MISS RC REPORT-April issue
03-14-2008, 08:46 PM
#26
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dunlap,
IL
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
The girls that pose for these photos are compensated for their image. I don't expect that they were in any way forced to do this. If THEY don't have a problem with it, then why do YOU?
Kerry
Kerry
03-14-2008, 09:56 PM
#27
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
The last guy that posted that kind of reply had actually posted pictures of his
own daughter on RCU to get hits on his B17 build thread.
Then his daughter came on and called the model in RC Report a skank !
It was quite entertaining until it was deleted.
own daughter on RCU to get hits on his B17 build thread.
Then his daughter came on and called the model in RC Report a skank !
It was quite entertaining until it was deleted.
ORIGINAL: Stickbuilder
Personally, I feel that it was an unfortunate decision to publish these photos in what has been my favorite magazine. These pictures have nothing whatsoever to do with model airplanes, and in fact, there is not even a model plane in any of the 4 photos on page 21. Before, all the models were dressed appropriately for the venue (swimsuits for seaplanes photographed in the water etc.). This has always been a family friendly publication until now. I am no prude, but this is just a tad over the line. Is this something that you would be proud for your child to see you perusing? Is this something that you would want your Daughter to emulate? I sure hope not. Is this the reaction that you would appreciate if the pictures were of your Daughter?
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
Personally, I feel that it was an unfortunate decision to publish these photos in what has been my favorite magazine. These pictures have nothing whatsoever to do with model airplanes, and in fact, there is not even a model plane in any of the 4 photos on page 21. Before, all the models were dressed appropriately for the venue (swimsuits for seaplanes photographed in the water etc.). This has always been a family friendly publication until now. I am no prude, but this is just a tad over the line. Is this something that you would be proud for your child to see you perusing? Is this something that you would want your Daughter to emulate? I sure hope not. Is this the reaction that you would appreciate if the pictures were of your Daughter?
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
03-14-2008, 10:06 PM
#28
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
banana hammock for sure!
ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
03-14-2008, 10:08 PM
#29
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
And we all know how fair and balanced BBC news is!
ORIGINAL: Red B.
Yes, I'm from Sweden, a country whose citizens have quite a liberal attitude towards sex, but on the other hand put a lot of emphasis on gender equality. For your information here is an article by the BBC:
Yes, I'm from Sweden, a country whose citizens have quite a liberal attitude towards sex, but on the other hand put a lot of emphasis on gender equality. For your information here is an article by the BBC:
03-15-2008, 12:02 AM
#30
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cincinnati,
OH
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
Hi my fans on RCU,
If you don't like it, don't look at it. Period the end. I personnally love good looking women in pictures and in person. In fact, I'd love to see Flyfalcons in a pic with some good looking skanks.
If you don't like good looking skanks or great looking women in pictures, should we put "little boy blue" in there for you fence hangers???
If you don't like it, don't look at it. Period the end. I personnally love good looking women in pictures and in person. In fact, I'd love to see Flyfalcons in a pic with some good looking skanks.
If you don't like good looking skanks or great looking women in pictures, should we put "little boy blue" in there for you fence hangers???
03-15-2008, 12:08 AM
#31
Senior Member
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
Okay done deal. I'll buy a bananna hammock, find some skanks (the good quality skanks) and pose with my new 13' glider. It will have something for everyone - the dudes that like to look at skanks, the skanks that like to look at me (fess up, all of you!), and everyone will also get to see a new model completed. The long wing on the glider will be symbolic too.
03-15-2008, 03:28 AM
#33
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: kregan
The last guy that posted that kind of reply had actually posted pictures of his
own daughter on RCU to get hits on his B17 build thread.
Then his daughter came on and called the model in RC Report a skank !
It was quite entertaining until it was deleted.
The last guy that posted that kind of reply had actually posted pictures of his
own daughter on RCU to get hits on his B17 build thread.
Then his daughter came on and called the model in RC Report a skank !
It was quite entertaining until it was deleted.
ORIGINAL: Stickbuilder
Personally, I feel that it was an unfortunate decision to publish these photos in what has been my favorite magazine. These pictures have nothing whatsoever to do with model airplanes, and in fact, there is not even a model plane in any of the 4 photos on page 21. Before, all the models were dressed appropriately for the venue (swimsuits for seaplanes photographed in the water etc.). This has always been a family friendly publication until now. I am no prude, but this is just a tad over the line. Is this something that you would be proud for your child to see you perusing? Is this something that you would want your Daughter to emulate? I sure hope not. Is this the reaction that you would appreciate if the pictures were of your Daughter?
