Should I Stop Posting Images?

[Mike Té]

re: My view

Wow. I think you've crossed the line with a couple of your inferences here, Stephen. Not fair.

Some guys take the sex workers to backrooms to fuck them, you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility.

All I'm seeing here is an man who's a lady-boy trophy collector. [/URL]

 

[Mike Té]

....discuss the work; don't slander the man.

 

[Uhner]

....discuss the work; don't slander the man.

Indeed.

 

[arigram]

Stephen, not cool man, not cool.
What you write comes off as a personal attack, out of your troubles and has too much anger to pass by as a honest critique, even if you are right in your assertions.
I do think though that Stephen reflects the sentiment of many that have not stated their opinions in public or just used a more polite and diplomatic wording.
I just hope that Gerry is hard skinned enough to stand the abuse.

I do see though a certain pattern in APUG:
When a controversial photograph is brought up people tend to become very strict and very harsh with their critiques. They start by "it doesn't bother me but" and then they demand radical changes, as like they ask for a different photographer.
Sometimes those critiques appear more like a diplomatic way to appear neutral and insightful to please oneself by also appearing radical and revolutionary or atleast tolerant.

But I hope I did not insult or offend anyone again. I am tired of appearing like a douche.
My mic goes back to Gerry, he can do all the talking, but doesn't need to do any defending really.

 

[23mjm]

Please do not stop posting your art eeerrrrrr images.

If someone is offended then they can just move on, there is a back button on all browsers. By asking you to remove your images is nothing more than censorship. While I agree somethings should not be posted (child porn), your models are all consenting adults.

 

[Drew B.]

13 pages of comments already! ...that's fast. Personally, I'm not at all interested in your work...and will avoid it at all cost...but I agree, keep posting for the comments of those who are.

 

[gerryyaum]

Gerry- I think if you showed the ladyboys in a less voyeuristic way, and shot their whole lives, not just the sexual identities of them, it would go a long way to showing what you want your work to do- follow them to the store, getting ready for work, and so on. It would be terrific if you could show interaction with customers, but I doubt you would ever get the customer's permission. Show them in the whole context of their living space, not just a naked man-woman on a bed. Give us the context. Look at Mary Ellen Mark's work about the women in the brothels of Calcutta for an example.I think that you also need to write up something that tells us about who each of your subjects is, to provide depth. Tell us who they are, what part of Thailand they're from, how old they are, what their education is, why they're doing it, what are their plans beyond tomorrow if they have any.

I get your point about non sexual identities..but I think the thing that fascinates me most about them is that sexual identity, the reasons they change from male to female or partly so, the sex worker aspect and how they deal with those issues. Do they like it? Do they hate it? How do they feel?

When I think of the term voyeuristic I think of sort of hidden photographs taken from a distance that are secretive in nature. I think of my ladyboy photographs as more direct/honest. I guess there is a certain amount of voyeurism but I do not really get that feel. All photos are voyeuristic in a sense (viewers of images can stare and look at someone as long as they want without problems). For me the nudity is functional in nature, it is honest to what that person would be wearing in that room when they work. Nudity also has a certain amount of vulnerability which works well in photographs and for ladyboys it displays their duality more visually (male and female parts on 1 body).

Mary Ellens work on Falkland Road is more balanced that is for sure, I love that work but most of it (all of it?) takes part on that one road. The cool part there is she photographed them with customers and also with their friends and mamasans, I would love to make those style images. The brilliant colors of her transparencies with flash are awesome.

Customers, western sex tourists (mary ellen marke photographed local indians in the 1970s), do not want to be photographed and are dangerous at time, the bars do not allow photographs for the most part. I think it would be very difficult but images could be made with the proper time and in the proper situation, I will have to work on that!

Thanks for your suggestion about the history of that person. I got a book idea about that now.

Title: Ladyboy

5-10 ladyboys photographed in detail (as you suggest) in seperate chapters along with their life stories, interviews, backgrounds etc.

