Jock Sturges selling his camera and print on Ebay...

[David]

Yes, the camera is great. I have one and was just using it with a 'new' 14" f4.5 Heliar.

 

[Dave Parker]

I have to ask, with informed consent or not, do any of us have control over what happens with the pictures we take, once they have left our hands? Jock has made quite a living off of controversy, Myself personally have never found the sexual side of his work and no, I am not a fan of nude photography, but have no problem with nudes! The controversy that surrounds Jock is part of what makes him what he is, and that is many different things in many different peoples minds and when it comes down to it, he is still a part of the photographic history in the US, right, wrong or indiffrent, he is what he is..

I would still love to own the camera as part of that photographic history.

Dave

 

[Frank Petronio]

The question not whether I'd let my daughters be photographed by an intelligent and respectful artist like Jock Sturges or Sally Mann. I probably would consent. But the problem is that it opens the door for other "photographers" of baser intent to do the same thing. By breaking down the taboos, it lets the creeps and idiots think that it is OK to do the same thing. And unless you could flip a switch and enlighten everybody all at once, you have a lot of evil people ready to exploit child nudity as "art" for narfarious purposes.

I suspect Jock lives amongst happy nudists and others who agree with him, in beautiful alternative lifestyle communities. He wouldn't last too long in Ohio.

 

[David]

Must be a chilling climate in Ohio

I have a lawyer friend who talks about 'the list of horribles'. That is, the notion that if one person gets away with something that everyone else can do the same thing too. One of the problems to deal with this approach is that the 'horribles' end up essentially controlling what the rest of us (of course we're not horrible!) can do. The lowest common denominator wins in this scenario. I wonder if there's an alternative???

 

[Dave Parker]

Must be a chilling climate in Ohio

Who's in Ohio?

 

[celluloidpropaganda]

I would love to own the camera regardless of photo history - no 8x10 Masters on Ebay recently.

 

[Jorge]

I have to ask, with informed consent or not, do any of us have control over what happens with the pictures we take, once they have left our hands? Jock has made quite a living off of controversy, Myself personally have never found the sexual side of his work and no, I am not a fan of nude photography, but have no problem with nudes! The controversy that surrounds Jock is part of what makes him what he is, and that is many different things in many different peoples minds and when it comes down to it, he is still a part of the photographic history in the US, right, wrong or indiffrent, he is what he is..

I would still love to own the camera as part of that photographic history.

Dave

The funny thing is that the controversy was started by the same people who pretend to tells us what is right or wrong. Nobody had heard of Sturges until his negatives were confiscated for child porn. If the goverment and the zealots who tried to screw him had left him alone, I bet my 8x10 we would not be dsicussing this....how is that for irony? From what I understand Sturges spent a lot of money defending himself off these charges, I bet he has recoup his expenses 10 fold just by the controversy generated, and the fact that now many paedophiles knew where to get legal photography books of naked young girls........ :rolleyes:

 

[Claire Senft]

Well Jorge, do you believe there is no such thing a bad publicity? Many times it is very true. Although, I would not wish to put to the Scott Peterson or Michael Jackson test.

 

[TimVermont]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

 

[Peter De Smidt]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

I hope so.

 

[Dave Parker]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

Perception of art, photographs, porn or anything else is in the eye of the beholder and the upbringing they have had, <B>and NO, I don't condone in any way shape or form, the Pedophile or child porn!</B> vary rarely can we view a subject, no matter the artform, without some emotion being provoke and our own ideals being read into it, I myself find it far more disturbing to view the journalistic pictures taken during a time of war...but that is just me, and I don't expect anyone else in the world to view things that way I do, just as I don't expect anyone else to impose their view on me...

What I find funny, is as Jorge said, even us discussing this subject is creating interest in what Jock has done over the years, bad or good, it is generating interest and curiosity.

Dave

 

[Jorge]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

I wondered that too...I have seen a few of the pics where the subject is smiling or seems comfortable, but overall it seems most are too serious. I dont know that it can be attribuited to being uncomfortable,....the french are strange people...lol...

 

[CraigK]

I've always been intrigued by Sturges work. On a technical level it is excellent. The prints are top quality.

What interests me the most however are the reactions that his photos generate.

In some ways I see a nude photo of a young girl standing on a beach staring into the camera as a sort of challenge to the reader. When presented with the facts of nudity, femininity, beauty, sexuality, earth, air, water, muscle, bone and blood we each need to decide what we should make of it.

Unfortunately for some, and this is where the controversy comes in, what they make of it is either prurient salivation or an outright cry to slap a burka on the girl.

Methinks the intention of the photographer, and the gist of his work, is in neither direction but rather on the more rational line in between.

 

[User Removed]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

I think it really sets a mood and feeling in his photography by the look on the models face. If all his pictures were just smiling happy naked people...would his images have the same impact? No.

By reading the expression on the models face, the viewer is able to form their own story and conclusion of the photography... rather then just a photography of someone nude that says nothing.

To me, Jock's images tell a story in each one, and thoses images that do not... usually have beautiful form, textures and composition to them.

I am a fan of Jock's work because what he does is creative, original and dares to be different and make a statement.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Am I the only one who thinks that most of his subjects -child or adult- look unhappy/uncomfortable?

No - I do, too! His subjects may not be bothered by being photographed naked, but they sure don't look enthusiastic!

 

[Dave Parker]

No - I do, too! His subjects may not be bothered by being photographed naked, but they sure don't look enthusiastic!

Has anyone thought, that maybe they are not suspose to look enthusiastic?

