In the first part of this, I'm going to be referring to music. The word alternative, and this is just my opinion, maybe it's true maybe not, was a marketing phrase created in the early 90's directed at kids who were buying/listening to rock style music, that was strictly about art and not associated with image, or the exploitation of women, or testosterone. Regarding the word image....listen, if you have purple hair, a nose ring, and ten tattoos, you are displaying an image. Regardless of the intentions, it's something you are choosing to make a statement to the world about who you are. When I use the word 'image' in reference to hair metal bands, I'm referring to a view of rock music that included really petty fake things such as making these faces of "Oh this is so hard, look at me roll!" to guitar solos, or every album having to include a slow love song about a woman. In regards to mainstream music, this is what was being distributed during the mid to late 80's. You could probably break down mainstream music in to four or five categories. You had country, rock , pop music, and rap (which also was sort of in its own genesis).
Then came Nirvana, and everything changed, from a mainstream perspective. Not that the band had any intentions of doing so, but what happened when Teen Spirit started being played by MTV, resulted in a movement more than just a good album. You know, one thing that in my opinion gets overlooked by most when considering the whole Nirvanamania at the time, is that Nirvana was just one of the bands that was a part of a music community that supported each other. From what I read, Seattle wasn't really too popular a destination for big bands and it only makes sense that these people would just form their own music scene. This wasn't music about hair or image or sex, this was music in its most honest form. A song like Fell On Black Days or Alive, is not something you can just pull out of your ass and hope it sells ten million copies. This was very raw unaffected music and considering that in terms of rock, what was being offered at the time was way over produced, it was a huge breath of fresh air, and you know what? People responded to it.
The mainstream called this, 'alternative' music. Blech.........what a horrible word to use. Alternative to what? It's all art, why even bother putting a label on it? Art should have no limits. If you want to paint a canvas blue, and then throw a fork in the middle of it, what is wrong with that? If you want to play thrash metal and splice in there a bit of banjo, what the hell is wrong with that? Anyway, I have just described to you a certain time in history. I 'get it' regarding why the word was used back in 1992, it definitely was an alternative to the music that was being played on the radio. However, in today's music, there's no goddamn fucking way that using the word 'alternative' holds any water when it comes to describing music. Everything has been split up into a thousand different categories.
So here's what inspired me to do this blog. Recently, I came across the blog of an SG who hadn't been active in a while. She had returned and said how she didn't fit in the SG community anymore. I am not quoting, but it was along the lines of how a good majority of sets that are chosen are of thin under 24 year old women, and how most sets have a background of bed bath and beyond, and contain repetitive poses and soft light, and how she wished for more diversity. She is not saying this in an angry, I hate SG, type of way, but in a very respectful tone of voice, and she just wishes there was more diversity. Now, this is not a blog post on bashing someone else's view of what they think of this place. However, there are a few things regarding her statements that I want to examine closer because I agree with one thing but don't agree with another.
1) Diversity
Take a look at @sairyn 's latest set SWAMP HEX
Every photo of this set is pure AMAZINGAWESOMENESS!!! There is so much to love about this set, from @sairyn herself, to the background, to the photography...just WOW! Everything goes together in this set. The color/tone of the swamp, Sairyn's black clothing, her modeling...
Here is @pebblezink and her latest set GAWD ZILL RAR
From the city in the background, to the Godzilla t-shirt, to her natural beauty, to the color of her socks and color of the sofa, everything in this set seems to go together. LOVE LOVE LOVE!!!!
