Naked Subway: Art or Indecent Exposure?

By: Edecio Martinez
Topics: Daily Blotter

(Zach Hyman/CBS)

Photo art by Zach Hyman (modified by CBS News).

NEW YORK (CBS/AP) Thirty seconds.

That's how long New York photographer Zach Hyman gives himself to photograph nude models across the city.

Fearing an arrest, Zach Hyman keeps bail money handy, brings a lookout for police and keeps his lawyer on speed dial. Creating the provocative images is technically illegal in New York, although the photographer says he has never been arrested.

"I'm doing it because it excites me and excites other people that are comfortable with their body," Hyman told Crimesider. "This is a little more innocent than a flasher. This picture is for me and the model."

The 22-year-old acting-school dropout has taken nude photos almost everywhere in the Big Apple, including Chinatown and the heavily patrolled Time Square, in which he strategically placed friends near oblivious officers. The models are unpaid. Hyman says they pose because they believe in the art.

During a recent shoot on a subway car, one woman screamed while an elderly man started to shake. But most passengers seemed unfazed, according to the artist.

An exhibit of 14 of his images opens Thursday, Aug. 20, at Chair and Maiden Gallery in Manhattan.

Hyman says he's inspired by nude paintings at the Met and insists his photos aren't pornographic.

"What I'm trying to do is disassemble the idea that nudity is pornography," Hyman said as he paused to take other press calls.

People's private parts, he says, are "one of the unifying aspects of being human."

Hyman snaps photos of male models too, but notes to the New York Post that photographing a woman in public is far easier than snapping a man.

(Facebook Photo)

Photographer Zach Hyman

"People see a naked woman and they smile," he said to the paper. "They see a penis and they freak out."

Hyman is fully aware of the illegality of his guerrilla style photos, but stands by his art.

"It's art because I'm photographing it," Hyman argues. "They are simply studies in the human body."

What do you think?

40 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 40 Comments


by BixUK August 26, 2009 8:18 AM EDT: I've just been browsing the comments about this photographers work and I just wanted to say, from across the waters, thanks people, you made me laugh.
I can understand some peoples dislike of public displays of nudity and others acceptance of it. But the way in which you attack each other makes me smile. The issue here isn't about art anymore it's about secular beliefs.
I myself believe in humanity - for all the good and bad we humans do - amd these comments just reaffirms my faith in you.
Thanks again!
Oh, and art is meant to cause a reaction - whatever kind - so judging by the response here I'd say his work is art.; Reply to this comment


by ch8rles August 24, 2009 11:47 PM EDT: I think this type of work is provocative and its own way beautiful as long as the passengers are cool with it. If anybody wants a more PG version of this kind of work they can go to my web site which I just launched a week ago-- SubwayBabeOfTheDay.com.

On my site any woman can be a NYC subway babe of the dayâ?? and on my site they don't need to take their clothes off to do so-- just submit a pic and see if you get selected . It's just good clean fun and quite an honor if you get chosen.; Reply to this comment


by idontbuyit August 22, 2009 6:13 PM EDT: i'm so sick and tired of non-believers ignorantly citing scripture to support their SECULAR views. how conveniently ABSURD and contradictory. (its sad they even have a Bible to begin with when its like having an untrained fool with a chainsaw who ends up cutting off their own feet to stick in their mouth!) can a lawyer give medical advice or a nude model give lectures on modesty? newsflash non-believing genuises: even satan "believes" in God AND knows the Bible scriptures backwards and forwards. it doesn't make him anymore credible as it does you as a right thinker or prescriber of truth, or a follower of Christ. liars are liars no matter how you dress--or undress-them up.; Reply to this comment


by internet_killed_tv_star August 21, 2009 7:46 AM EDT: woah... 80 comments...; Reply to this comment


by internet_killed_tv_star August 21, 2009 7:38 AM EDT: woah... 80 comments...; Reply to this comment

by G-I_Jesus August 20, 2009 7:01 PM EDT

Photoshop it!

Reply to this comment


by ToolMangler1 August 20, 2009 7:06 PM EDT: I am good at that also. :)

by Hosheen August 20, 2009 4:50 PM EDT

Art or not, what difference does it make? Nudity is not obscene unless you are a religious freak that allows other people t do your thinking for you.

If you feel that way, do you shower in a raincoat? Or are you just one more religious hypocrite? Come to think of it "religious hypocrite" is a redundancy, isn't it?

Reply to this comment


by pwgrant August 29, 2011 9:01 AM EDT: YOUR nudity is obscene. I have NO DESIRE to see your junk. Please keep it in your pants.

by jvande7472 August 20, 2009 4:49 PM EDT

1 Cor 6:19-20
Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? ... Therefore honor God with your body.

Reply to this comment


by jvande7472 August 20, 2009 5:09 PM EDT: Matthew 6:25
Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?


by idontbuyit August 22, 2009 5:22 PM EDT: laughable--more godless fools drop-quoting scriptures to support their NON-CHRISTIAN worldly views. another sick contradiction to serve THEIR purposes, not God's. typical. once again, jvande7472, you deceive yourself. the scripture you conveniently use supports the views you oppose in that our bodies are NOT to be defiled but treated as a SACRED TEMPLE, not the PLAYBOY MANSION.

See all 4 Replies

by credibility2 August 20, 2009 4:47 PM EDT

This guy is a pervert and uses art as the excuse for his mental imbalance. Why any of these passengers would tolerate something like this without trying to stop it or get off the car is beyond all sensibilities. Nudity is natural for the human form, but so is urinating, defecating and copulating; but, doing any of these things in public is against the law and is indecent. The police need to pursue him and make sure that bail is denied so he can maybe get his due while in jail.

Reply to this comment


by jvande7472 August 20, 2009 4:55 PM EDT: So Michelangelo's David is pornographic? The Venus de Milo?


by bigreddog222 August 20, 2009 6:30 PM EDT: Re: The Venus de Milo

It looks pretty cold in that room.


by kamsack50 August 20, 2009 4:40 PM EDT: I don't know how the passengers in this picture can remain so complacent.
She's a beautiful, young thing. I would find myself approaching her from behind.; Reply to this comment