On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:59:10PM +0100, Tony Sidaway wrote:
Daniel Mayer said:
--- Tony Sidaway
<minorityreport(a)bluebottle.com> wrote:
Kevin Rector said:
Yes, I do believe that if a non-nude can illustrate an article as
well as a nude can then the non-nude should be used.
Why in this case, though? The whole point was that she posed nude
wearing the Heart of the Ocean for Jack, and the treasure hunters
looking for the diamond found the picture. That is the McGuffin that
holds the whole story together.
A still of of the drawing, not of the actual nude actress, would be
more appropriate then.
This is an article about a movie, not a drawing (Mr Cameron, who drew it,
is a far better director and cinematographer than he is a draftsman).
Frankly, I'm of the opinion that a still of action in the film is more
illustrative than illustration itself. The major point to ponder here,
for me, is whether the plot point involving the nude posing and the
rediscovery of the illustration is something that is relevant to the
article itself. I tend to lean in the direction of considering that
relevant, but I could probably be dissuaded.
--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite |
http://ccd.apotheon.org ]