Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Photography / Professional Premium Member Justin WilliamsMale/United States Groups :iconerotica-x: Erotica-X
You know you like it.
Recent Activity
Deviant for 5 Years
3 Month Premium Membership
Statistics 113 Deviations 980 Comments 53,273 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

Random Favourites



:iconerotica-x: :iconbeautyamateurs:



Mar 26, 2015
6:27 pm
Mar 26, 2015
1:34 pm
Mar 25, 2015
3:53 pm
Mar 25, 2015
2:21 pm
Mar 25, 2015
7:27 am

Photography from my other Deviantart account

Colorado Storm 01 by z-monster Cadaver The Clown by z-monster

Daily Deviations that I've suggested!

Magic by Meluxine



My Journal Entry

Journal Entry: Sun Oct 30, 2011, 7:56 PM


I returned home from a year long tour in Afghanistan this past July. Since then I've made a lot of plans to radically change my photography. The first part was to change out all of my mixed matched lighting in favor of a complete Elinchrom Ranger light kit with two batteries, two flash heads, and a ringflash. This kit will allow me to be far more portable than ever before. Since I enjoy shooting models outdoors more than indoors the Elinchrom Ranger kit makes far more sense than what I had before, plus I can finally overpower the mid-day sun!

Oh yea...

I'm also getting ready to make a radical move to the East Coast. I've always wanted to shoot models at the beach during sunrise. This will be a very exciting part of my photography that I can't wait have happen. I hope you'll enjoy the results when the time comes

For those of you who have been loyal fans of my work, I really appreciate the time you take to look at my work! I can't thank you all enough!

Finally, for the first time in many years, I got to experience the joy of having my suggestion for a Daily Deviation become a full blown reality.
I've always admired deviant :iconsecondbest2: since she first landed here on DA. She supported a lot of my work with her kind words and comments. I can only hope that my DD suggestion shows how much i greatly admire this woman. I can only wish that someday her beauty will grace my camera someday!

If you haven't seen the Deviation, then click on the thumbnail below and let her know what you think!


:+devwatch: Watch List :+devwatch:

Updates coming soon!!

Stamp Collection

1D Mark III Stamp by ST77 Glass Stamp by ST77 AlienBees Stamp by ueris
Photoshop Stamp by mushir I own a BAMBOO - Stamp by kdude63 stamp by z-monster
PE 2010 stamp by projecteducate dAc Stamp by deviantARTcommunity Vispir stamp by zakarranda
Nuclear Holocaust by Abfc Pirate Stamp by phantom Serbia stamp by Ephourita
Artistic-Nudes Stamp by artistic-nudes I Support DeviantNudes by DeviantNudes Canon by Krolikus
:thumb58102926: Death-Chicks Old School II by Death-Chicks Proud Fetishist by Countess-Grotesque
Immolation stamp by t3hsilentone:thumb154280826: Trance Stamp by rustyrayz

CEA UPDATE: Clarifying the Definition of Porn

As quoted from DA Admin:


The official definition of " pornography " has been modified at several points over the lifetime of deviantART in an attempt to bring greater clarity in the wording used however portions of the community have demonstrated a tendency to be confused on the exact definition and continue to report things which fit their own personal viewpoints; today we attempt to clarify things.

The official policy for deviantART prohibits the submission of pornographic works. While the community as a whole, with few exceptions, agrees that this policy is required there are many who demonstrate a marked misunderstanding of exactly what is and is not defined as " pornographic " under the current policy. This misunderstanding often leads to many reports being marked as invalid due to the deviation not being officially considered to be pornography and dissatisfaction tends to lead to some community members attempting to explain the outcome by maligning the staff or speculating that deviantART policies are not actually enforced or not enforced consistently.

We will be attempting to dispel these myths today by explaining exactly how official policy can differ from individual opinion.

Over the years we've attempted to bring clarity by modifying the official definition of " pornography " to use wording which is more specific about what is not allowed, but unfortunately some have demonstrated a tendency to expand upon those definitions to encompass situations and themes which fit their own personal viewpoints.

At one point in time the definition of pornographic content was more restrictive but beginning in 2006 deviantART policy was gradually modified and relaxed so that a wider amount of erotic artwork and sexual themes could be accepted into the galleries. While some of you may disagree with this official stance of acceptance, policy will continue to be accepting of erotica which remains within certain defined boundaries.

Policy and Definition vs. Community Viewpoint
Official policy and definition differ from community viewpoint in several key areas and these differences are responsible for the disproportionately large number of invalid reports; up to fifty percent (50%) of reports involving pornographic content are marked as being invalid each week.

The primary difference between official policy and your own personal viewpoint or standards is the fact that as a member of the community you are personally able to subjectively judge the intent of the photographer or artist or guess at how they intended the work to be viewed.

