Mikhail A Khokhlov contacted us to show off his impressive work from his series Nudes Defined – I & II- I & II.
The naked body without a face is not a nude; it is a projection of something everyone possesses. It is in the face, the stamp of genealogical difference, that sets a naked body apart. Without a face, the composition of a naked body is not a “nude;” it is something that is malleable, fluid, and easy on the eyes. It is what it is, a naked body. However once we introduce a face associated with the naked body, a sort of shock takes place.
With this series I aim to explore what makes a photograph, a “nude” photograph. More specifically – Is there a relation with how much is visible on a naked body in a photograph, what is showing on the naked body, and what sort of activities are being performed by one or a collection of naked bodies with how one perceives a “nude” photograph.
When we can identify with a naked body, put a face on the naked body, does a different response manifest?
In short I would like to test this conjecture – ”Without a face included in a composition, a photography of a naked body is not ‘nude’ photograph.”
To see more from Mikhail, check out his website.
If you’re interested in being featured on Lightradi.us, submit images at least 680px wide along with a brief overview of your work to firstname.lastname@example.org.