Then there is @coolicio and her latest set STAY AWAKE
I sooooo love sets done out in nature! Again, everything matches up perfectly in these photos, the color/style of her shirt with the field and the sun..She's sooo super beautiful!! LOVE LOVE LOVE!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm only using three sets done within the past couple of weeks as an example to illustrate my point. I definitely believe that there is diversity among the sets. But here's another thing regarding diversity, and that is the members and models of those who are a part of this community are spread out in the world. I noticed this last year, it seemed like a good majority of the sets were from people who lived in Russia, Australia, Chile, Colombia, etc. and not in the US. I wonder if there is a statistic available to see just how many SG's and hopefuls are not from the US. Compared to ten years ago, that's a huge shift in the SG demographic. But what that also means is that new beliefs for what defines beauty are being introduced almost on a daily basis. There are different perspectives on everything from nipple rings, to blue hair, to what it means to have a tattoo that are coming from all over the world. I absolutely think it's important to realize this. What does it mean for someone to do naked photo shoots while living in Colombia vs. someone who does the same thing but lives in Brazil? I mean, is it more taboo to do it in one country vs. doing it in another? What does it mean to have pierced nipples in Russia compared to what it means to have them from someone living in Australia? These are all things that have to do with culture and cultures across various countries have a lot of differences between them.The term beauty has many different meanings across many parts of the world. You can have two females living in different countries with pink hair and the same type of body mods, with completely different interpretations of what they mean. But also, that's just being human. I dunno, it's just fascinating for me to see beauty from all over the earth.
2) Bed, Bath, and Beyond sets. Hmmmm....Here's what I think this particular SG is referring to: On November 2, 2006, the set of the day was with the lovely @dominick TANK RIDER . This is sooooooooooooo awesome!!
Look, I've only returned for a couple of years now, which means there are a lot of years of SG photos that I don't even know exist. But since I've been back, I don't think I've seen a set that looks anything like this. There's something about this that says it's a pretty daring set. If you browse the sets from ten years ago, and you should, just by looking at the thumbnails of sets of the day, there's definitely a pretty obvious difference from the poses to the themes, compared with what you see today. Could a set like this become set of the day in today's SG? I just get the feeling that I'm asking a very silly question. Of course it would be, why not? But then why aren't there more 'daring' sets being submitted to SG? I dunno about bed, bath, and beyond, but the sets over the past couple of years seem to be less 'in your face' or controversial. But is that necessarily a bad thing? I really enjoy whats going on here as much as I did ten years ago.
What I definitely wish I would see more of are set's such as @morgan's IN A CROWD
I cannot even begin to describe the amount of artistic value that something like this has for me. I dunno, is this considered controversial in today's world?
One last thing on the 'bed, bath, beyond' comment from the SG. I'm not convinced that the website is telling people to 'tone down' the sets that are being submitted, but rather they are showing us what's being submitted to them. But I also think it's one of the actual positive reflections of who we've become as a global society. Yes, there's an awful amount of hatred going on in the world, but this place is one of the few that you will find people from various backgrounds, doing their thing without it. Regardless of whether or not a tank is used in the set or if it's just a plain white backdrop with a bed, people display their own beauty on here and I think we all do a good job of showing our support to one another.
3) soft light and repetitive poses. This is something that I've actually heard a couple other people talk about when the subject of newer sets on here arises. I am definitely not at all knowledgeable about photography so I know nothing about light settings involved, what to do and what not to do. I only see the end result. I've never done a photo shoot with anyone or anything. So I have no clue what preparations are made before the photo shoot happens. You know who does? @kezia and what an awesome, appropriate coincidence that the day the writing of this blog occurs, a set she photographed with the lovely @lita has been released today. MOVING DAY
I actually asked @kezia a question about this very photograph when she did a blog about it a few months back, and I got a very detailed answer (and for length purposes, I will cut and paste some of it):
What exactly does 'edit' mean when doing these types of photo sets?
Kezia:
In terms of art direction, editing, or anything else it's dependent on a) the photographer and b) the model. Some models are more versatile, others have a very specific image in mind. I tend to edit very gently in terms of retouching. Editing, to me, is levels. White balance. Brightness. Editing is when you make all the pictures match, and make them the same colour and they each look their best while also fitting into the whole. Retouching is where you get rid of those pieces of paper or whatever else. Some models have different things they are self conscious about... For example, some models are mothers and have stretch marks. One model might proudly flaunt hers while another wants her stretch marks edited out. Personally, unless specifically asked, I only edit out pimples, bruises, and random distracting things in the background. I edit it make things cohesive, so sometimes I'll mess with the type of green in the trees to match a different exposure, for example...