You made some great points, will think about them tonight.

Gerry

 

[katcall]

Hi Gerry (and everyone)

Interesting topic. Gerry I have been having a look at your lady-boy work in the gallery just to get a sense of what you are trying to achieve.

I'm finding the series a bit confusing. For me the images are coming across as portraits rather than the social documentary or journalistic approach that you are wanting to achieve.

The lighting is very film noir, very harsh. Not sure if this is what you are trying to achieve but I don't think it is necessarily the most appropriate light. It's more movie star like and to me that's not what you are trying to achieve. It's like you are actually uncomfortable with the subject and just concentrating on getting a shot rather than actually telling a story.

I found Stephen's comments interesting (maybe a little harsh in the wording and borne a bit out of frustration) but he did touch on a good point "you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility". There's nothing wrong with paying someone to photograph them, it's a fair exchange for their time, but it's not getting you what you want. To me the images are overposed, they are giving you what they think you want in exchange for money, their performance. I think the problem here is that you are trying to tell a story but just ending up with portraits. It's like you are another customer. There is no real rapport between you and the subject. I think you are in a comfort zone that you may not be ready to step out from. It's easier just to photograph them in a room rather than really get into their lives.

Stephen also made another comment "All I'm seeing here is an man who's a lady-boy trophy collector". I can also see why this may be perceived as the case. There is more to these individuals than the images convey. As they stand they are just a collection of individual images. The fact that you have to add words to try and explain what you want to achieve says that the images are not doing that for you. And for me, still hotography should not necessarily need words. It's interesting to understand what a photographer is trying to achieve, but the images should be strong enough to convey that.

You were saying that "I wanted to not only tell the story of the woman who work the scene but also of the men and ladyboys. I wanted to photograph with compassion who they were but I also felt my feelings were changing somewhat, these people were not just victims, things were more complex than that. I wanted to show them as individuals who were being exploited but also as people with a certain amount of freedom of choice."

"When I photographed the woman workers in 1999 and 2003 I felt they were being used by the system, exploited for the most part and mostly unhappy in their lives. I found with the ladyboy shoots thou that many were happy with where they were, that they actually enjoyed the life to a certain degree and that thou they might be unhappy in their personal lives the sex with foreign males was not something they necessarily disliked".

Or maybe it's just something they accept because it gives them a better life than they would have in a society that is probably very unaccepting of them. Is it really about freedom of choice or the only choice available to them!

I think that you would be doing these individuals a lot more justice if you actually concentrated on maybe one or two people, get a better understanding of them and showed a lot more of their life rather than just portraits. You need to get to know the subject a lot better, have a far greater understanding of them, not only in their work but other aspects of their lives. I'm sorry if you are already doing this and I applaud you on the effort, but it's just not showing in the work at the moment. A photograph of a man with breasts and a penis is just that, a man with breasts and penis until you really make the effort to present the story, because they obviously have truly interesting stories but unfortunately that is not coming across.

 

[Dennis S]

Yes. They are offensive to me. I don't have allot of time to explain my choice but on the internet anything is availble. We are on THIS SITE to talk photography.

 

[dbonamo]

Gerry,

I can echo Miskuss comments about your work, for me I like your street series the best.
As for posting or not, if the sites owner/moderators have not objections, then why not. Anyone not liking your work can avoid it. Your work does not bother me, if it did I simply would not view it.

However as some may have already mentioned, a separate gallery may be a good idea, and like declark, I too like to access APUG from work and some material my employer may find objectionable.

David

 

[gerryyaum]

I feel these these photos and the other photographic works of yours are not so different to the one of the homeless man that I posted and got strong negative feedback from Apug, Why you haven't amazes me.

Personally I think these sex worker photos lack talent, they come across as a rich westerners images who goes to Asia for sexual thrills then posts on apug to receive some validation to your exploitive actions. Some guys take the sex workers to backrooms to fuck them, you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility. The style of these photos is clumsy & unoriginal and I think the fact your shooting on large format is not being taken advantage of by how you are executing your work. Many of them look like a bad Richard Avedon copies to be generous.

