Homelessness in B&W. I am just getting into photography, tell me what you think.

[Jaemie]

Well, the lighting is good. The composition could be criticized, but I like it; the blackness gives a sense of emptiness or mystery, the huge jacket is intriguing (or is Ray just small?), the underpass adds immediacy, Ray's expression could be interpreted many ways. It's technically well executed and very emotionally engaging. It's stark and I like that.

 

[rokvi]

I took a photo of a guy with 3 homes, is that unethical?

 

[SCraig]

Lol, I'm just trying to get the hang of photography and was looking for suggestions on the picture
itself(strengths, weaknesses, too processed, ect).

OK, first I don't like the composition. Too much dead, black space on the left that adds nothing to the shot. The open-sky upper right corner is distracting and draws my eye away from the subject. The contrast is too high in my opinion, too much black and not enough gray in his face (although personally I dislike black and white to start with).

Had you not said that he was homeless I never would have known it. The coat he's wearing does not look like one that a homeless person would wear, it looks like it's new. There is nothing in the shot that says "Homeless" to me, just a photograph of a guy. Show his face. Show the stubble of beard and the hopelessness in his eyes and then maybe I'd think "Homeless" but this doesn't work for me.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

OK, first I don't like the composition. Too much dead, black space on the left that adds nothing to the shot. The open-sky upper right corner is distracting and draws my eye away from the subject. The contrast is too high in my opinion, too much black and not enough gray in his face (although personally I dislike black and white to start with).

Had you not said that he was homeless I never would have known it. The coat he's wearing does not look like one that a homeless person would wear, it looks like it's new. There is nothing in the shot that says "Homeless" to me, just a photograph of a guy. Show his face. Show the stubble of beard and the hopelessness in his eyes and then maybe I'd think "Homeless" but this doesn't work for me.

I agree with this post 110%. The shot has so much potential, especially with the lighting angle on your subject. However, there are too many flaws with the composition. It literally looks like a regular working man in a large coat.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

 

[cgipson1]

I should have been more clear on what I meant by candid. I shot this as a part of a photojournalism assignment to show the more human side of homelessness in Salem. I did not just go out and snap this picture without talking to the guy. Even if I did, I would not have had an issue with the ethics of it, as it is a public place and I am not exploiting him in any way. If people didn't cover people in different situations or from different backgrounds by taking their pictures then photojournalism wouldn't exist. I talked with him for about thirty minutes as he was panhandling before I brought the camera out. After getting to know him I shot a series of pictures as he was doing his thing. He just so happened to look right at me as I took this picture. He was holding an "anything helps" sign, but I was standing right up against the street, and couldn't get it in the shot. But, back to the image itself. Is it too dark, contrast too much?

Is there a reason you didn't shoot this "portrait" in vertical format? You could have gotten the sign (adding context).. and gotten rid of that HUGE expanse of black nothing....

A lot of people shoot the homeless for the "shock value".. the dirt, wrinkles, odd clothing, etc.... and that is often frowned upon. Kind of like amateur level National Enquirer type stuff. Not saying YOU did that.. just trying to explain the bias against shooting the homeless unless well done for good reasons...

 

[Jaemie]

Okay, now I'm making the popcorn.

 

[Ernicus]

...add fuel to fire and grabs a bag of popcorn too....


Maybe you should put a UV filter on your lens in case the next homeless guy throws a rock at you, then your lens won't get broken.

 

[yerlem]

He talked to the guy and then took a picture of him, with Ray's consent. How is that unethical?
I was sitting by the river with a friend the other day, and there were 3 or 4 photography students taking pictures of us, without asking if they could do it in the first place...was I being exploited?

 

[AaronLLockhart]

I don't understand how ethics has any involvement with this photograph in the first place. Photographing him is no different than photographing a complete stranger. You all say ethics comes into it if he is taking the image to be artsy, on the grounds that the man is homeless. That's hogwash. Photographers take photographs of people all of the time because they are beautiful, yet I don't see anyone calling that exploitation.

The man is homeless. It's not a disease, and it's not a sickness. He's homeless because of a decision that was made somewhere along in his life. In fact, that same decision may be what's causing him to remain homeless. We are in America, not Africa. Being homeless here isn't a misfortune, it's a choice.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

 

[Jaemie]

We are in America, not Africa. Being homeless here isn't a misfortune, it's a choice.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

Ray doesn't look so fortunate in the photo.

 

[Ernicus]

Being homeless here isn't a misfortune, it's a choice.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

LMAO. wow. The arrogance of youth. I normally don't enter into moral debates on here, but whew...buddy..I hope bad times never fall on you. That's all I have to say.

 

[SCraig]

LMAO. wow. The arrogance of youth. I normally don't enter into moral debates on here, but whew...buddy..I hope bad times never fall on you. That's all I have to say.

There are always two sides. In many cases he is right and in many cases he may be wrong.

We have a rather large homeless population here, and some of them truly are by choice. One local television news crew interviewed a number of them several years back. I remember it because one of the people they interviewed had a masters degree in something. He just decided he was tired of working, didn't want to do it anymore, and would rather live under a bridge. Others make a pretty good living panhandling. I see the same ones in the same places day in, day out, and most of them don't look like they miss many meals.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

LMAO. wow. The arrogance of youth. I normally don't enter into moral debates on here, but whew...buddy..I hope bad times never fall on you. That's all I have to say.

Bad times have came on me, when I was 18-21, I was in similar shoes. I was a drug addict and making my way through life as a stay in with my friends and their homes. Pretty much every night I switched locations. Eventually my friends got sick of it and patience was wearing thin.

I CHOSE to do something about it. Now I'm going on 29 years old, I have my own place, a car, a family, and a nice stable job producing good income. So, don't call my statement arrogant or naive. I speak from experience.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

 

[yerlem]

I went to Oregon once. Homless people there had nicer clothes than I did, lol

 

[unpopular]

He's homeless because of a decision that was made somewhere along in his life. In fact, that same decision may be what's causing him to remain homeless.

Sent from my iPhone 4S

ALL RIGHT! Now let's get some popcorn!

Ok Aaron. Why is it that for some people the choices we make have less or more impact than others? Why is it you don't see many homeless teens in wealthy neighborhoods?

Are you really telling me that a 23 year old kid addicted to alcohol from a poor family has an equal chance of obtaining treatment as a 23 year old from a wealthy neighborhood? Which of these two kids are more likely to have health insurance? Which of the se two kid's parents are more likely to have the resources to pay for treatment? Which of these two kids are more likely to have parents who can support him financially?

And what about mental illness? Perhaps you don't realize it, but there is a wait-list usually 12+ months in major cities. The poor spend this time on the streets, often allowing their health to deteriorate to the point that they are incapable of even knowing that they had applied in the first place. Where do you think wealthy people stay during this time period.

The same goes for social security applications, so it's not just a matter of "staying on meds" because despite the truth is there are three month wait lists for public psychiatrists - without medicare benefits, these people have no access to the healthcare which they need to stay stable. Again within that time period conditions often worsen to the point that they couldn't maintain a home even if they had one.

So put down your iPhone 4S and look out your window. You're entitled to anything by any virtue. Nobody is.