Homless Shelter wants Photographer with no Ethics?

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

There is a difference between telling their story honestly, and there is poverty porn. Poverty porn says nothing at all about a person aside from the fact that they are homeless.

No offense, but it sounds like you are trying way too hard to create a dramatic issue out of something that really shouldn't be. Its one thing to dislike photographers who take pictures of the homeless for use as "street photography" or whatnot as being exploitative, but this is kind of silly when you are rallying against an institution that is trying to help these people.

There is nothing wrong with capturing photos of people as they are, in order to illustrate what this shelter does. Its not like they are bringing in a bunch of people and dressing them up like hobos and then asking you to photoshop them so that they look like they are at deaths door. Honesty should always be something you strive for.

However, While this shelter works hard to feed, clothe, and provide shelter to an ever growing group of needy human beings on a daily basis, you have the audacity to sit back and pretend that your righteousness is going to help the homeless in an sort of realistic sense. I think that your automatic assumption of exploitation and "porn" are incredibly presumptuous and misguided regardless of how hip and fun it is to frivolously use the word "porn" as a suffix. Sorry if that comes off as harsh. I don't mean to offend you, just being bluntly honest. Everyone likes to stand up for something, I just think that you are picking the wrong battle.

 

[unpopular]

Debasing and dehumanizing individuals to mere icons of a greater problem is never ethical. Judging from your initial reactions, I don't expect you to understand this because you likely don't see the homeless as individuals, but rather as a problem needing to be fixed.

Furthermore, unless you have ever used a shelter yourself, you have no idea what these institutions are actually doing.

 

[IByte]

Best story of the homeless is when Diogenes of Sinope influenced Alexander the Great.

 

[Jaemie]

Next time give them a nice benign letter saying you're willing and enthusiastic, blah blah blah, and then, if they give you the job, do it your way.

Asking for permission sucks. I rarely get anything done that way, so I don't.

 

[unpopular]

I agree, that is a much better approach. Get the foot in the door and feel them out.

I'm just a little disappointed, you know, I'd think anyone who worked with the homeless would welcome attempts to humanize them. I'm much more disappointed in that than not getting the job.

woot! spellcheck is back!

 

[Carny]

I'm still not really sure what the difference is. What would the photo you want to take look like? What would the photo you think they want look like?

I think the previous posts about them not responding because they thought you were going to be difficult are probably correct. Why wouldn't they want them shown as individuals? If I were running a shelter and wanted photos for promotion and to get donations, then shots that made them look like individuals and real people are exactly what I would want.

It's almost like you have something against the shelter and are offended they don't want your help at the same time.

Also, there's a good chance they are busy and just haven't responded yet.

 

[gsgary]

He is difficult, have you seen some of his post on here

 

[Jaemie]

Those needy meek...

 

[usayit]

No offense, but it sounds like you are trying way too hard to create a dramatic issue out of something that really shouldn't be.

Totally agree... The discussion is very similar to the ones that blatantly classify nudity as porn without much thought to the complexities involved.

On the other hand, you shouldn't do what makes you feel uncomfortable. If you as the photographer can use images to tell the story of the struggles of homelessness and portray them as fellow humans, then you should have no problems sleeping at night knowing that you are helping getting their message out in the open.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

All this condemnation based on assumptions. Nice! Go you!

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Debasing and dehumanizing individuals to mere icons of a greater problem is never ethical. Judging from your initial reactions, I don't expect you to understand this because you likely don't see the homeless as individuals, but rather as a problem needing to be fixed.

You have shown no evidence of dehumanizing people. If someone takes a picture of a homeless person and the photo clearly conveys that this person is either a)homeless b)impoverished or c) needing assistance then this somehow dehumanizes them? So you are telling me that a dirty guy I see sleeping on a bench instantly becomes "dehumanized" simply because I snap a photo of him? That makes no sense.

Again, as I stated, it seems that you are assuming way too much, and also twisting a shelters intentions into your own assumptions. If you are so worried about how a shelter does its job, then go stay there, or go talk to them. Don't sit back, make assumptions, and whine about how they don't want to work with you. What I see here, is someone who had a pretty good sneaking suspicion that the reality is that this shelter does not wish to work with you. So you come on here and ask a fairly obvious question in hopes of everyone thinking you are so great for taking a stand against all those "damn filthy homeless shelters with all their ....helpfullness....and sheltering...." So we can all say "wow, that guy is so cool and righteous!" Its all so self-serving and anyone with an inkling of a clue can see right through it.

Is this shelter supposed to just pull money out of its @ss to do what it does? Do a little test-- go out in front of a Walmart (or some other busy store) and stand with a sign asking for money. Dressed as you normally do. Then, don't shower for 2 weeks, and wear the same clothes for 2 weeks. Don't comb your hair or shave or brush your teeth. See which day you get more money. Are you any "less human" either of those days? Not really, but the public is quite fickle, especially in a down economy when it comes to donating. Just as you are suspicious about the shelter, the general public is typically suspicious of people asking for handouts. That's just life.

 

[The_Traveler]

Debasing and dehumanizing individuals to mere icons of a greater problem is never ethical. Judging from your initial reactions, I don't expect you to understand this because you likely don't see the homeless as individuals, but rather as a problem needing to be fixed.

You have shown no evidence of dehumanizing people. If someone takes a picture of a homeless person and the photo clearly conveys that this person is either a)homeless b)impoverished or c) needing assistance then this somehow dehumanizes them? So you are telling me that a dirty guy I see sleeping on a bench instantly becomes "dehumanized" simply because I snap a photo of him? That makes no sense.

Let's not conflate two issues - the 'using' of the homeless for a subject and what the shelter's intent is.

I have no idea about the latter but I do have a very specific opinion about the former.
I believe that if an image has no other point than showing a homeless/poor/mentally ill (your choice) person and tells us nothing more, but uses that person's plight as cheap emotional fodder to pump up an image's impact, then it is exploitation. Rather than treating that subject as a person, the photographer in that case is dehumanizing them and degrading them to the level of only a subject.

The homeless/poor/mentally ill are more vulnerable than most and photographers should be aware than sometime our rights can trample on theirs.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I don't think photographing homeless environmental portraits is any more dehumanizing or degrading than glamor girl bikini photography.

 

[Ernicus]

and we now see why your screen name is "unpopular"

:lmao:

...had to say it. hippie. lolol

 

[unpopular]

I have no idea what the shelter had in mind. As a fine art photographer who aspires recognition, though, I must maintain some level of quality in my work. Perhaps some of you can go off and give whatever the client wants, but the last thing I want is to be known as a poverty pornographer. Which, believe it or not, is a big topic in the fine art circle.

This is not a matter of what the shelter did or did not want, it's a matter of what what I was willing to do. Like i said, I'm much more disappointed in that the shelter refused free services solely on the basis that I sought to humanize and individualize a marginal population who is so clearly often debased to their economic status.