effective answer and finally put this subject to rest.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by mdj812 View Post
                                    There are solo, boy/girl, girl/girl, and IM categories. What about adding a category specifically for shoots with models who have tattoos or piercings or whatnot? You could call them "AWlternative" shoots, and people can view them, or not, according to their preferences
                                    AW has to deliver a certain amount of content/shoots to members each week. Content that fits their policy and what (a lot of) members subscribe for. If they were to shoot 'alternative' content that would take (extra) money and resources, which cannot be recovered from existing subscriptions because they still have to shoot that (not alternative) content as well.

                                    Making a separate site/section would solve that problem to a point, but I'm not sure I'd want to see models assigned to a section based on their looks?

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by Frans View Post
                                      Originally posted by mdj812 View Post
                                      There are solo, boy/girl, girl/girl, and IM categories. What about adding a category specifically for shoots with models who have tattoos or piercings or whatnot? You could call them "AWlternative" shoots, and people can view them, or not, according to their preferences
                                      AW has to deliver a certain amount of content/shoots to members each week. Content that fits their policy and what (a lot of) members subscribe for. If they were to shoot 'alternative' content that would take (extra) money and resources, which cannot be recovered from existing subscriptions because they still have to shoot that (not alternative) content as well.
                                      You're entirely correct, and at any rate, AW's policy isn't going to change. In the end, Jada's original solution is the simplest, and the most faithful to AW's philosophy. I was just throwing ideas around.

                                      I'm not sure I'd want to see models assigned to a section based on their looks?
                                      I agree with you on this. I was referring more to the tone and tenor of a shoot than to models' appearances--sort of like the way After Dark shoots are thematically different from "regular" content. Although, now that I think about it, I'm not sure what that would mean in this context. I suppose this is why no one pays me to design their web sites for them, haha.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        I think Simono's solution is the best one. Shoot tattooed models just as they are shot now, but then add some extra shots with the camouflage clothing removed, i.e., the model fully naked and shot full body front and back. Those extra shots could be put in a separate set called something like "[Model name] with body art". Just like there's a separate Dressing Room set already. Then members could choose whether they want to look at those shots or not. No complete extra shoots would be involved and all members would still have access to everything. It would just be a few extra shots, say about 30. I can't imagine it would add much to the cost of a shoot, if anything at all. And then members who are annoyed by the stupid camouflage would stop complaining.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          Simono's idea still appears to be the simplest and most effective way to overcome this issue, although the downside is that it would obviously negate the no-tattoo policy. If clothing continues to be used as an alternative approach could I again suggest that more careful consideration be given to selection of outfit. A case in point is the shoot between Anahi and Carmen where long knitted stockings would have eliminated the awkward strap around Carmen's left leg. (Incidentally I thought Carmen's outfit of bright yellow, dark blue, red, orange and grey somewhat "overwhelming"! Sorry, Carmen!)

                                          What follows is not an attempt to be critical, nor intended to put Garion or the staff on the spot but merely to seek to understand something that has puzzled me for a while.

                                          Up until quite recently tattoos were openly displayed and then, in a relatively short space of time they began to disappear and now are mostly covered. Yet some still appear on occasion. What then caused this change to come about?

                                          It's difficult to find the answer via the site membership because, through the forum, it seems that some members dislike seeing tattoos, some like them, some are ambivalent, while others dislike the attempt at covering them up. Je suis baffled!

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            I hadn't thought about the stills zip files, since I don't use this feature. As part of making photo content conditionally visible to members based on their account settings, there could be another pair of zip files to contain any additional fully nude material in a shoot, and the zip file links would silently resolve in accordance with the viewing member's tattoo preference. All members would see the same link title, e.g. "X-Large", but which file is actually downloaded when the link is clicked would depend on that member's account setting. I suggest these approaches having created dynamic web pages in a previous life but I don't know anything about methods used in AW site content management so these per-member page customization actions might not be feasible.

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by boomertoo View Post
                                              Simono's idea still appears to be the simplest and most effective way to overcome this issue, although the downside is that it would obviously negate the no-tattoo policy. If clothing continues to be used as an alternative approach could I again suggest that more careful consideration be given to selection of outfit. A case in point is the shoot between Anahi and Carmen where long knitted stockings would have eliminated the awkward strap around Carmen's left leg. (Incidentally I thought Carmen's outfit of bright yellow, dark blue, red, orange and grey somewhat "overwhelming"!
                                              The thing is, Boomer, that they already violate that policy. What the site really wants to do is shoot models without tattoos. The problem with that is that there aren't enough of them. So the "compromise" is to shoot models with tattoos, but try to pretend that they don't have them by hiding the tattoos. And it now seems to be that they only hide them in the solo shoots; you see them quite frequently in IMs and GGs.

                                              Anyway, so having some extra shots in a separate file that could be blocked by members who would rather see the tattooed models with camouflage than naked really is not much of an advance on where they are now, and it would mean that members who would rather see the whole model than the model with bits covered could do so. Personally I don't like tattoos or piercings (apart from the traditional ear piercing), but I'd rather see the whole model even with tattoos than only see selected bits of her. And from the comments that have been made in various threads for a long time now, it seems that there are quite a few who feel the same way.
                                              Last edited by JacksonP49; 17 August 2015, 02:32 AM.

                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                I agree, Jackson, that the policy is already compromised; but then there was, nor cannot be, any way of achieving 100% success with it as the size and location of tattoos are not designed to suit the camera!
                                                However, I still remain intrigued as to what caused the change to occur. From what I have read on the forum there seems to have been no real drive from the membership to rid the site of tattoos yet, over a relatively short space of time they became taboo.
                                                Je suis baffled!
                                                I still am!

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  Another possibility maybe. Create a new message thread titled "Models posing with tattoos revealed" or similar text to alert those who would not want to see such material. AW photographers could take a few extra photos without fabric or other obscuring tactics at the end of a stills shoot and post them to this thread - ideally when the stills shoot is being released. I am primarily thinking of a handful of simple full-body poses (no toys, etc.) and from solo shoots rather than GG shoots (I think most models in GG shoots will also have solo shoots). Models could also post fully nude photos to this thread when back home if they are interested. This would be a method for providing the desired images without the need to modify content management code as I have suggested in earlier posts.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter

                                                   
                                                  Sign up for the abby newsletter. Don't worry, we'll NEVER share your email address with anyone.
                                                  Working...
                                                  X