The work doesn't give the viewer any understanding of the people you are photographing or the lives they lead, and no amount of spiel can account for this. Why not do as TheFlyingCamera suggested and photograph their lives in broader respect? perhaps take a look at the works of skilled documentary photographers like Mary Ellen Mark? All I'm seeing here is an man who's a lady-boy trophy collector.

reference materials below.

Link is reference to the homeless man image i posted.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

And for other people who are reading this thread this is more work from gerryyaum
http://www.gerryyaum.com/street%20life.html

I feel these these photos and the other photographic works of yours are not so different to the one of the homeless man that I posted and got strong negative feedback from Apug, Why you haven't amazes me.

I do not really think of this as a competition. I feel this is a place to get other opinions which I can think about and then ignore or use in my photography. It is a great venue to see how people react to your photographs and whether they are effective or not. The adulation thingy is sort of silly, who cares about that. I could care less about getting any kind of credit the thing that is important is to make the photographs and tell the story of the people you photograph. The creation of the work is what gets me high not the pats on the back, actually that(compliments in real life or internet life) whole thing makes me uncomfortable. I do love to talk about the work and the stories behind it but when people compliment the photos it makes me feel uneasy. Apug to me is a place to learn from others (great knowledge here) and to get feedback on whether the images work or not, that’s it!

Personally I think these sex worker photos lack talent, they come across as a rich westerners images who goes to Asia for sexual thrills then posts on apug to receive some validation to your exploitive actions.

Well the talent thing I always felt was a bit of a fallacy, talent to me is not what it’s about, it’s about just working harder and being more devoted than the other guy. I think your right on that point I need to work harder and be more devoted to my work.

The exploitation thing I hope is not true, doing my best not to go down that road.

To try to achieve validation here in APUG seems to me like your seeking what should not be sought. You do the work for yourself, you do the work because it is important, you do the work because you cannot stop. To do the work so that you can get fame in APUG seems a bit silly.

Some guys take the sex workers to backrooms to fuck them, you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility.

Yes sure that is very very common and something I have to talk about with everyone I photograph. One of the things I say in my opening speil is that I do not want to do sex photos I do not want to do impolite photos, I do not want to have sex with them (which is assumed by most sex workers). The photographs are made not for sexual purposes, if they are used that way then I have failed to communicate my message.

On the backrooms, here is the thing, these people live and die in those back rooms, they disappear and are forgotten. If I can create a photograph (by going into these back rooms) that is a memory to that person I have done something very important. I have given them a voice to be remembered by (if the work is collected) I have also raised the awareness of the conditions they work in. Hopefully with enough awareness that world will change for the better.

"For me, the idea was that through photography one could interact with the world, be a witness to society's problems and act on them......It wasn't that photography ended wars exactly, but it engaged in debate. It was part of a social dialogue."
Susan Meiselas

Another thing to consider is most people I have photographed in Asia wanted to be photographed again, so I think the experience was mostly positive. The contact sheets are often filled with laughter and smiles (rarely print those images because I think they do not speak to the reality of the subjects lives).

The style of these photos is clumsy & unoriginal and I think the fact your shooting on large format is not being taken advantage of by how you are executing your work. Many of them look like a bad Richard Avedon copies to be generous.

How to improve them? I think I might agree with you on the Richard Avedon thing (but I do have several nice images that I have not posted yet) I am going back next year to improve on them, using the same camera and techniques. What you have to remember also is that Avedon's book "In the American West" was shot over 6 years and something like 15000 photographs were taken. He also worked with 4 to 6 assistants. I shot my sex worker images over 5 weeks and shot about 500 sheets of film and had very limited help. I also have been shooting the camera for about 2 years and that was my first project with it, Avedon used his for decades. I am not saying that I will make Avedon like images in the future but with hard work and dedication the work will continue to improve.

