Is a nude person in art considered pornography? Or art?

That's actually a pretty good question. I wouldn't say that nudity is pornography, but if they were nude and were doing "spread" shots, or pretending to do something with an object, then I'd class that as pornography. I was actually having this convo with a friend a few weeks ago. We were debating whether or not Suicide Girls was classed as an arty modelling site, or pornography. As it is a must for a model to pose naked, he thought it could be classed as porn, but i disagreed as they have stirct rules for the submission of pics: " The nudity should be tasteful not graphic, but you do have to be fully nude. Think along the lines of cute, pin-up photography and not explicit nudity. We will not accept explicit, close up spread shots, any holding or touching, and certainly no penetration!! "

This is an excellent question to be asked. It depends on your own society rules and regulations. I appreciate you courage. Language of an art can be understood by the artists and only few broad minded people. What ever the 'line' that you are talking about will vanish for those who actually got so much involved in the beauty of the art. Those who see it from strong artistic point view cannot find any bad thing in a nude girl in the art. They least care the content and its meaning. They care the quality of the art. And for those who are fond of pornography sees only that content in the art, they cannot truly appreciate the artistic skills. They care the type of content in the art. You might be knowing the story of four blind persons understanding an elephant in four diffrent ways by just touching it from four diffrent positions. This case is also similar. Content is same view points are different. Difference exists there. Check what kind of people were there in the panel to which you are going to submit this paper. Here the answers will be anonymus and may not help you.

The purpose of nudity in art is considered art, in any case with any variables...even if it portrays two people making love (exclude anything hardcore - that's when it would wander into pornography), because nude art - whether it be painted, drawn, or photographed is an admiration of the human form. Even in photography, if the nude person is to be taken in an artistic sense and not something to turn people on in dark rooms then it is, or should be considered, art.

It is art, the human body is one of the most beautiful things. normally people who do these drawings or art photographs mean they have to shame to their body or others. the drawings may have been drawn a certain way, skewed, or affected by lighting different to give emphasize on something, perhaps tell a story. think of the Van Gogh painting of the woman.... appears to be just a woman( clothed) but her body language and eyes tell the view something in itself. now with out the cloths you can see more of the body language and where it is bending (drastic or not), how the eyes are, how the eyes are in refrence to the rest of the body, where the hands go... Porn is in my opinion " fantasies" and more about the in and outs of the body parts if you know what i mean.... not how the rest of the body is or what it is telling

for me, it's an Art but not for all photography, I think it's depend from what our feeling when we watch it and I think it can't says by word

it depends on how the woman is being portrayed. from ur description it would seem fine. But if she was SPREAD EAGLE with her goodies hanging out, then it would be more suitable for porn. Like the scene from titanic......