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
Personally, I feel that it was an unfortunate decision to publish these photos in what has been my favorite magazine. These pictures have nothing whatsoever to do with model airplanes, and in fact, there is not even a model plane in any of the 4 photos on page 21. Before, all the models were dressed appropriately for the venue (swimsuits for seaplanes photographed in the water etc.). This has always been a family friendly publication until now. I am no prude, but this is just a tad over the line. Is this something that you would be proud for your child to see you perusing? Is this something that you would want your Daughter to emulate? I sure hope not. Is this the reaction that you would appreciate if the pictures were of your Daughter?
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
The reason you often see old fat men posing in the photo's with the planes is probably because they built them. Gee, my photo is in that same issue, as is my Wife's, and that didn't stir the pot at all.
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
03-15-2008, 06:19 AM
#34
My Feedback: (62)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New Lenox,
IL
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons
Okay done deal. I'll buy a bananna hammock, find some skanks (the good quality skanks) and pose with my new 13' glider. It will have something for everyone - the dudes that like to look at skanks, the skanks that like to look at me (fess up, all of you!), and everyone will also get to see a new model completed. The long wing on the glider will be symbolic too.
Okay done deal. I'll buy a bananna hammock, find some skanks (the good quality skanks) and pose with my new 13' glider. It will have something for everyone - the dudes that like to look at skanks, the skanks that like to look at me (fess up, all of you!), and everyone will also get to see a new model completed. The long wing on the glider will be symbolic too.
Ryan,
You know where we expect to see 6 ft of that 13 ft wingspan???? Or Dave will be pissed!!!!
03-15-2008, 06:37 AM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jonkoping, SWEDEN
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: kregan
And we all know how fair and balanced BBC news is!
And we all know how fair and balanced BBC news is!
03-15-2008, 07:28 AM
#36
Senior Member
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
Yes Tailwind, the rest of that is easy to arrange but what you are descibing will take some time and probably a lot of money to pull off. Have no fear though, I've put out some feelers on the issue. Also interested in trying the retract thing as well. If done correctly a lot of people will be ordering gliders in the near future!
03-15-2008, 07:35 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Spartanburg,
SC
Posts: 3,770
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
but on the other hand put a lot of emphasis on gender equality.
Then maybe we should get Gordo to print an issue with Dick Pettit in a tight little tank top for all the wifes out there to ogle at.
And I'm climbing out of the hormone pool on this one. Bye.
Dr.1
Then maybe we should get Gordo to print an issue with Dick Pettit in a tight little tank top for all the wifes out there to ogle at.
And I'm climbing out of the hormone pool on this one. Bye.
Dr.1
03-15-2008, 09:58 AM
#38
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cincinnati,
OH
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons
Okay done deal. I'll buy a bananna hammock, find some skanks (the good quality skanks) and pose with my new 13' glider. It will have something for everyone - the dudes that like to look at skanks, the skanks that like to look at me (fess up, all of you!), and everyone will also get to see a new model completed. The long wing on the glider will be symbolic too.
Okay done deal. I'll buy a bananna hammock, find some skanks (the good quality skanks) and pose with my new 13' glider. It will have something for everyone - the dudes that like to look at skanks, the skanks that like to look at me (fess up, all of you!), and everyone will also get to see a new model completed. The long wing on the glider will be symbolic too.
03-15-2008, 10:19 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jonkoping, SWEDEN
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: Dr1Driver
...Then maybe we should get Gordo to print an issue with Dick Pettit in a tight little tank top for all the wifes out there to ogle at. ...
...Then maybe we should get Gordo to print an issue with Dick Pettit in a tight little tank top for all the wifes out there to ogle at. ...
03-15-2008, 02:26 PM
#40
My Feedback: (1)
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: kregan
banana hammock for sure!
banana hammock for sure!
ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
03-15-2008, 05:12 PM
#41
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
Maybe we can get RC Report to use this picture instead-OH WAIT!!!!!!!!!!! this may offend someone that is forced to look at it and we know someone would be exploiting this woman to get a big discount at the LHS-PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!
03-15-2008, 09:40 PM
#43
Senior Member
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: khodges
Only if the pics are shot from 1/4 mile back with a wide angle lens
ORIGINAL: kregan
banana hammock for sure!
banana hammock for sure!
ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
In an effort to appease female RC pilots, RC Report has signed me on to model in one of their upcoming issues. I need your opinion guys, should I go with the knee-long surfer/skateboarder shorts or the Borat bananna hammock?