I should also mention that these images led to my first private collector sales, check out the blog thingy.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/05/gerry-yaum-collected.html
http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/05/collected.html

3 sex worker images (20x24s) were added to a large collectors collection in Florida and 1 was added to a smaller private collection in California (a non sex worker image).

The main reason I shot large format was to make large prints that are extremely sharp and detailed, something that is missed out online. I have made 20x24 prints from the 8x10 negs and I can read labels and count hairs in the photographs. I want now to go larger next, Foma has 43 inch wide paper and Ilford has 50 inch wide. I think when I go that big I will be taking advantage of the large format.

The work doesn't give the viewer any understanding of the people you are photographing or the lives they lead, and no amount of spiel can account for this. reference materials below.

Partly agree but not always, look at this photograph, do you understand anything about the person?


http://www.gerryyaum.com/BG6.html

One of the reasons I moved away from the on white images this year is because I wanted to show more of the background working areas of the subject. In Cambodia the girls would put up all these photos from the celebrity and beauty magazines to try and make these awful rooms (the size of a bed) more tolerable. When I photographed her thou I tried to show what she really felt. I think this image communicates something about that person. You could be right about some of the ladyboy photos thou, they need more depth.

Why not do as TheFlyingCamera suggested and photograph their lives in broader respect?

That is more an issue of time management. The ladyboy photos were made in 2 weeks, it would be impossible to meet, build friendship/trust, and make indebt photographs of that person in the time allowed. I do think it is a way I might try to go in the future. In 2009 I hope to spend 1 year in Asia making photographs, I might go down that road at that time.

perhaps take a look at the works of skilled documentary photographers like Mary Ellen Mark? All I'm seeing here is an man who's a lady-boy trophy collector.

Hmm sort of being doing that for 30 years now, have basically all the books I can get on Mark, Salgado, Smith, Clark etc…I think thou as you mentioned earlier in your Avedon comment, you do not want to copy the work of others but instead use it as a positive influence on your own work and style.

Not sure what that trophy thing is about. I just look at them as interesting people, with complex personalities some of whom are friends. I actually was photographing some for the second time ( Jiji, Nut, Mat, Kaow).

I do not agree with some of your points of view but thanks for expressing them it is appreciated, any thoughts and feelings on my work are valued.

 

[gerryyaum]

Gerry,

Thanks for understanding what I was getting at.

Several others seem to think that I said you shouldn't post your images on APUG, that was not my message, only that I didn't want the firewall jockies at my company to turn APUG off, which they have done from time to time with photo.net for whatever reason. I was unaware that the thumbnail could be turned off on the sidebar and have now done so. Of course I wrote this from home and not my work computer because heaven forbid someone actually take a few minutes during a lunch break to read the forums.

No problem, I have to warn people I work with whenever I give them my webpage that there is some nudity onsite, we have that same software here! I work nights so I have time to write my long winded manifestos....APUG keeps me from emailing all my photo buddies, I just spit out everything here!

 

[gerryyaum]

Stephen, not cool man, not cool.
What you write comes off as a personal attack, out of your troubles and has too much anger to pass by as a honest critique, even if you are right in your assertions.
I do think though that Stephen reflects the sentiment of many that have not stated their opinions in public or just used a more polite and diplomatic wording.
I just hope that Gerry is hard skinned enough to stand the abuse.

I do see though a certain pattern in APUG:
When a controversial photograph is brought up people tend to become very strict and very harsh with their critiques. They start by "it doesn't bother me but" and then they demand radical changes, as like they ask for a different photographer.
Sometimes those critiques appear more like a diplomatic way to appear neutral and insightful to please oneself by also appearing radical and revolutionary or atleast tolerant.

But I hope I did not insult or offend anyone again. I am tired of appearing like a douche.
My mic goes back to Gerry, he can do all the talking, but doesn't need to do any defending really.

Thanks, well said.