The reason I'm bringing this particular conversation up is because of this 'soft light' thing. What exactly is soft light but also, what purpose does it serve in terms of the model and the set? Is the phrase 'soft light' being used to degrade the types of photos or to provide a compliment? I've seen a few pics on here where the color of a particular part of a models body, be it boobs, butt, or legs, are very bright looking. I wonder if it has anything to do with the lighting or if it wasn't edited properly. Is that soft lighting?
And a couple other things I should mention, technology and access to technology. I'm not sure if many members of this website take advantage of looking at some of the older sets on here (and if you haven't, you're missing out) but to display my point, here's a couple of photos from some of the very first sets done on this website: This is @kendra BREAKFAST
As you can see, copyright 2001. What technology was back then vs what it is today, but also, who had technology back then and who has access to it today..........I highly doubt that these pictures were of the digital kind, but furthermore, I can only imagine what a pain in the ass it would be to do any type of editing to film back then. So when I say 'who had access to technology', in 2001, a highly popular magazine such as Vogue, probably did have the people and money needed to do editing to their photos, while those who were involved with Suicidegirls.com initially probably didn't have a whole lot of money in their budget to do editing. I think it's pretty safe to say that there is no editing of this photograph.
What about lighting though? @kezia hopefully you can chime in here....does this particular photograph provide any clues to you as to what type of lighting was used or camera? But furthermore, what do you think this exact moment with Kendra, would look like if it were done today with today's technology?
4) Backgrounds.....The first picture I used in this blog is that of @sairyn . This set was done with a background of...a swamp. Others have a background of mountains, fields, the ocean. Then there are those that are done indoors. Beds, bed sheets, marble, kitchens, ovens, bathrooms, bathtubs......a background doesn't necessarily 'make' the set, but the interaction between a model and the background definitely has an important role. Again to bring up @kezia , this is from a set called GOLDEN STARE
There is definitely action going on in the background of this photo, but @sparrowlegs doesn't seem to notice or perhaps care. Her thoughts are elsewhere. Just my interpretation of it, but this is exactly why I'm so happy that people such as @sparrowlegs and @kezia exist...there's so much to think about when looking at just one picture..
Finally though, again go back to the past and look at some of the earlier sets on this website. This one is called VELVET
This is @voltaire . This is sooooooooooooo magnificent!!!!!! The look on her eyes, the pose with her hands, the jewelry, her fingernails, the lingerie, her hair........and what's the background? Just a red backdrop. Fucking amazing!!!! But you know, a good majority of the early sets were just that, either a white or red backdrop. Do you think this set would make front page today? Absolutely!
5) thin women under 24. My initial knee jerk response to this was...well, that's because most of the people who submit sets are under 24, not that this website is specifically selecting models under 24. In regards to the 'thin' part of the comment...there is a description of this website on their twitch page which goes as follows:
We're a global sorority of badass babes of all shapes and sizes. What some people think makes us strange, or weird, or fucked up, we think is what makes us beautiful.
FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let me conclude with this phrase called 'alternative beauty'. What exactly does this mean? For me, alternative beauty doesn't exist because everyone has a different view on what is beautiful, and quite frankly, that's how it's supposed to be. Was this phrase introduced in order to show some type of correlation between 'alternative music' and people with piercings/tattoos/green hair? Maybe this was true in 1992, but in 2016, sorry, that's definitely not true. Or, does alternative beauty refer to alternative to lets say Kendall Jenner? You know, while the quality of the photos have changed, the themes of the sets have changed, the demographic of the models and members have changed, one thing remains constant and that is you will find some amazing beauty in all of the sets. :)
