Is my title going to be offensive to museum curators?

[amolitor]

TPF is so wonderfully inconsistent. When someone unpopular uses some potentially offensive term, TPF becomes a veritable bastion of righteousness. When one of the in crowd uses a potentially offensive term, it's SUPER FUNNY!

I guess some of the members may actually still be in high school. Does that explain it?

 

[Ilovemycam]

He's asking about Museum Curators specifically, not about whether the title is generally offensive. Of course they won't be offended. They're not offended by either the title or the work "Piss Christ" or 10,000 imitators, after all. Come on.

Actually, this is just a troll to get people to look at his pictures, with a little defensive shield in case of negative feedback, but we'll ignore that.

There you go again Amolitor, trying to build up your self-worth by tearing down others.

I've told you this before. Self worth is an inisde job. You wont succed building slef esteem by attacking others.

My posting record is an open book for all to see. My posts are always on target and to the point and deal with the subject of photography. The same cannot be said about your personal attacks.

 

[runnah]

TPF is so wonderfully inconsistent. When someone unpopular uses some potentially offensive term, TPF becomes a veritable bastion of righteousness. When one of the in crowd uses a potentially offensive term, it's SUPER FUNNY!

I guess some of the members may actually still be in high school. Does that explain it?

While I agree, and secretly hope I am one of the cool kids I think you missed the point.

The point is the term anorexic isn't offensive when used properly. In this case label some old woman as an anorexic is just brash and looking to make it out to be like the OP is some cutting edge artistic badass when in reality it's just a trite and badly taken photo.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Im curious as to the thought process for deciding on the title.
Why use the word "anorexic" at all?
Why not "woman under a storm"
or just "under a storm"
"Colorful dress in a storm"?

Did you use that word to produce some sort of visceral response from people?
Anorexia is a medical condition. Are you certain she has it?

I don't personally find anything offensive.
I think people that are "offended" by something are too often using the word "offensive" to mask their own issues or inadequacies.

I also think the exact same thing about people that purposely use known "offensive" language and imagery to evoke an emotionally negative response from other people. (not saying that is or is not the case here, i have no idea what your intent was obviously)

Anyway, the picture isn't really my cup of tea, and having no experience whatsoever with museum art, i cannot say whether a curator would or would not have issues with either the title or the picture itself.

It goes back to the OP

"I talked about it on another forum and told them I just don't shoot kids, I shoot any damn thing I like from anorexics to kids to dogs...does not matter. Someone got offended when I mentioned anorexics."

People are always offended at one thing or another. Someone got offended when I used the term Indian and not Native American. Another got ruffled from Black and not Afro American. I dodn't really care. But was wondering more about Anorexic here.

 

[Ilovemycam]

No one has offered their own title to the pix. Any suggestions?

 

[Ilovemycam]

Why would a museum even be interested in the first place?
The title is irrelevant.

Don't know if they would? Just wanted to make sure it would not be too offensive if at my Tumblr.

 

[amolitor]

My posting record is an open book for all to see. My posts are always on target and to the point and deal with the subject of photography. The same cannot be said about your personal attacks.

Yup, yup it is. So's mine. In the extremely unlikely event that anyone gives a damn, I suggest that that anyone actually go inspect the record.

Click on my name over on the left side there, above my avatar, select "View Profile" from the popup. This should take you to a "amolitor's Activity" tab. Under that tab you'll see sub-tabs for "All", "amolitor", "Friends" and "Photos". Click on the "amolitor" subtab. A similar process can be followed for ilovemycam. Then you'll actually know.

This is a simple and often quite interesting exercise.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Why would a museum even be interested in the first place?
The title is irrelevant.

I rather find myself agreeing with this. What I see is an image which IMO is poorly composed and grossly over-processed photographed and titled specifically with the intent of producing a controversial subject, rather in the same way that some people photograph the homeless for the "shock value". I'm not a museum curator, nor do I play one on television, but I can't imagine seeing this image displayed in a public gallery.

That is fine. But many street shots are just that. Well, they don't have to be HDR.

 

[Ilovemycam]

I still believe in this thing called integrity - a soundness of moral character thats clearly not demonstrated here.

Morals are subjective, localized and are based on custom a lot of the time. Maybe you can explain.

Is the problem that she may not be an anorexic? If she was an anorexic, then is there a problem suing the term?

Or is it something else?

 

[amolitor]

People don't like you, ilovemycam, and they are using your use of the word "anorexic" to justify some bile. You're never going to move on from your obsession with mailing photos to museums, but perhaps you can get past this one.

 

[Ilovemycam]

If you "do not give a damn" about so much why do you care about offending anyone? You obviously "don't give a damn" about mislabeling a person. Are you a doctor and this is your subject or are you just a closed minded judgmental person. (That's rhetorical)...

Hey, I just have to go with what I see on the street. I didn't interview her.

The majority of curators are old women. I don't think like an old woman. I am looking for feedback to help me decide if my title is offensive. For me it is not offensive, but I can't go by that.

 

[Ilovemycam]

I updated the image in the OP. Decided on hyper real and dumped the grunge.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Why would a museum even be interested in the first place?
The title is irrelevant.

I rather find myself agreeing with this. What I see is an image which IMO is poorly composed and grossly over-processed photographed and titled specifically with the intent of producing a controversial subject, rather in the same way that some people photograph the homeless for the "shock value". I'm not a museum curator, nor do I play one on television, but I can't imagine seeing this image displayed in a public gallery.

forgot to add...

A Widelux is tough to shoot good street pix with. The photo is pretty much full frame. Now, you don't have to like the photo. I'm not trying to sell you on it. I'm just saying many times non street photogs view street work like it should be some studio set up shot. I've looked and looked for good street work done with a Widelux. And it is very slim pickings.

 

[amolitor]

The majority of curators are old women.

Say what?

 

[PixelRabbit]

If the use of the word anorexic fits the image and you can say with 100% certainty that the subject of the image is battling anorexia no it is not offensive.
That is not the case here, you have no confirmation from the subject that she is indeed anorexic and there are many indicators that she is not.

IMHO it will read untrue at the very least and stand out as careless, insensitive, inaccurate and or a selfish attempt to make your art something it isn't by using anorexic as a buzz word.