(the glider)
03-18-2008, 01:26 PM
#44
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: La Vergne,
TN
Posts: 3,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
Just a bump for completely selfish reasons. I'm just curious what y'all think?
I'm just curious what y'all think?
ORIGINAL: gboulton
The following isn't meant to attack or criticize in any way....it is a genuine request for opinion on the issue. I'm asking as a photographer who, as we speak, has some projects going involving "pretty girls and airplanes".
What IS "appropriate" along these lines? Clearly, several feel that "illogical" outfits, if you will...such as a skimpy bikini and spiked heels out at the airfield, are simply "over the line". My question is, are they "over the line" because the outfit doesn't make sense (that is to say, would the same outfit be acceptable if the set were a float plane at the beach?), or are they instead inappropriate or displeasing because of the revealing nature of the outfit itself, and thus "out of line" in ANY set?
What about the other way? What if the clothing/outfit is WAY out of place, but far more "conservative"? Say, for example, a girl dressed in elegant evening attire, photographed at the airfield? The outfit is equally "out of place" as a bikini. is the resultant photograph "more acceptable" because of the attire? Is the overall effect still "displeasing" because the outfit is out of place?
What if there's a clear "connection" between the model and the airplane? For example, would partial nudity (say, the exposure of a nipple) be "appropriate" if the girl in the picture was recreating, say, a specific piece of noseart on a scale model of a B-29? For example, say someone had modeled the B-29 "Hearts Desire II". Its noseart, which may be seen here http://warbirds-online.org/images/no...rts_Desire.jpg (caution, potentially NSFW) features some frontal nudity. Would a photo shoot that sought to "recreate" that pin-up as the model was holding the airplane be different/more acceptable/the same as a generic "topless model"? Does the obvious attempt to recreate or symbolize something specific to the aircraft change the "rules" or boundaries any?
============================
Again, please understand...I am NOT attacking or critiquing anyone's point of view here. By NO means am I saying anyone's "a prude" or "of loose morals" or even suggesting anyone has a double standard or anything. This is a GENUINE request for input.
I also realize that none of the questions above have "factual answers" so to speak...the answers are ALL opinion, and opinions will differ greatly. That's exactly what I want. Specifically because I'm pursuing such types of projects, I'm very interested in what the aeromodeling community thinks on these issues.
The following isn't meant to attack or criticize in any way....it is a genuine request for opinion on the issue. I'm asking as a photographer who, as we speak, has some projects going involving "pretty girls and airplanes".
What IS "appropriate" along these lines? Clearly, several feel that "illogical" outfits, if you will...such as a skimpy bikini and spiked heels out at the airfield, are simply "over the line". My question is, are they "over the line" because the outfit doesn't make sense (that is to say, would the same outfit be acceptable if the set were a float plane at the beach?), or are they instead inappropriate or displeasing because of the revealing nature of the outfit itself, and thus "out of line" in ANY set?
What about the other way? What if the clothing/outfit is WAY out of place, but far more "conservative"? Say, for example, a girl dressed in elegant evening attire, photographed at the airfield? The outfit is equally "out of place" as a bikini. is the resultant photograph "more acceptable" because of the attire? Is the overall effect still "displeasing" because the outfit is out of place?
What if there's a clear "connection" between the model and the airplane? For example, would partial nudity (say, the exposure of a nipple) be "appropriate" if the girl in the picture was recreating, say, a specific piece of noseart on a scale model of a B-29? For example, say someone had modeled the B-29 "Hearts Desire II". Its noseart, which may be seen here http://warbirds-online.org/images/no...rts_Desire.jpg (caution, potentially NSFW) features some frontal nudity. Would a photo shoot that sought to "recreate" that pin-up as the model was holding the airplane be different/more acceptable/the same as a generic "topless model"? Does the obvious attempt to recreate or symbolize something specific to the aircraft change the "rules" or boundaries any?
============================
Again, please understand...I am NOT attacking or critiquing anyone's point of view here. By NO means am I saying anyone's "a prude" or "of loose morals" or even suggesting anyone has a double standard or anything. This is a GENUINE request for input.
I also realize that none of the questions above have "factual answers" so to speak...the answers are ALL opinion, and opinions will differ greatly. That's exactly what I want. Specifically because I'm pursuing such types of projects, I'm very interested in what the aeromodeling community thinks on these issues.
03-18-2008, 11:16 PM
#47
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: La Vergne,
TN
Posts: 3,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
ORIGINAL: Kmot
I think a calendar made with real models replicating the nose art of WWII planes would be awesome and I am 1st in line to order one!
