WebModels Forum is a message board for models, photographers, agents, managers, and others associated with the modeling industry.

Posted by: Christian B. (65.81.5.49) on November 26, 2002 at 14:31:29

Location: South Bee-yotch!

I just had a minor chuckle about reading the word "Implied".

So what's being implied?.. the fact that you have boobs... or that there's a possiblility of getting a better perspective on them if I turn my computer monitor sideways. Is the implication that you COULD be naked... but none of us are supposed to know? It's my understanding that "implied" means nothing. Either there are boobs in the photo... or there are not. Is "implied" a way that webmodels jerk up the rate of a shoot? Do people really pay more for "implied"? Is it a way of saying to the photographer " Hey, I don't want to shoot nude, but I'll make it look like you saw me naked..."? I've noted that "implied" is typically a girl holding or covering her boobs with body parts ( mostly hands ), so does "implied" mean that the model has implied that she has a whole body and that there isn't a great cavity below the part that's covered? Is it the implication that you have " This much boob"? Given that a swimsuit covers less than a human hand... are all swimsuit shots "implied"? Is there any more value for an "implied" versus a white tank top? Will white tank tops now be considered "implied"?

Frankly, I resent the implication.

christian

ps. Is my post image "implied?"

• Damn... now I'm going to go out and shoot BOOBS!

Follow Ups:

• I like "implied" - Cami 15:41:10 11/30/02 (2)
  • "implied" vs "covered" nudes - Doug Lester 17:31:33 11/30/02 (1)
    • Re: "implied" vs "covered" nudes - Rattlesnake Stu 20:47:53 12/01/02 (0)
• Damn, man.... - Union City Photographics 03:51:28 11/29/02 (1)
  • Double Bi-Polar Espresso Please... - Christian B. 14:14:33 11/29/02 (0)
• I Wonder... - Bradford Pettigrew 01:24:11 11/27/02 (1)
  • uhm - Katharine 13:56:03 11/27/02 (0)
• Advice - Katharine 00:31:36 11/27/02 (1)
  • I think I'm in love :) - Christian B. 02:28:18 11/27/02 (0)
• You crack me up - Nancy Freshour 21:16:49 11/26/02 (0)
• Industry standard term - Roger 19:33:27 11/26/02 (1)
  • To follow up - Roger 19:40:52 12/06/02 (0)
• Re: Implied.... Implied What? - Heather 18:09:46 11/26/02 (1)
  • Re: Implied.... Implied What? - Harry 22:35:05 11/26/02 (0)

Do Not Reply to Archived Messages

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Password:  A password is required to post messages. If you do not have one, pleaseregister now!
Subject : 

Location: 

Comments:
: I just had a minor chuckle about reading the word "Implied".  

: So what's being implied?.. the fact that you have boobs... or that there's a possiblility of getting a better perspective on them if I turn my computer monitor sideways.  Is the implication that you COULD be naked... but none of us are supposed to know?  It's my understanding that "implied" means nothing.  Either there are boobs in the photo... or there are not.  Is "implied" a way that webmodels jerk up the rate of a shoot?  Do people really pay more for "implied"?  Is it a way of saying to the photographer  " Hey, I don't want to shoot nude, but I'll make it look like you saw me naked..."?  I've noted that "implied" is typically a girl holding or covering her boobs with body parts ( mostly hands ), so does "implied" mean that the model has implied that she has a whole body and that there isn't a great cavity below the part that's covered?  Is it the implication that you have " This much boob"?  Given that a swimsuit covers less than a human hand... are all swimsuit shots  "implied"?  Is there any more value for an "implied" versus a white tank top?  Will white tank tops now be considered "implied"? 

: Frankly, I resent the implication.

: christian

: ps.  Is my post image "implied?" 


Optional Link URL:  
Example: http://www.webmodels.com
Link Title:         
Example: WebModels - Information and Resources
Optional Image URL: 
Example: http://www.webmodels.com/images/webmodels.jpg

Do Not Reply to Archived Messages