Welcome to our new theme, In My Bedroom, from Oct-Dec!
Title: Katherine
Photographer: Beth Yarnelle Edwards
Gallery: Meter

- Click thumbnails for more -
- Please join us by submitting your own pictures (all info below) -

Title: Centered Piece, 2002
Photographer: Rita Maas
Gallery: Meter

Title: Ring Flash Cat
Photographer: Charles Maraia
Gallery: Meter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN MY BEDROOM - WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO YOU?
NEW THEME FOR OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER.
This year we are going to change themes more often. Our fourth theme is In My Bedroom. Drawing from this theme we hope you will submit more pictures for us to feature each Friday.
Here are the ground rules for 2008:
1. The title of of the picture must relate to the words "In My Bedroom" (you may define that any way you like)
2. The picture should relate to the concept of home (you may define that any way you like)
This is our weekly celebration of ACCESSIBLE photography, which means beautiful artwork that you can actually hang on your wall tonight.
We're happy to be doing it with our friends Marty Weiss and Hannah Wallace. who are curating pics from Meter Gallery. Reader submissions will be posted bi-weekly and Meter will be in between. That means it a full on amateur and professional show!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBMIT HERE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are our previous exhibitions:
• 2008 - HotHouse
• 2008 - Suburbia
• 2008 - & Light
• 2007 - Through My Window
• 2006 - Home Is...
• 2005 - Chair &
Here's a crazy StumbleLoop that we made out of all the extras from last year:


Comments (28)
I must be a little slow tonight, but I don't understand where you want us to submit the pictures? In the comments...?
poor kitty looks freaked out
My brain isn't working either...what's the deal?
Sorry about that. I mistakenly took out the html for the submission form. It's back in now.
;-)
It works!
Am I the only person slightly uncomfortable with that first photo??
does anyone know where the chair and ottoman are from that are in the top picture?
That's one flexible kid! Or is that a tiny yoga master?
i don't really get it either. :\
The Chair and Ottoman are the part of the Calin series from Ligne Roset. I have this pair as well as a corner piece and they are amazing.
thank you, poisonhypnotique!
I agree- that initial photo make me cringe.
I found the first picture a little disturbing too, but it makes a lot more sense in context - check out the rest of that body of Edwards' work. It mellows it out a bit.
yeah, that first pic did weird me out a bit.
It weirds me out that you all are weirded out by a kid stretching. What. The. Heck.
agree with the ones that find the first pic strange.
but AT has changed from a year or so ago when i first started tuning in--not all positive, like the house tours and a few other things.
which by the way---where is Matt and plant therapy?
Yea, I don't get the big deal about the first pic either. All I see are a bunch of comments about it being weird and strange without saying why. I don't get it, sorry. Maybe I'm missing something here.
I don't really mind the first picture but my first thought was that I hope that there are no pedophiles on AT.
I don't get what's wrong with the first photo?!!!Actually ,I like the first photo ,this chair seems very comfortable and fit perfectly in a bedroom.
If the other children were staring at her, or if it were the same image but in the middle of Wall St. or a biker bar then I would say it is creepy, but she is in the comfort of her own home, safe and surrounded by family. Are we getting to a place where even hanging out in panties at one's own place triggers perversion? :(
agreed, that first picture is creepy. I don't think parents should be freely posting photos of their children in their underwear on the internet! What difference is the context of the photo? I don't think pedophiles care that about the intent of the photo, only the subject matter, which in this case, is disturbing. If this was a child model on a poster at A&F rather than someone's kid at home in that photo, everyone would see the problem but since someone's parent willingly posted it on the interent for everyone to see, it is ok?
In response to H.B's comment....in the first photo we have a CHILD striking a vey suggestive pose. Is it soft-core child pornography...probably not. But I still find it a little inappropriate. That's why I find it a little weird and strange on Apartment Therapy.
Good lord people...the girl is stretching and/or practicing yoga or a cheerleading pose. Get over yourselves!!!
I can appreciate that some people might not find that photo awkward, but I don't think that justifies the implication that those women here who do find the photo inappropriate must all be pedophiles. I suspect (?) most of us are mothers of daughters.
I hardly want my daughter to have to cover every inch of her body in a floral 'little house on the prairie' dress in the name of modesty, but at the same time, this photo is disturbing to me. There is (in my opinion) a great difference between 'feeling comfortable in one's own home', and having what appears to be a nine year old girl in her underwear striking such a pose 12 inches in front of her older brother. It would make me uncomfortable for my daughter, and my son, because I suspect should he look up from that magazine, the image may be uncomfortable for him too.
Would those users suggesting that people who don't appreciate the photo must be pedophiles really still be defending the photo if the view the photo displayed here on the website was the exact same view that brother would see when he looks up from his magazine?
I suspect that most users would not be so quick to judge others as pedophiles then. Or at least, I hope, it would be universally recognized as inappropriate.
What is with this pedophilia kick? The kid is stretching and wearing a lot more than many people do at the beach - in her own home. It boggles my mind that the lack of clothing a person stretching is somehow sexualized.
If you want to keep pedophiles away from your children, educate yourself and them about what actions by another person are inappropriate and what to do if they are. If someone has a fetish, they will get turned on by it, no matter what. Finger-pointing at a photo that has nothing to do with sexualizing children isn't going to help save children from predators; education and support is.
Well said Monica!
If you have taken yoga or gymnastics or dance, you will know that there is nothing suggestive about her pose.
Why her brother would feel uncomfortable is beyond me. It isn't uncommon to find someone in my house lounging in our underwear, especially in summer when it's hot- my dad or little brother (16) sitting on the couch on a Saturday morning in their undies... or me doing my hair on the floor of the living room in bra and undies. After seeing everyone's reactions, I asked my brother if he feels uncomfortable and he laughed, saying no, we are family... but not to do it when his friends come over ;-). Maybe it's because I grew up in a transplanted European household, but it seems that people are getting prudish and you can't even be semi-naked in your own house without people freaking out.
So little girl in the pic- Do your poses in your undies, like no one is watching!
I too don't understand why anyone would want to pay $1800 for a print of someone else's kids just hanging out at home. If they were in an interesting setting or something perhaps, but otherwise I just don't find anything striking/unique enough about this shot to command a pricetag like that.
One of these days, there's going to be a post of a white on white painting.
And we will fight about it.
I think if you thought that this was perverted as soon as you look at this there is something wrong with you. Gimme a break. These are some of the dumbest comments ever.