Official policy does not, and cannot be allowed this luxury.

While the community is free to attempt to divine intent and attempt to second guess the reasoning behind a particular work policy cannot be allowed to do this and must limit itself to the judgment of the actual content visible in the work itself. This primary difference of community members viewing a work subjectively and policy judging the same work objectively is an issue which will most likely never be resolved regardless of any educational effort which we staff members may embark upon because everyone is entitled to their own opinion and obviously most will not share the same stance embodied in official policy and we cannot expect everyone to change their views to match it.

This means that if you report works for having "No Artistic Intent", you should expect that the report will be marked invalid by staff because "intent" is not part of the judgment process and in the absence of any other circumstance this is not a reason for removing a work. You are personally entitled to view a work however you wish, including holding the viewpoint that a nude is pointless and without any redeeming artistry at all but official policy does not consider this to be a reason for removal.

There are several other areas where official policy differs radically enough from a personal viewpoint to cause some dissatisfaction if one is not aware of the criteria being used.

Many have noticed that reporting a work for the reasoning of "masturbation" will tend to see a large number of reports marked "invalid" by staff. The main reason for this is that official policy judges "masturbation" based upon what is specifically visible and how the various elements in the scene appear to interact. What is not considered is what might be suggested. This allows for erotic and sexually themed works to display hands and other objects coming into contact with the genital region in certain ways and under circumstances and still be allowable under policy. We have found that the average community viewpoint maintains that anything which comes into contact with the genital region in any manner at all should be ruled automatically as masturbation regardless of what may or may not be clearly visible.

This difference means that only those works which clearly show an act of masturbation will be removed while works which use camera angle, shadow, props and other circumstances to suggest something sexual will not be removed unless the staff can find some visible element which suggests that masturbation is actually occurring.

We realize that many in the community may be upset with this completely objective judging of what is plainly visible in the work but as I have already stated, policy will not venture into the realm of assigning "intent" to an image.

On the subject of images depicting "sexual intercourse" a similar difference occurs. While official policy prohibits any depictions of actual sexual intercourse it does allow for models, same sex or opposite sex, to be posed in various ways which include bodily contact which may in fact be sexually suggestive to a certain degree. As a member of the community you are free to dislike such posing and bodily contact or personally classify it as sexual intercourse regardless of the presentation or circumstances but official policy will remain primarily focused on depictions of actual sexual penetration and other cases of clear sexual contact. Again, we realize that many may be dissatisfied by this official stance but unless a work contains a visible indication that sexual penetration is occurring or the work is judged to be too graphic in its level of sexual suggestiveness it will most likely not be removed by the staff.

Another subject which seems to cause a large amount of confusion is the depiction of "erections". The average report of an "erection" tends to involve any penis which is not in a clearly flat and flaccid state and any depiction of a penis which is of larger than average size regardless of whether any sign of arousal is present. Official policy reviews images for a certain level of arousal, which takes into account the actual tissue structure of the penis, while recognizing that the human penis comes in many shapes and sizes and that they may "hang" at certain angles dependent upon size and the strength of the suspensory ligaments.
While this might sound somewhat technical these standards ensure a consistent application of the rules which is not as certain using the subjectivity exercised on a personal level.

The last subject which seems to have the greatest amount of confusion by community members involves the prohibition against images displaying "Vaginal or Anal Spreading". Members of the community commonly misinterpret this restriction to include any case where the model's legs are spread apart and any case where the vagina or anus is visible. Official policy is only concerned with whether the labia or anus has been physically pulled open using the hands or some form of instrument or object; the simple spreading of the legs, the act of bending over, or showing of the vagina or anus is not sufficient by themselves to meet this definition and is the cause of most invalid reporting.

Given the subject matter and the vastly different personal viewpoints which could be held by the millions of people who make up the deviantART community it is impossible to craft a policy which would possibly address every possible definition of " pornography " but we of the deviantART staff have worked and refined a policy over several years which is able to address the most serious concerns while still avoiding undue censorship.

We do not expect that this explanation of the differences in official standards and personal viewpoints will please everyone but we do hope that we have helped to dispel the misinformation which is making its way through the community and that you come away from this article with a better understanding of how the review process works and what may cause certain reports to be marked "invalid" by staff.

:faq: remake by arrioch DeviantArt FAQ :faq: remake by arrioch


:: monitor calibrating ::

Along the top of the strips are alternate patches of black and dark grey. If it looks solid black to you (look very carefully), your monitor's brightness setting is too low. Increase it until you can -just- perceive the difference between the grey and the black squares.

Pass this along to your journals, it will help new and old deviants view your work as it should be seen!

