Not Sweating the Small Stuff

Realism in Photographic, Digital and Cartoon Images

I've just realized I've been seeing a lot of digitally-generated porn appearing round the blog-o-sphere recently, with some almost blurring the boundary with real photographs:




In the first image, the illusion of photographic reality is made more convincing by cute touches like including freckles on the top guy's back!

So I was wondering about the rise of digitals, apart from the natural impulse to play around with the new technology.

Digital technology seems to offer a further level of image realism for an 'artist' of porn to select from. The realism cline or gradient that is available now is 'low' realism level as in cartoons, 'medium-high' with digital images and 'high' with photographs.

So the question is why one would select one level over another when considering the specific content of a proposed image.

I think the selection is to do with the complex inter-relationship between the social acceptability of this content in a genral sense, the force or power one wants to give an image, and the particular audience of the poof-o-sphere that's being targeted.

Quite unacceptable content (conventially speaking) can to be presented in a way that makes it more acceptable for a mainstream gay audience to enjoy when it is being presented in the less realistic (and less powerful) mode of cartoons:


It may still be unacceptable to many audiences.

The content of this cartoon can be made much stronger if presented in a realistic digital image or in a photograph. ok or appropriate for an S and M or B and D audience.

Slightly less unacceptable content might be offered to the general audience in a way that is acceptable to enjoy through the more realistic mode of digital images:





This mode is more powerful than in cartoons but less than in photographs. Though one might want to present this content to the B and D audience in a photo to make the experience of it more powerful:



Or in a cartoon mode for great uncle Cedric - who has heart problems!

Quite acceptable content (to anyone) can to be presented in the total realism of the photograph. And might be too weak if presented in a cartoon or digital image.


Two final points.

Firstly, less realistic digitals are able to explore fantasy and/or exaggeration while maintaining the power of a certain degree of realism:





These guys have the musculature I can only dream of!

And secondly, more realistic digitals are able to harness the power of serious realism while being free from the constraints of what you can get models to do in photographs - stuff, if photographed, might risk putting you in jail.

You know what I'm talking about !!!! Blood and shit come to mind. No images - sorry!