Homeless & hot

[keyseddie]

Typical example of someone snatching OP's original post and probably seeking attention ;-)

If you can't take a photo of a homeless then you can't take any street photos which doesn't make sense.

I assume you're referring to me, Vincie, right? If so I'm not sure what you mean. I'm relatively new to this kind of communication. Just seeking attention I suppose. So was I not supposed to post a homeless person also because it derails the OP's thread? Or are you saying the lady is a "street photo" that doesn't make sense so I shouldn't have posted it for that reason?

 

[manaheim]

Typical example of someone snatching OP's original post and probably seeking attention ;-)

If you can't take a photo of a homeless then you can't take any street photos which doesn't make sense.

That's totally different and I think you know that.

Wait, I'm confused. Are photos of homeless people not allowed here? Is it against the rules? I'm serious, I need clarification here.

No rules against it. It's "fine".

 

[DanOstergren]

Wait, I'm confused. Are photos of homeless people not allowed here? Is it against the rules? I'm serious, I need clarification here.

No rules against it. It's "fine".

So why is the OP being chastised in this forum? If any place at all for it to be appropriate to do so would be in a forum focused on morality, not photography.

 

[DanOstergren]

As for the photos, I would choose the color because I like the color tones and I feel that it shows more detail.

 

[manaheim]

Wait, I'm confused. Are photos of homeless people not allowed here? Is it against the rules? I'm serious, I need clarification here.

No rules against it. It's "fine".

So why is the OP being chastised in this forum? If any place at all for it to be appropriate to do so would be in a forum focused on morality, not photography.

That's a bit of a straw man, and I don't see the OP being chastised. Questioned? Certainly. But the comments, while in some cases a little pointy in bits, were respectful.

You're trying to separate aspects of what can and cannot be discussed based off of some rule set that you have applied to what is and is not a photographic discussion. This is a photograph. The decisions the photographer made in taking it are reasonable areas for exploration.

 

[runnah]

I think the biggest issue is that he is maaaaybe a 4. Possible 5 if cleaned up. But by no means "hot".

 

[manaheim]

THE FOLLOWING REMARK IS INTENDED AS HUMOR.

That joke was exploitative.

 

[JacaRanda]

The OP was specific in his question IMHO, which is often the preferred method of asking for help according to many TPF'ers. Some responders answered directly, which I find refreshing. Even 'none' seemed to be acceptable as an answer to the OP.

I would like to know what the secret is to others opposed to the photo, that chose not to comment at all (if any).




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Vince.1551]

I assume you're referring to me, Vincie, right? If so I'm not sure what you mean. I'm relatively new to this kind of communication. Just seeking attention I suppose. So was I not supposed to post a homeless person also because it derails the OP's thread? Or are you saying the lady is a "street photo" that doesn't make sense so I shouldn't have posted it for that reason?

No no not you keys! Someone else . Someone who previously made a similar comment about attention seeking and snatching OP's post ;-)

And just to make my stand clear I feel it's alright for OP to take that photo.