Need an idea?
Idea Generator - v1.4.1 by Folji

  • Mood: dA Love
  • Listening to: The XX - Intro
  • Reading: The Big Book of Legs by Dian Hanson
  • Watching: The Walking Dead on AMC
  • Playing: Call Of Duty: Black-Ops
  • Eating: Apple Cider glazed Pork Roast
  • Drinking: Sweet Tea


Justin Williams
Artist | Professional | Photography
United States
deviantWEAR sizing preference: Large
Favourite genre of music: Trance, Progressive, House, New Age, Death Metal, Hardcore, and Punk
Favourite photographer: Joe Jennings, Joe McNally
Favourite style of art: Photography
Operating System: Windows 7
MP3 player of choice: Winamp (PC) and iPod Video (Rockbox firmware)
Favourite cartoon character: Opus, Bill the Cat, Invader Zim, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, & Foamy


Add a Comment:
MAGNYFI Featured By Owner Aug 8, 2014  Hobbyist Photographer
thanks for the watch, i am honoured:happybounce: :happybounce: 
dannysuling Featured By Owner May 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist

This is my first visit to your gallery, despite the fact that I've here at dA a long time. My apologies for overlooking this.

I found the images you've posted to be of very high quality…which figures, given that 1) you're a professional, 2) of obvious talent, and 3) you have your experience as a member of dA's staff to use as a filter of your own work's quality. The models' posing is modest, confident, and circumspect, even the bondage art. And the compositional aspects are so nicely done: shading, contrast, prop parallels, etc. etc. All making for a very enjoyable tour through your hallways.

Now, on to something a little less comfortable.

Since you chose your own gallery to post (hard to read) da-related clarifications about the dA TOS on what is and what is not porngoprahy, I'm submitting this content as a reply.

In my experience, and in conversation on the topic with many very serious and prolific artists here at dA, it's not the rules themselves, nor your necessarily procedural approach toward applying those rules, which generates the frustration we feel. The law in the US on pornography is the law, the dA rules are the rules, and dA owns the site and can and should make its decisions according to the details defined in the TOS.

No, what we're most concerned about is the complete absence of due process in the administration of your decision-making, including the penalties not just image deletion but also suspending and outright banning of artists for TOS violations involving a "porn" image. It's this absence of due process – meaning the non-involvement of artists in discussion with the staff about a particular image – that is fundamentally undemocratic and often hypocritical.

Why hypocritical? Because dA does not exercise the same level of supervision and punishment for galleries displaying extreme violence, death, dismemberment, misogyny, and overall misanthropy. And because dA does not exercise the same level of supervision and punishment for galleries clearly in violation of copyright, even when it is pointed out. (We understand why recent changes in copyright law make your remedial actions difficult, but still….)

Sure, there are legal (and maybe commercial…nah! surely not commercial) rationales for why you push so hard on the issue of pornographic representations and not at the presence of images of unbelievably extreme violence. We understand it but do not condone it. It infuriates us, as supportive members of this community, and as well-meaning contributors.

But more than anything, it is the extremely bureaucratic and impersonal actions of the staff with respect to penalties levied against artists here that are so dismaying. If we had a wish, and if you really were open to listening to your contributors, you would institute a mandatory and open due process procedure in the TOS for handling pornography violations resulting in potential penalties before their administration. And that you would follow such procedures rigorously.

Thanks for listening, this once, to your clientele! I don't expect much, but you never know….
LIMOMO Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014
thanks for the trade!
TootsieBear Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014
YES! YES! YES! Thanks for the trade.
AnklesocksFox Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014   Traditional Artist
thank you for the trade
Jon-McBride Featured By Owner Mar 28, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Hey, thanks for the trade!  :D
SushiiBob Featured By Owner Mar 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
thanks for the trade! :D
sunnybunny1199 Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks for the llama offer! :tighthug:
LeaAventurera Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks for the trade ^^
Cupcake-SmileyFace Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Thank you for the trade :-)
dianita98 Featured By Owner Dec 27, 2013   General Artist
thank you for the trade!
MUTANERDA Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2013  Professional General Artist
merry llama trade
SkellieBeads Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2013  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
Thanks for the trade!
Sings-With-Spirits Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2013
Thanks for the trade! Hug
caflora Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
thank you for the trade ^^
jihannee Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2013  Student Digital Artist
thank you for the 1 :points: :la:
liviugherman Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2013
thank you for the :llama:

mikebp Featured By Owner Jun 17, 2013  Professional Photographer
Thank you for the fave! M
clara0107 Featured By Owner May 22, 2013
Thanks for faving [link] !:iconhappysunplz:
Sangvinar Featured By Owner Jan 30, 2013  Professional Photographer
Tanks for the watch! :la:
Add a Comment: