For Some, Life is Tough

[The_Traveler]

Where is any of these four photos in any way comparable to the situation you're describing about me tumbling down a hill and landing with my skirts round my neck?
They show PEOPLE, in their daily situation, and make us, the viewers, realise that there is such a problem as being without a home. Particularly these four photos are anything BUT "photo porn". They don't show anyone in a drunk situation, an embarrassing situation - they only show what life can be like for some! No more. But fortunately no less, either. They make us think. In how far would that be "for the benefit of the photographer" or "in exploitation of the photographed"?

Clearly not.

Because of their situation, homeless people don't have any option to escape being made the object of our Schadenfreude. Saying that pictures make us aware that people are worse off might be useful if the viewer was, say, from Venus or had been asleep in a cave for the last 1000 years but what person isn't away of the plight of the homeless?

Picture number 3 is quite good in that it is not the man, however well he is portrayed, as the point but the photographer showing us visually that this sad situation exists in parallel with the real society and we turn away from it. A good and valid point, imo, that justifies the picture.

The others just recapture things that we've all seen. Except for the person's condition what new do they bring to the issue?

I'm not saying that we should all stop shooting street people, just that we should look at each picture opportunity and make the ethical choice about whether the information value makes the picture worthwhile and decide that it isn't a cheap opportunity to get some response at the cost of the subject's humanity.

Instead of ad hominem attacks on me for having a different opinion and daring to express it, why not justify your position that anyone, anytime is fair game?

Here is a quote from Eric Kim's blog Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

I see many aspiring street photographers on the web who merely take photos of homeless people down on their luck and label their images as “street photography.” I feel bad for these aspiring street photographers, as they simply use images of people who are experiencing poverty as a crutch for their own photographic shortcomings.


Don’t get me wrong– I do not believe that all photos of homeless people are distasteful..............................


If you decide to take photos/portraits of homeless people, try to get to know them as human beings. Don’t look at them as “different” or strange, but someone equal to you. Have a conversation with them and lend an ear to them. I have had many conversations with homeless people on the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica, and many homeless people just have made some poor life choices or lost their lives due to health problems, family issues, or even mental problems.

 

[StringThing]

Thank you for bringing another voice to this discussion. I had never really thought about it from that point of view, but I will now. I'd love to hear what the OP would say on this subject.

 

[The_Traveler]

What part of my statement did you not understand? You knew what the thread was about but still chose to shoot your mouth off before engaging your brain, as usual.

Dear Bob,

Your personal animosity towards me seems to be just bubbling out.

Rather than attacking me, why not just explain why you think that anyone, anytime is fair game, no matter what and how I'm wrong?

 

[bobnr32]

What part of my statement did you not understand? You knew what the thread was about but still chose to shoot your mouth off before engaging your brain, as usual.

Dear Bob,

Your personal animosity towards me seems to be just bubbling out.

Rather than attacking me, why not just explain why you think that anyone, anytime is fair game, no matter what and how I'm wrong?

Paranoid or what?
Again you are exhibiting classic bullying symptoms. You can give it out but don't like it up you, and of course denial.
By the way, is your avatar copyright protected?

 

[The_Traveler]

Paranoid or what?
Again you are exhibiting classic bullying symptoms. You can give it out but don't like it up you, and of course denial.
By the way, is your avatar copyright protected?

Dear Bob,

I realize now that asking to you explain your thoughts or actions might be bullying in your case.
If you consider my response to you bullying I suggest that you report it to the mods.


In response to your question, assuming that it was a real question and not a pathetic passive-aggressive act, here is an explanation of my avatar as a derivative work under the Fair Use doctrine.

In the United States, the Copyright Act defines "derivative work" in 17 U.S.C. § 101:
A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.

 

[The_Traveler]

Bob,

This is the second thread in which you've attacked me, not my opinions.

As I did that time, I'm asking that, since you don't like me or what I think, just put me on ignore and you'll be free of me.

 

[Derrel]

While these are good pictures, there is a definite ethical issue about using the vulnerability and bad circumstances of others for impact in casual photography without bringing more to it than just another picture of a poor person.


I call it 'homeless porn'

Lew

Seriously Lew? You sound like you are parroting that pompous windbag Bjorn R and his tedious bleating about the same, exact disparaging phrase. Your judgemental dismissal of this type of photography, and equating it to pornography, shows a real small-mindedness. Maybe you and B.R. ought to spend a few minutes in the corner, reflecting upon your sanctimonious judgement of the work of other people. I really do NOT AGREE with the value system you and your mouthpiece buddy constantly spout, in an effort to try and make others feel bad about showing the world the way it really is. Seriously...why are you attacking the photographer, and not discussing the work: as the title shows, the photos show us that, "For Some, Life is Tough". For example, the second photo shows a man seated on a crate, between the offices of an Abogado (Lawyer), and a Kentucky Fried Chicken store...his sign says he has six kids...he has no work..his house needs [something I cannot quite read]"...this photo really shows the difference between the haves, and the have-nots. It causes people, me included, to "think", to "ponder"--you know, one of the major goals of art!!!

I'm seriously sick of this line of thinking that street photography is the equivalent of "pornography"; the assertion is tasteless and juvenile. You and B.R. need to construct a bit better, more grown-up put down and argument to spew at those whom you dislike and disagree with.

 

[bobnr32]

Bob,

This is the second thread in which you've attacked me, not my opinions.

As I did that time, I'm asking that, since you don't like me or what I think, just put me on ignore and you'll be free of me.

I have not attacked you but your mindless obsession with belittling others. You voice your opinions, nobody else.
You have been told to watch your words not me.
I shall challenge injustice wherever it rears its ugly head.

 

[The_Traveler]

Seriously Lew? You sound like you are parroting that pompous windbag Bjorn R and his tedious bleating about the same, exact disparaging phrase. Your judgemental dismissal of this type of photography, and equating it to pornography, shows a real small-mindedness. Maybe you and B.R. ought to spend a few minutes in the corner, reflecting upon your sanctimonious judgement of the work of other people. I really do NOT AGREE with the value system you and your mouthpiece buddy constantly spout, in an effort to try and make others feel bad about showing the world the way it really is. Seriously...why are you attacking the photographer, and not discussing the work: as the title shows, the photos show us that, "For Some, Life is Tough". For example, the second photo shows a man seated on a crate, between the offices of an Abogado (Lawyer), and a Kentucky Fried Chicken store...his sign says he has six kids...he has no work..his house needs [something I cannot quite read]"...this photo really shows the difference between the haves, and the have-nots. It causes people, me included, to "think", to "ponder"--you know, one of the major goals of art!!!

I'm seriously sick of this line of thinking that street photography is the equivalent of "pornography"; the assertion is tasteless and juvenile. You and B.R. need to construct a bit better, more grown-up put down and argument to spew at those whom you dislike and disagree with.

Bob,

This is the second thread in which you've attacked me, not my opinions.

As I did that time, I'm asking that, since you don't like me or what I think, just put me on ignore and you'll be free of me.

I have not attacked you but your mindless obsession with belittling others. You voice your opinions, nobody else.
You have been told to watch your words not me.
I shall challenge injustice wherever it rears its ugly head.

Again, nothing said about why my opinions are wrong or incorrect, only harsh words attacking me.

I do like the challenge injustice line; it has a kind of silly pomposity to it.
Care to point out where the 'injustice' is?

Some people have a real hard time with opinions that challenge their own view of the received truth.

 

[mishele]

:er:

 

[Ricardodaforce]

[/QUOTE]


I would also like to know if the photographer was kind enough to slip the homeless people he shot a few bucks to help them out (not that it could be verified :/ ). It might be different if he asked their permission first... and they would probably give it for a "donation".[/QUOTE]

I gave the subject of the first 3 images some money. I don't give money to those that approach people (like the woman in the fourth image) because often they can be rude and a tad aggressive. So, if I see someone passively begging that I want to photograph, then yes I give them some money.

Furthermore, sometimes I see people that I would like to take a proper portrait shot of and I ask them if I can do so for a financial consideration. Some say no, some say yes, like this guy:


4 de Julio by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

I take photos of stuff that interests me, whether it be people, landscapes, architecture etc. When it comes to people I don't fixate on the less fortunate members of society I take pictures of people that I find interesting. Here are some examples.


La Sonrisa by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr


Lágrimas by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr


Untitled by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr


Las Guapas by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr


Ojos Españoles by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

 

[The_Traveler]

Picture number 3 is quite good in that it is not the man, however well he is portrayed, as the point but the photographer showing us visually that this sad situation exists in parallel with the real society and we turn away from it. A good and valid point, imo, that justifies the picture.

I'm not saying that we should all stop shooting street people, just that we should look at each picture opportunity and make the ethical choice about whether the information value makes the picture worthwhile and decide that it isn't a cheap opportunity to get some response at the cost of the subject's humanity.

Instead of ad hominem attacks on me for having a different opinion and daring to express it, why not justify your position that anyone, anytime is fair game?

Thank you, Ricardo, for your measured response.

Let me repeat what I have said several times.
We have the power to invade homeless peoples' lives by taking their picture and exposing their situations and weaknesses to the world.
As photographers, we should use that ability carefully and use it only when we think the situation is worth the cost.

If that is bullying, well ...................

 

[bobnr32]

Traveler your arguments are contradictory. It was clear that Ricardo used "that ability carefully and use it only when we think the situation is worth the cost." The title was "For Some, Life is Tough". He portrayed his subjects with great sensitivity. A lesson to be learnt, surely?

 

[cgipson1]

I would also like to know if the photographer was kind enough to slip the homeless people he shot a few bucks to help them out (not that it could be verified :/ ). It might be different if he asked their permission first... and they would probably give it for a "donation".

I gave the subject of the first 3 images some money. I don't give money to those that approach people (like the woman in the fourth image) because often they can be rude and a tad aggressive. So, if I see someone passively begging that I want to photograph, then yes I give them some money.

Furthermore, sometimes I see people that I would like to take a proper portrait shot of and I ask them if I can do so for a financial consideration. Some say no, some say yes, like this guy:

Thats great! That is more than most photographers / people do! I fully understand about not giving to those that hassle you for it... I hate panhandling with a passion. Some nice shots too! Love "untitled".. made me smile!

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I nominate this as the most jacked thread on this forum