[sm=thumbup.gif]
I think a calendar made with real models replicating the nose art of WWII planes would be awesome and I am 1st in line to order one!
[sm=thumbup.gif]
=============
And now I'll jump in on this issue...not sure if I'm taking a "side" here or not, but I'll throw my two cents in anyway.
Think of it as the perspective of someone who shoots PRECISELY these types of photographs...for hire...in a variety of arenas (model airplanes included). Please remember...this isn't a statement of "right or wrong", so much as it is an expression of what I, as for lack of a better term "an artist' feel and think when I'm shooting things like this:To me, the issue at hand is...and ALWAYS is...the point of the photograph. In the area of "critique", be it critique of a film, a book, or in this case a photograph, the critic is (or should be, anyway) evaluating the work based on its "rhetorical act" if you will...what is the message or statement the creator wants to send?
If I'm looking at a photo of the type we're discussing here....pretty girl and airplane...the question I'm asking myself is this:
What is this a picture of?
In my opinion, it OUGHT to be a picture of an airplane with a pretty girl in it. What, again in my opinion, detracts from pictures such as the ones in this thread, is the fact that they are pictures of a pretty girl with airplanes in them (sometimes).
I think what 'gnaws' at the folks who don't appreciate these photos isn't that it's "disrespectful", or that they're prudes or whatever...hey, I'm a big fan of pretty girls myself. I'm a big fan of airplanes too...and you tell me I can look at both at the same time, I'm there faster than you can wreck a tail heavy warbird.
The "problem" is that, purely objectively, if I pick up a model airplane magazine, I want to look at model airplanes. Now, I'm sure not going to complain if I stumble across a pretty girl in the process, but I didn't grab the magazine to look at pretty girls. In short, in a very real sense, my time has been wasted...or at the very least misdirected...and it was, in my opinion, INTENTIONAL on the part of the publisher. He put in a picture of a pretty girl for the sole purpose of showing me a pretty girl. He tried to sell me sex for no other reason than the belief (correct belief, admittedly) that sex sells.
Now hey...that sort of thing absolutely has its place. You put that EXACT same picture in random "hot chick magazine" of your choice, and I am ALL OVER IT. I picked up that magazine for the PURPOSE of looking at pretty girls...and this one is DOUBLY hot because she likes airplanes!!
See the difference?
The very CONCEPT of "Miss RC Report" is, imo, complete and utter garbage. The man responsible for the publication has, in this very thread, invited us to ignore his product if we found it unsuitable to our needs...and I shall do precisely that. The entire idea itself is nothing more than reliance on the adage that sex sells (and it certainly does...no question) SIMPLY because of either the inability or the lack of desire to populate the magazine with more useful content.
Now..please note...I don't say it's a BAD choice....the choice may well sell magazines, and the publishers commitment is to do precisely that...show profit to his stakeholders.
So hey...knock yourself out guys...just know you've lost at least one reader because of it.
Now, in fairness, I'll say this...
it would, imo, be completely wrong of me (not to mention I'd be coughing up a tremendous opportunity to pimp my own work *heh*) if I didn't toss my own work out there, and let the masses have at it. Nothing says I'm right or wrong here...but if I'm going to say "this way is better than that" I better be prepared to be told I'm wrong, and why.
So...here's what I think is different...and, imo, more appropriate to the task at hand.
====================================
*shrug*
In the long run, does it really matter? Nahh..not one little bit. As someone said above, the girls in both cases were, I'm sure, appropriately compensated for their time and effort...so, you know, no models were harmed in the making of these images. And certainly, I'm sure none of us are any more warped or depraved than we already were for having viewed them.
But...eh...that's where at least one "artist" stands on it. It's simply a function of purpose. Girly mags should have girls with airplanes, airplane mags should have airplanes with girls.
03-18-2008, 11:39 PM
#48
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
I don't know how you guys like your R/C boats but here's a nice site: http://www.cmdracing.com/updated/picofmonth_gallery.htm
Some of these fine ladies are the ones that you'll actually get to talk to when phoning in orders. Yup, not only do they look good but know their way around these boats also!
Some of these fine ladies are the ones that you'll actually get to talk to when phoning in orders. Yup, not only do they look good but know their way around these boats also!
03-19-2008, 01:31 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kitscoty,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: MISS RC REPORT-April issue
What I find humorous about this entire thread is that if poeple think that those photo's are all there kids are looking at then they had best take a reality check. I went to the mall this afternoon and just took a look at my surroundings. Calvin Klein anyone? Any add you see has a woman (my preferance) or a man, half dressed. Get over it poeple, its not the 30's anymore.
Dale
Dale