Tiger, tiger, burning bright, in the forests of delight; what mere mortal limb or thigh dare frame thy fearful symmetry? (with apologies to William Blake)
A springing blossom, on the vine, an artful flower so divine!
This lovely photo perfectly captures a beautiful model with an amazing example of the tattooing art, and displays both to perfection. The model's sensual pose perfectly sets off her sensuous artwork, the lighting beautifully shows the image "in a good light", literally.
I even love how you can barely see her left hand cupping her breast!
Cheers for the model, the tattooist, and the photographer! together you have pulled off something amazing!
I think that she is beautiful because her thighs don't touch, she's not wearing much make-up, if any at all, her hair is simple; she is simply beautiful. It goes to prove that you do not need everything that everyone else wants, being yourself is just as beautiful. Well done!
I understand if it's for the art of the tattoo... it's just that a lot of nudes get far more attention than they deserve on an art site. sexuality should not trump hard work and dedication to one's skill.
"I understand if it's for the art of the tattoo" - ah, I didn't realise you appreciated this - since, as I am sure you noted, this deviation is featured for the capture of body art, as stated in the DD description.
As to artistic nudes getting more attention than they deserve - you're going to have to blame the community on this one, because only two other volunteers have a prerogative to feature nudity, and these are the Artistic Nude volunteers, and they are allowed ONE DD per day. There is generally 24-36 DDs per day. Nudes are certainly not getting preferential feature rates than other art pieces, so "far more attention than they deserve" is not coming from those featuring DDs, it's coming from the viewers.
... Also, naked =/= sexuality.
And finally, what's the level of attention they "deserve on an art website"? If you walk into any art museum there will be a pile of nudes. People look at it just as they look at other art, because nudes are just like any other art. If you can't see it that way, the problem is with you.
the problem is completely with the community, I agree with that. and I wasn't trying to attack you as an artist, simply a misplaced exasperated exclamation at all of deviantart. you make a good case with the distinction between daily deviation and what the community likes. I didn't know only two people could feature artistic nudes, it seems like it should just be classified under photography and not be subject to any special restrictions.
sexual content isn't an issue if it is well done, thoughtful and actually interesting; it's a really strong medium to get ideas across. for me the sheer volume of mindless photos of damn near the EXACT same thing is a problem. thus "another naked lady" it gets tiresome and eventually it sort of all blurs together and feels like the same thing. even though some of these photos may be actual artists trying to display body art.
the level of attention any art deserves should be subject to the effort the artist put into it, the originality of the idea, the execution etc. but selling sexuality is an easy way of getting attention, and usually none of the above need go into the making of a piece of artwork that gets far more notice than say, something someone challenged themselves to create. now if someone takes a nude pornographic iphone selfie in a toilet stall and then makes an oil painting of it, I will consider that perhaps they have enough depth of character and deliberation to be aware of how it comes across, and hey? they're probably just sardonically commenting on the degrading quality of public schools or something