As a photojournalistic statement, I find theimages more redundant than offensive.
In a word: I constantly battle with trying to disregard the status of people and their material possessions when I am in front of them, and I try to focus on what they do - one human to another. That describes, I think, their true worth. The important lesson is that everybody is a human being, and you reinforce that.
Somebody mentioned that it would be interesting to hear a few qualifying comments - reasons to why you do this work - because I think it would give it more depth and meaning, and possibly an understanding among those that need a justification for viewing it.
Oh, and thank you by the way. I can't go to the galleries at work anymore, thanks to you, and that's a good thing. I get more work done.
- Thomas
Gerry-
I'm really glad you wrote your statement of "why" earlier in this thread. I disliked the images you were posting because I lacked context for them, and without the context, I felt they were exploitative. That said, I would never ask you to take them down, because there is nothing wrong with them. Now that I have a context for the images, I understand the background and it doesn't create the same misgivings. They do not appeal to me aesthetically, especially the latest series with their Weegee-esque quality to them, but that is a style critique, not a reason to stop posting. Keep on doing the work you believe in, and keep showing it.
Keep posting. Your work is interesting, and I'm pleased you've decided to share it here.
And for those at work, we tried to create a system to make it easier for folks to "hide" certain "Not Safe for Work" images, but the whole thing became too onerous.
I think the system we have in place works pretty well for those who may not want to view certain types of images, especially the sidebar thumbnails, whether nudes, ladyboys, rocks, trees... whatever!
lots of us have posted images which offend some one or another... take a look at the penis gate affair or the homeless man issue just recently.
debate is good....however I would be intrested to see you move on from this topic and show what other work you are doing?
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
The images don't bother me at all, however I can understand that some people might find them offensive. I don't think it reflects badly on people who are offended & I'm surprised at the amount of vitriol that is being directed at them. If we are open minded enough to appreciate the rationale behind pictures of sex workers then surely that same open mindedness can extend to understanding why some people don't want to see such explicit material displayed at APUG.
If I was taking photos like this I probably wouldn't be posting them on 'general public' sites such as APUG, rangefinderforum, photo.net etc. I'd host them on my own blog or website or find a forum that is dedicated to no holds barred documentary photography & post them there, where people would have some expectation of what they are likely to see.
This body of work is fine, but can we see more works from you of a different nature? ide like to get a feel for what other bodies of work you have undertaken.
Having looked at your first posting of an image, the first thing that came to my mind was exploitive people being exploited more. Having read your explanation, I see what you are trying to accomplish. But I don't think posting one at a time accomplishes your goal. If this is a body of work that as a whole is supposed to cause people to react and some greater good is to come out of that reaction, than post the photos as a body. The Portfolio section would be a better place, not the general gallery.
A second thought, as a father, not all that view this forum are over 18.
Gerry, keep on posting! Maybe you can print them on AZO and add some blather about highlight separation to make them less offensive. I wish there were more gritty work and a little less tree-trunks and clouds on APUG!
Thanks very much for expressing your point of view.....I have always been troubled with trying not to exploit the exploited to make my photographs. I worry thou at the need for my words to add context, it is sort of like the images do not speak for themselves. I guess a certain amount of verbage is needed to describe things, I just wish the photos did all the talking for me.
Well, that's where we differ. I do try to have some sympathy for & understanding of other people, no matter what their beliefs, or how different they are from mine. That's why I'm trying to present a plausible reason why some may reasonably take offence. I just want to make clear once again that I am not bothered by the photos. I'm perfectly happy for Gerry to keep posting them. However if it was my project I would do something like - post some of the tamer ones in the APUG gallery & have a link in my signature directing people to my website to see the full set.
Branches trees and clouds are ok, I do not even mind the occasional rock if it is done tastefully but stumps are lewd and salacious and offensive. They have no place on APUG.
Gerry, I would say, in a nutshell, that there can be a million things to discuss, criticize, agree/disagree about your photos, but not that they do not belong on APUG.
I'd be glad of course to bring in my big mouth and endless opinions, should you like to start a thread discussing the content and art of your photos.
At any rate, your attitude is exemplary, and I hope you'll be encouraged by this reality check to keep doing your work and posting it on APUG.
I am a tree, cloud, stump kind of photographer. I like to take pictures of what I find beautiful, or attractive in the world. I like to be reminded that the world is not always harsh.
As such I am challenged by you posts, but not offended. The right challenge at the right place and time builds strength and character. It is up to each us to chose time and place to view and contemplate art/documentary work such as yours. APUG with your contribution affords us this luxury. In turn it is up to us to prepare our children to survive in a world that is sometimes beautiful and often harsh.
Keep posting and thanks.
The subject matter of this series likely has limited interest for many if not most.
There are some who will be offended, however I seriously doubt that this is any great surprise.
As a photojournalistic statement, I find theimages more redundant than offensive.
A dog licks his testicles because he can. I would hope that is not your reason for your posting on this site images of very similar subjects, compositions and technical skills.
I often refer people to this site as a resource. There are some I would not refer if this became the norm in the galleries section. Bill Barber
Gerry,have you seen the book by Lincoln Clarkes titled "Heroines:The Photographs of Lincoln Clarkes"? He did a series of photos in Vancouver's east side dealing with the epidemic of crack & heroin addiction among young street girls/women.A very powerful social statement.Your work reminded me of Clarkes's.
I agree. If you wanted to make a more photojournalistic statement about the lives of these people, you would include more about their lives in the gallery (the bars they hang out at, their "mama-sans", their families, what do they do when they aren't "working", what their lives were like before, etc.). There's a whole life and life history behind these people and we're not seeing it. Just my opinion.
As Gene, Shmoo and nsurit say, expand this and let us see what the daily life of a ladyboy is like. I'm sure there are moving images of the interaction between these ladyboys that the general public has no comprehension of.
What we see in your images is a dark side of life that probably isn't entirely true. Maybe it is. But I'd bet there is a humanity here that we will never know.
I was interested in Sturges' suggestion to light them and generally to represent them in a more humanizing way.
It's interesting to see how the project has developed, how you've become closer to the subjects, and to see how you've been searching for a style. The earlier shots are more Weegee-esque, where the flash seems to be catching a furtive glance, and the later 8x10" shots are more formal, and the subjects are taken out of their surroundings, like you're trying out Avedon's approach--lots of soft, relatively neutral light, small aperture for longer DOF, revealing everything in detail. Bellocq's images are formal, because he's using a camera on a tripod and making excellent use of available light, but the women are still photographed in their workplace. I'm guessing it wouldn't be so easy for you to get the 8x10" camera and lighting into the bars and brothels, or maybe not yet.
nothing wrong with that point, it is very valid ...I surf from work also : )
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?