Should I add the details to this pix or is it too much information? Nude Warning

[Ilovemycam]

Nude Warning!

http://www.artslant.com/ny/works/show/732608-the-sunlit-slipper

I found this pix on Monday. I forgot I even shot it 40 years ago.

I normally print whatever info I like on the backs of my photos. When I met this lady and went to her home to shoot, there was dog crap all over the floor. I had to be careful where I put the tripod legs and where I stepped.

Should I add this info when I use this pix or is it too much information?

Again, I have no interest if you think this is over processed, has bad comp, I am goofy, a troll, a poor photographer, bad lighting, I have low moral character or whatever else you feel like throwing at me. Just answer the question if you please...

Thanks

 

[gsgary]

Nice shot, but she's no milf is she

 

[DanOstergren]

If you truly feel like it's part of the story then yes, add the info. Perhaps find a way to make the info as least crude as you can. You could even say that the house was very much lived in by her and her pets.

Honestly I don't see why you are asking us though; it's your artwork.

 

[Granddad]

I don't think the extra info is needed, it's pretty obvious she's not a neat freak ... but I do like Dan's way of saying it if you choose to add it.

 

[sashbar]

I would say you must treat your subjects or models with respect, whoever it is. You can create an image of a whore for example but you need to separate the image from the subject when it comes to a moral judgement. Especially if someone invites you in her/his home. I think the "dog crap" info is absolutely unnessessary. The image speaks for itself quite clearly. And there are no dogs in the frame.

 

[Derrel]

Funny...I thought the title was Sunlit Stripper. I would probably take the tack mentioned above if you absolutely must work in the dog poop detail...

 

[terri]

I don't see where it adds anything to the image, which is a good shot and stands on its own. Writing something on the back of the print about dog crap would not further elevate my impression of the work itself. It's your own memory of the shoot, nothing more.

 

[Braineack]

I think you should print this on the back of your photos: I have no interest if you think this is over processed, has bad comp, I am goofy, a troll, a poor photographer, bad lighting, I have low moral character or whatever else you feel like throwing at me.

 

[thebasedsloth]

I feel like this isn't the right section.
Do we have a 'what should I write on the back of a print' thread?

 

[JTPhotography]

As a stand-alone peice of art, it shouldn't matter at all. If you were including it in, say, a themed gallery showing where the info was relevant, probably. Or a book or something, maybe.

 

[jenko]

The info adds nothing to the image, and in fact, takes away from it. I looked at the image before reading your question, and to me, she looked like a woman past her prime, and yet ironically, more comfortable in her skin than many younger women. There is a smug self-confidence that is celebratory. The extra info makes the photo feel a bit fetishistic and exploitative, imo.

 

[The_Traveler]

This seems like just another way to build clicks on your site.
Why not post the picture here?

 

[Ilovemycam]

Nice shot, but she's no milf is she

Film is beautiful...isn't it! I was lucky to get people I would meet to let me shoot them at home. Even back in the 70's it was hard to get into houses. But that was my M.O. While I liked street photography, I liked social documentary photography at the home even more...'Meet on the street...shoot at the home.'

But nowadays people are just too paranoid to let strangers in. I have also been refused a few times because photography is so wide spread and easy that people tell me they don't want or need any more photos. They got a cell phone and a $50 ink jet printer so why do they need me?

 

[Ilovemycam]

If you truly feel like it's part of the story then yes, add the info. Perhaps find a way to make the info as least crude as you can. You could even say that the house was very much lived in by her and her pets.

Honestly I don't see why you are asking us though; it's your artwork.

Well, I sometime like to see what the consensus says about a pix or an idea. My ideas are ‘goofy’ according to one member. So I like to bounce things off you guys and gals to see how it flies before putting things out there.

I asked another forum their thoughts about adding a pedophile note to this pix

http://www.artslant.com/ny/works/show/721151-the-lost-princess

I was going to put a note on back of her pix that said how things were for the male photog in 2013. That it can be tough for male photogs shooting stranger kids on the street. About my being thrown out of events and threats of them calling the police. Accusations of being a pedophile anytime you point a lens at a stranger kid. That type of thing. But from discussion there, I decided to leave that note off.

With my pix of the American Nazi, I found out 60% of the people I polled think it is a staged photo. There can be no bigger insult for the documentary photog than to say their pix is staged. So on that photo I put a note the photo is not staged. Sure photo is posed, but it is not staged in any sense of the word.

Same with the pole dancer. I didn’t do a formal poll, but I received comments that I had staged it. They think I built the ‘set’. So I put a note on it that it was not staged. It is clear to me what the pix was. I was walking by the pole dancer's camp and I asked her to hold still for a second to shoot her. But what is clear to me must not be clear to others.

So I always like to see how others view my work. It is especially important for me when I send off solicitations to museums and other institutions to place my work. I like to put my best foot forward when I send things out and do some extra work to refine areas I am not sure about.

 

[Ilovemycam]

I would say you must treat your subjects or models with respect, whoever it is. You can create an image of a whore for example but you need to separate the image from the subject when it comes to a moral judgement. Especially if someone invites you in her/his home. I think the "dog crap" info is absolutely unnessessary. The image speaks for itself quite clearly. And there are no dogs in the frame.

Yes, well spoken post. I wondered about that. If I have a pix of a hooker, should I say anything about her work? Maybe I would just say 'a lady I met on the street' and leave it at that if any description is needed.

I love to shoot any colorful prostitutes I find. But as they are business ladies one has to pay to play. (shoot) So I usually don't do much with them inside the home, as documentary photogs don't like to pay for their pix.

Here is a poem for you!

My Madonna

I haled me a woman from the street,
Shameless, but, oh, so fair!
I bade her sit in the model’s seat
And I painted her sitting there.

I hid all trace of her heart unclean;
I painted a babe at her breast;
I painted her as she might have been
If the Worst had been the Best.

She laughed at my picture and went away.
Then came, with a knowing nod,
A connoisseur, and I heard him say;
“’Tis Mary, the Mother of God.”

So I painted a halo round her hair,
And I sold her and took my fee,
And she hangs in the church of Saint Hillaire,
Where you and all may see.

By Robert W. Service