On Thursday night, police seized naked photographs of a boy and girl reportedly aged 12 and 13 years old from an art gallery in Sydney, just before Bill Henson’s new photographic exhibition was due to open.

Police say the images show children under the age of sixteen “in a sexual context.” Promotional material for the exhibition reportedly says the works portray the ‘vulnerability of adolescent life.’

It’s not yet clear whether charges will be laid against the artist, Bill Henson, and the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery.

It raises the question - is there a difference between art and pornography?

The Prime Minister has weighed in to the debate. He says the photographs are “absolutely revolting,” and that kids should be left to be kids. The leader of the opposition and other MPs have also denounced the photos.

But supporters of Bill Henson have come to the defense of the artist. Art analyst Michael Reid says there’s no doubt the photographs are artistic. He’s told The Sydney Morning Herald: "The main photograph in question is in the style of the Old Masters," he said. "The model is enveloped in a black velvety shroud and she is backlit. She is very still. There is not any sexual charge about the image. It is quite restful and contemplative. She is demure.”

Some are calling for creative freedom to be defended. Others say photographs of underage teenagers does NOT constitute art.

What do you think?