I remember a run of commercials several years ago, that Calvin Klein did, with models in their underware, and I don't ever remember any of them looking enthusiastic! for the most part, I don't remember to many of the fine art models looking to enthusiastic during their shoots

Dave

 

[Thomassauerwein]

I think his images are about a place and time more than anything else. well composed and exacuted, capturing a freedom that most don't trust themselves with. The parents of these girls are probably very excited to have an amazing portrait of their kids in transition. If I had a child I would shoot every evolution, every change that they and their bodies go thru. It is amazing and should be celebrated. Their are those who have a lack of perspective that ruin this freedom for everyone. Both those who believe it shameful and also those would can't get past the sex.
As far as their mood is concerned how many young girls do you know that don't try to control everyone around them through mood. This large camera in a total control situation is a mirror for themselves. To show the world they are in control. A very free capture of both the physial and mental state of transition.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Sturges

Thank you Thomas-that was so eloquently put. And herein lies the eternal problem of trying to use words to describe art. Like his work or not Mr. Sturges does not hide his intentions. And to me they are of pure form and artistic quality. If you know anything about French people they are not ashamed of their bodies. It's this puritanical society that exploits the "youth" sex scam ala Calvin Klein Ads,etc. to no end and get away with it. At least in France when they do advertizing they have the balls to show tits and ass-and that's on public streets no less. We're always hiding the real intentions in this country and that's why so many screwed up adults with relation to sex.
The old issues of photo magazines used to have plenty of nude photography;Peter Gowland;Andre Dienes and numerous others. Those guys really knew how to get the essence out of nude phtogrphy. It was classical and classy at the same time. Today you hardly see any nudes at all. The rags just don't print "those" types of pix now. We've actually gone backwards.
Just a shame Sturges got his noteriety after his hassle with the law....
Best, Peter

 

[Steve Hamley]

Has anyone thought, that maybe they are not suspose to look enthusiastic? SNIP

Dave

Mona Lisa didn't look too enthusiastic either. Definitely would be better fine art with a big grin, huh? IMO, the lack of "enthusiasm" says more about the genre than the models.

Steve

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Mona Lisa didn't look too enthusiastic either.
Steve

No, but she looked enigmatic rather than bored and suspicious!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think Sturges is an interesting photographer, but to me the images look somewhat commercial. In part, that's the effect of the commercial imitation of Sturges' style in the Calvin Klein ads and such, but it's also the case that the style is informed by certain commercial archetypes of the "beautiful" (as mentioned above, he doesn't photograph overweight, deformed, ill proportioned models), and lends itself so well to commercial adaptation.

 

[Frank Petronio]

My brief and painful exposure to nude beaches (burning) confirms that Jock is very selective with his models. Nothing takes the sexuality out of nudity like a nude beach.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

My brief and painful exposure to nude beaches (burning) confirms that Jock is very selective with his models. Nothing takes the sexuality out of nudity like a nude beach.

There are a few other things, too! I do not patronize nude beaches in the UK, on climatic grounds alone, but there was an interesting documentary a little while back on British TV which revealed, among other things, that females (of any age) on such beaches are likely to find themselves being shadowed at a distance of just a few yards by assorted fruitcakes whacking off as much as their stamina will allow. It is apparently considered "etiquette" not to call the police, even though masturbation in public is illegal. I can imagine nothing nicer than dozing in the sun with someone like this for company, wondering the whole time if he/they are going to make an attempt at closer acquaintance, what STIs he/they may be suffering from and indeed whether he/they have previously indulged in solitary pleasure on the spot on which you are at present lying. I think that under these circumstances, any thoughts of being naked as nature intended, casting off the restrictions of bourgeois convention, etc. would tend to get lost in the static. But maybe it's all different in France!

 

[Peter De Smidt]

I think Sturges is an interesting photographer, but to me the images look somewhat commercial. In part, that's the effect of the commercial imitation of Sturges' style in the Calvin Klein ads and such, but it's also the case that the style is informed by certain commercial archetypes of the "beautiful" (as mentioned above, he doesn't photograph overweight, deformed, ill proportioned models), and lends itself so well to commercial adaptation.

Well, if "commercial" means that one doesn't photograph overweight, deformed, or ill proportioned models, then it's not such a bad thing. But it's not exactly true that he only photographs "beautiful people" as a brief look through his books will show. There are many family groups photographed, for example. These include a good number of people who wouldn't ever find themselves in a Calvin Klein ad.

My understanding of what Sturges is about is that he's trying to convey the beauty and naturalness of these people's life style. I read once that he never tells his subjects to undress, nor does he pose them. He simply tells the subject to "hold it" when he sees something that he likes. (Since he uses and 8x10, this might take a little while. In any case, he can't quickly rip off a big series of exposures.) Thus his technique is something of a middle ground between candid shots and traditional portraits.

My interpretation of his subject's expressions are that they are serene and at ease, both with themselves and with being photographed by Sturges. If they weren't, why would they allow themselves to be photographed year after year, and why would some of the people he photographed as children allow him to photograph their own children? I've read that he doesn't use model releases, but rather he asks permission from the person photographed every time he wants to use one of the images. In any case he clearly has a long term, positive relationship with his subjects. At least, they seem to think so.

Yes, some people feel uneasy about his photographs, and this unease affects their interpretation of them. Society has brainwashed us into thinking that nudity, especially with children, is inherently a bad thing. But I've not seen one plausible argument that this is the case.

-Peter

 

[Frank Petronio]

Nudity in itself is innocent. But march your naked teenage daughter down Fraternity Row and get back to me about the practicality.