Somebody commented on this image they were curious how the picture could be called art. I didn't think they were being derogatory, and I just heard the remark as an honest question. Here's how I replied:
"Im not sure Im the right person to answer your question, but heres my reply. For a start, the image displays a reasonable degree of technical skill from both the model and photographer. Secondly, theres an element of creativity in it: i.e. its more than just a throwaway snapshot. This was a serious attempt to say something by using cameras and bodies and lighting and props etc. And thirdly, the image is also in correct alignment with the contents of my erotic imagination: i.e. it faithfully records what I was thinking that particular day, at that particular time. Ok, you may object, after considering all that, that its not very high art. Such objections would be justified. But so what if it wont ever hang in the Louvre or the Tate Modern? This picture is an utterance of the photographic kind. Its my utterance. Maybe its trivial. But its well crafted; its articulate; and its polite and respectful to the dignity of all concerned in the making of it. It acquires grace and beauty from these considerations alone. It also acquires beauty from the gorgeous figure as its subject. Thats enough to count this picture as art. Just my opinion though. Id be very pleased to hear yours?"
What say you? What's your opinion?