People being critical of your stuff can actually be a positive, look at all the photographers through history that got people angry! I think it's pretty cool to get a reaction of any kind with your photographs, it at least means your getting people to take notice. The worst thing you can do is get that bored, indifferent response to your photgraphy.

Negative comments also help you develop the STEEL WILL and CAJONES needed as a earlier message recommended. : )

 

[gerryyaum]

13 pages of comments already! ...that's fast. Personally, I'm not at all interested in your work...and will avoid it at all cost...but I agree, keep posting for the comments of those who are.

haha...the passing lane is on the left...thanks for your input

 

[gerryyaum]

Yes. They are offensive to me. I don't have allot of time to explain my choice but on the internet anything is availble. We are on THIS SITE to talk photography.

when you have time please tell me why they are offensive? thanks

 

[per volquartz]

Why the need to explain anything in words...?

... let the image(s) stand on their own!


Such images will offend some - thats the nature of visual art.

We don't have to look at any images posted here - even if we become curious!

If we then go take a closer look we are on our own.



Per Volquartz
Dead Link Removed

 

[RobC]

I have a problem with the way you have presented your images. Not here on APUG but on your website. The site says nothing about your purpose and how you are helping to do something about it. Only when you go to your blog site does it say anything and only because you have been prompted to say something. But still nothing about how your images are being used to do anything about the situation.
On your website you have just presented sex worker images offered in different sizes and prices. That does not look very convincing to me. Regardless of your motives, your presentation is poor and detracts from your stated purpose. If I had found the site other than via APUG, I would have no idea of your motives and would suspect you were attempting to profit from those sex workers since that is the only thing the site is conveying other than the images.

 

[gerryyaum]

Hi Gerry (and everyone)

Interesting topic. Gerry I have been having a look at your lady-boy work in the gallery just to get a sense of what you are trying to achieve.

I'm finding the series a bit confusing. For me the images are coming across as portraits rather than the social documentary or journalistic approach that you are wanting to achieve.
.

Hmm not sure I see the difference. Mary Ellen Marks book which is considered documentary/journalistic in nature also contains portraits.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51BZR80XKNL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

I think the work that I have shown lacks variety but I think also that portraits qualify as documentary. The work does need more different types of images, as it is repetitive in nature.

The lighting is very film noir, very harsh. Not sure if this is what you are trying to achieve but I don't think it is necessarily the most appropriate light. It's more movie star like and to me that's not what you are trying to achieve. It's like you are actually uncomfortable with the subject and just concentrating on getting a shot rather than actually telling a story.
.

Actually I thought a lot about the lighting. Part of the reason I chose the harsh light was because the life is harsh, the people grow harsh, the situation is harsh. I felt the light represented that visually. The second reason is more practical, I was shooting in rooms that are often nearly completely dark. Several of the ladyboy photos were made in sex rooms with a single pink light in the ceiling. I had to use an external flashlight mounted on the camera just to focus the camera (sometimes with much effort). It was also more practical to walk the bar areas with smallish equipment.

I found Stephen's comments interesting (maybe a little harsh in the wording and borne a bit out of frustration) but he did touch on a good point "you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility". There's nothing wrong with paying someone to photograph them, it's a fair exchange for their time, but it's not getting you what you want.
.

Actually the payment thing is sometimes there and sometimes not. In 1999 when I photographed on the street, I gave away free photographs for all the people that posed (had a darkroom in my apartment bathroom). No money was involved.

http://www.gerryyaum.com/BG23.html

If you photograph in the shortime rooms you have to pay, it is not an option because the owners of the bars will not allow you upstairs until you do, so that is a different situation. Even going up to the rooms to make photographs is dangerous. The owners of the bar pay off corrupt police who get a cut of the bars action. If you make photos that have the possibility of raising awareness and possibly interfering with that income they will take care of you! The police might arrest you on a bogus charge or if you make enough of a problem the solution sought might be more permanent.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/07/danger.html

Sometimes thou you photograph people that you maybe should not because you feel for them. Tell you a story:

