Having a bit of fun with random photos...

I'm not entirely sure if this post is allow here, but if not I know it will be deleted and I am fine with that.

During the Tumblr crackdown, I found myself making an account on one of the feeds that many adult tumblrs were going to. I intended only to lurk, so I didn't use the name Goodgulf. Later, after seeing some captioned photos, I thought "I could do that".

So I got out a very high end art program (MS Pant), googled to find some photos, and added captions to them. Many of those photos are stock ones - you can tell that because the watermarks saying "stock" and the company's name are still there. All photos were found using google, selected almost at random (if it looked large enough to caption and I thought I could caption it I downloaded it, otherwise I didn't).

Anyway, if anyone would like to see some captioned photos that are mostly F/m (because that's how the first batch worked out and I've stuck with that theme) you can visit

https://lurking_like_jesse.bdsmlr.com/

You will probably have to make an account there to view it (at least I had to) but you might enjoy it.

Oh, and I should point out that there is no nudity whatsoever. None. Just random photos with captions.

Pretty cool.

Thanks. They take only minutes to make, and all the pictures are from different google searches. Some of those searches included: stern maids, stern women, and angry women - mostly because searching images of women produced mostly smiling women.

I've never understood the appeal of captions like these. (And they do have massive appeal it seems.) In fact I have a Tumblr of my own geared specifically to deride the worst of them. (Caption Hell) At least these are well done, relatively tasteful, and correctly spelled....so I have to give you points there, Goodgulf.

I have had this discussion with several people over the years and found some who agree and many who don't, but personally I find the practice of taking someone's non-kinky image, without their permission, and literally putting words in their mouths that they likely would never say to be.....well.......wrong.

I can sort of see using images of women clearly into this kink (spanking photos, women holding paddles, etc.), but when I see an "innocent" model or worse, some random candid from somebody's party or barbecue, spouting some kinky threat, I wonder what the author would say if some cell phone photo of their wife or daughter ended up on some other sort of kinky caption site where the kink was not something they liked saying something like, "I love taking as many different cocks in my mouth and ass as I can...preferably at the same time" ?

It would be no different than being a male model, or just a guy at a park, whose image suddenly ends up on some White Supremacist site, spouting racist remarks.....when that is in no way who that person is. Would anyone here want to find such an image of themselves somewhere?

Now I'm not saying that threatening a spanking is as bad as spouting hate, but the assumption that this person's image is free to publicly use however someone wants is the same. (I don't have any issue with someone who does this for their own private use since they are the ones who created the verbiage and the only one seeing it.) And I suppose in this case one could say, "well, it's Shutterstock. These are all public domain and up for grabs." And yes, that is true. But now again.....suppose it's your daughter? It may not be illegal, and it may be common practice. But is it right?

Just a thought for caption-lovers to ponder.

Yes, I do try to use correct spelling. And I do look at the page the image comes from. I don't use the images of crime victims, etc. The majority of the images I use are stock photos, catalog photos, and celebrities.

When someone signs off on a stock photo they are generally looking for exposure - any exposure to help their modelling career.

Why am I doing this? Well, I've been having a hard time finding time to write. This captioned photos take a couple of minutes each and allow me to be creative in a short amount of time.

I can see that. It's why I'm not as bothered by using stock images as I am when I see candids from some backyard party being used the same way. And I have NO problem with a kinky model who is doing something kinky, being used in a caption that clearly coincides with her own interests. Catalogs though? Hmmm. I'm not sure a model who was willing to appear in a photo to promote a sweater has somehow waived off the right to not be part of a kinky fantasy. Still, I am glad you have a sort of personal standard for what you use. A lot of what's out there seems to indicate no sort of ethical standard at all.

And like I said, your stuff in no way falls into the realm I cull my material from for "Caption Hell".

Would i wish a online image of a family member captioned, no absolutely not, but can i do anything about it, no unless it is illegal, so any 'protest' i made would merely be stamping of my feet and getting hot under the collar.

Simplistic answer is not to have your images online, if they are, well you need to accept they are in reality majority of time available to all, and once uploaded you have no control into whose hands they get.

Digital age brings many positives but alas negatives too.

It is time to whip these inappropiate users of online images into shape, there'd be less hot under the collar and more heat elsewhere, that'll get their feet stamping to the spanking dance i tell ya

Hmmmmmm.... so welcome to "The Moral Maze" on BBC Radio 4.
I too have a Tumblr account and I use it purely to share spanking photos that others have already posted, mostly of well-known spanking models, but quite a few US guys are keen to display their subs backsides and explain just how they got like that. Actually I lied there.... some nice female spanker can take me to task for that later, I also post pictures of very desirable girl's bottoms.
I have reported several people for inappropriate posts, I personally do not like stories of children being punished, nor the cartoons of such, but I draw the line at photos of anyone who looks underage.
When Tumblr allegedly closed it's doors to porn of any description I had to buy a new external hard drive to download my blog onto so I could load it up onto the new site everyone seems to have migrated to.
As to posting pictures with captions emblazoned across them, I have to say it does nothing for me, but each to their own.
Stock photos? As was pointed out by kdpierre, a "stock" photo can be one of your mother taken from an online newspaper article or your daughter from a school magazine and that is not right. How to stop it? I wish I knew, but Tumblr can't, nor Facebook nor Instagram.....

I'm just curious because I have seen many captioned photos on Imagefap as well. If you type in spanking images on imagefap, or anything you wish images on imagefap, thousands, no tens of thousands of images will come up. So if I download an image as a jpeg as most of them are, I can open that image in paint and do anything to it I want. The same is true for any of the still images on spanking sites. Once you download the image you can take any text, such as the name of the site off the image if you wish. You can also crop out any part of the image you don't want. I've done this on many images. You can also add captions if you wish either right in the image or create a space below the image to type in whatever you want. So you can take an image from any spanking or other site, or imagefap, download it and customize it to your specific liking.

Maybe I should define "stock pictures".

They aren't pictures harvested from newspapers etc. There are companies, such as shutterstock, that take "stock photos" to sell to whoever wants to buy them. Many of the photos I post are from them - and you can tell because they have shutterstock watermarks on those photos. Other time I've found versions of those same photos without those watermarks and used them.

If I paid shutterstock $29 / month I could download 10 photos each month that didn't have that watermark. If I paid them $199 a month I could get 750 clean photos per month to use for anything I wanted to. Any downloader can use them ads, commercials, or any other way they want - either commercially or for a non-commercial purpose.

For example, if someone wanted to he could make a pro-life ad with a photo from there and a pro-choice ad using the same photo.

In short - a stock photo is taken with the intent that it will be used however the buyer wants to use it.