I met a girl last trip on the street where I met most of my ladyboy sex workers. She worked in a shortime bar catering to western men. I walked by and she started to talk to me in English, I responded in Thai and she started to tell me who she was , where she was from etc etc. I was looking to photograph a ladyboy who I had met the night before named Emmy so I told this girl Tun that I was not looking for a lady to photograph but wanted to photograph a ladyboy. Tun told me in Thai that she wanted to go upstairs to make photographs because she had no money for food. I am not sure if she was telling me the truth or not but I took her up and we made photographs. I was not that interested in her for photography because she did not have a strong visual face but as a person I really liked her. We talked during the session and she told me everything about her life. When we finished and walked down stairs, she gave me a hom gam (a smell kiss on the cheek). A few days later I walk by the same bar and there is Tun again, she runs up to me and asks if she can hom gam again and we had a nice friendly talk. She was such a nice person, I really liked her maybe I should just have given her some money instead of photographing her but I hoped to make an important image with her (so far do not like the 4x5s of her as she is smiling in most shots).

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/07/tun.html

I think what is hard for people to understand is that this whole project has nothing to do with sex for me, it is about meeting people (like Tun) about understanding their lives and spreading those thoughts through words and photos (as I just did).

I think I am getting what I want, maybe the photographs are not always clear but just like developing print with more time and effort (agitation) the work becomes more strong ( how is that for an analogy !!).

To me the images are overposed, they are giving you what they think you want in exchange for money, their performance.

Hmm that I think the exposure is a result of my lousy scanning abilities. The negs are quite nice when you see them on the light table, and so far have rendered some nice fiber prints.

I think that everyone puts on a mask and a performance when they are photographed (Richard Avedon said that). The trick is to try and capture a bit of reality in that performance. When I photograph I will talk to the person about their relationships and family life. The expressions on the faces of the people photographed are often a reaction to thoughts they have about their families and boyfriends. Sometimes I talk about what they feel when they have sex with their customers, sometimes we talk about the abuse they face. I think it is a performance but it also has a certain reality to it.

It's like you are another customer. There is no real rapport between you and the subject.

One of my goals in making the images was to convey the feeling that the sex worker feels towards their customer. The look of being tired of being bored of being used, that’s the idea! I have contact sheets full of rapport photos, the laughing and joking stuff the relaxed smile thingy, I do not want that, I am not there to show the rapport I have with them. I am trying to create images of what their real lives in the sex world are like, not how comfortable they are with me.

I have often been asked to eat at peoples homes or to go with them to temples and pray etc. I have met families and friends, I have known some workers for over 10 years. Another story:

I photographed an older sex worker in 1999 along with many others on the streets, her name was Nit. In 2003 I made this image of her

http://www.gerryyaum.com/BG5.html

In July this year I was walking through a hotel and Nit came to talk to me, she remembered my name, my job, my country etc. she asked me to photograph her again, which I did. I think there is a certain amount of rapport there. The rapport thing changes from person to person of course.

I think you are in a comfort zone that you may not be ready to step out from. It's easier just to photograph them in a room rather than really get into their lives.

This is definitely true! I agree with this 100% I am in a comfort zone and I need to step out of it. One of the reasons thou that I stepped into this zone again this last trip was for the reasons stated earlier. I had 2 weeks to make photographs and was it. I had no time to go in a more time consuming direction. I think thou I will follow your and APUGs advice and try to get out of that zone in the future!

To get into the lives is something that is easier said than done, I have photographed a little down those lines and it is not easy. I do agree thou that is the direction needed for me to go with my photography. Jock Sturges said something similar about getting to know your subject and working with them year in year out, so that you can add more humanity to your photographs.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/02/jock-sturges-review-of-gerryyaumcom.html

Stephen also made another comment "All I'm seeing here is an man who's a lady-boy trophy collector". I can also see why this may be perceived as the case. There is more to these individuals than the images convey. As they stand they are just a collection of individual images. The fact that you have to add words to try and explain what you want to achieve says that the images are not doing that for you. And for me, still photography should not necessarily need words. It's interesting to understand what a photographer is trying to achieve, but the images should be strong enough to convey that.

Think were thinking on the same lines there as I wrote the very same words earlier tonight before reading your post. The work should speak for itself I agree, but to do that is very difficult. Photographs should not require words I agree(or very limited words), but that is also very difficult to accomplish, I hope I am heading down that road bit by bit with help from good people like yourself.

You were saying that "I wanted to not only tell the story of the woman who work the scene but also of the men and ladyboys. I wanted to photograph with compassion who they were but I also felt my feelings were changing somewhat, these people were not just victims, things were more complex than that. I wanted to show them as individuals who were being exploited but also as people with a certain amount of freedom of choice."

"When I photographed the woman workers in 1999 and 2003 I felt they were being used by the system, exploited for the most part and mostly unhappy in their lives. I found with the ladyboy shoots thou that many were happy with where they were, that they actually enjoyed the life to a certain degree and that thou they might be unhappy in their personal lives the sex with foreign males was not something they necessarily disliked".

Or maybe it's just something they accept because it gives them a better life than they would have in a society that is probably very unaccepting of them. Is it really about freedom of choice or the only choice available to them!

Hmm quoting me! That’s not fair! : )

I guess I should have explained this a bit better, I was just trying to stay away from the sex stuff. When I photographed woman working the scene in 1999 and 2003, to a person they almost all did not like what they were doing. Sure they did it for the money and a better life that is the only reason they would because they certainly did not do it for the enjoyment of sex with their customers.

This last trip thou I found the ladyboys sometimes responded differently to the photo sessions. Out of the 20 that I photographed about 5 made sexual advances to me during or after the session. The sex advance thing almost never happened with woman during shoots (in 1999 and 2003) but with the maybe 25% of the ladyboys it did. One of the things I learned making these photographs was the fact that some of the ladyboys enjoyed to a degree working as sex workers.

What you have to understand is that Thailand is a quite tolerant to ladyboys and that it is also relatively prosperous in that region ( there are many job opportunities open to them). They have options besides working as a sex worker, of course those options will not be as financially beneficial. The whole sex worker scene is extremely complicated, I have learned that the people who suffer the most are the sex workers who work with locals. They might be in Cambodia, India, Thailand wherever but the local scene for local men is often the most brutal. People are sold into that world and have no choices at all,

http://www.gerryyaum.com/BG6.html

The people that work in the Western sex tourist world have limited choices but they still have some choices about the directions their lives will take.

part 2 in next post

 

[gerryyaum]

[

I think that you would be doing these individuals a lot more justice if you actually concentrated on maybe one or two people, get a better understanding of them and showed a lot more of their life rather than just portraits.

Yes definitely, I actually started out that way in 1996 and continued that work in 1999. I think your very right on the mark with this comment. I think thou that when you photograph a person you always in a way doing a portrait, unless of course they are not in the image. All people photos are portraits in a way, just different kinds of portraits.

You need to get to know the subject a lot better, have a far greater understanding of them, not only in their work but other aspects of their lives.

Not sure I agree here. I have spent lots of time learning Thai culture. I have learned the language well enough to have conversations about many subjects with many people. I can read and write in Thai(sort of ). I have studied Buddhism ( a very important part of all Thai lives) and plan on becoming a monk for a short period of time in the future. I have slept in places with rats and cockroaches. I have travelled the country at length. I have had friends in country for over 10 years etc etc. Am not sure what I can do to go deeper into that world. I basically go as Thai as I can when I am in the country and try to understand all aspects of a Thai persons life.

I guess thou I need to translate some of that knowledge in the photographs, I will work on it! I need to photograph more of that or at least post some of the images I have made on APUG and the webpage.

A photograph of a man with breasts and a penis is just that, a man with breasts and penis until you really make the effort to present the story, because they obviously have truly interesting stories but unfortunately that is not coming across.

How do you tell a story in one photograph? A great image like W Eugene Smiths photo of Tomoko Uenmura tells a story but even that is limited. What is she sick of? Why is she deformed? That is not explained.

http://www.bhopal.net/otherbhopals/archives/smith_minimata.jpg

To tell the interesting story you need to go to a larger format, one photo cannot do it. A photo essay or book needs to be made. I think it’s a tad unfair to expect 1 image of one person to tell the story of that persons life. I think everyone is right and that the photos need to have a wider variety. I need to do a book or create an exhibition of work that contains many photographs to tell the WHOLE story.

As to the breast and penis thingy, I see the nudity as functional to telling the story.

1) it talks to the fact the person sells their body for money
2) it shows the duality of that person (mix of male and female)
3) it also shows honestly what that person really looks like without the prettiness factor attached, to me that makes the photograph honest.

The other thing you have to consider is that lady boys love to show their breasts, they are very very proud of them Many times when I was making photographs I would not even ask and the breasts would come out! 2 of the people I photographed last year (Jiji and Mat) had grown breasts (surgery) in the year between photo sessions and both were extremely proud of them. Most times when I did the images I let the subject lead the way and I tried to photograph them the way I felt they thought of themselves. Some of them thought of themselves in the way they were photographed.

Thanks for your detailed post, it really got me thinking about a lot of things and sometimes in new ways. I really appreciate it!

Gerry

www.gerryyaum.com
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

 

[gerryyaum]

... let the image(s) stand on their own!


Such images will offend some - thats the nature of visual art.

We don't have to look at any images posted here - even if we become curious!

If we then go take a closer look we are on our own.



Per Volquartz
Dead Link Removed

very valid point...actually I am getting a bit dizzy answering everything. I do find it sort of helps me organize my thoughts and also helps me see what works and what's lacking in the photographs.

 

[gerryyaum]

I have a problem with the way you have presented your images. Not here on APUG but on your website. The site says nothing about your purpose and how you are helping to do something about it. Only when you go to your blog site does it say anything and only because you have been prompted to say something. But still nothing about how your images are being used to do anything about the situation.
On your website you have just presented sex worker images offered in different sizes and prices. That does not look very convincing to me. Regardless of your motives, your presentation is poor and detracts from your stated purpose. If I had found the site other than via APUG, I would have no idea of your motives and would suspect you were attempting to profit from those sex workers since that is the only thing the site is conveying other than the images.

guess its a bit of a catch 22, I think I believe like the others that the images should speak without words. It is like those annoying artspeak artists statetments the galleries all want, LET THE WORK TALK, the photographer should not!

A small explanation per gallery on my website might be in order thou, thanks for the sugestion. The site is relatively new and still in the process of finding its way.

As to profit, no not at all. The Sex Worker Images on white backgrounds cost me about $10 000 CAD to produce. I have sold 3 20x24s to one collector, not exaclty a financial winning propostion. All the money from that sale went towards film for the ladyboy shoot. This whole thing costs me money, but I do it because I feel it is important.

I will have to differ from you on the website design. yes it is simple but I hate all those sites that takes ages to load. Show me the photos , show me them quickly and easily that is my philosophy! I think thou it does need to be cleaned up. All the images have to be redone and rescanned. The overall basic layout thou I think I will keep, maybe I can snaz it up a bit to make it more appealing.

Thanks for your suggestions
Gerry

 

[Videbaek]

<I think what is hard for people to understand is that this whole project has nothing to do with sex for me<

I at least assumed that your ladyboy project had nothing to do with sex for you. One must give the benefit of the doubt.

I was happy to see your ladyboy series showing up on APUG. It's not in the least offensive, just straightforward nude portraits of people with slightly adjusted anatomy. Sexworkers. An old photographic theme, one of the oldest. Many ladyboy series have been appearing in the last couple years, seems to be in fashion.

The pictures are not well made, they don't interest me. Your camera doesn't get past the dead eyes and spirit, what photographer could?

It's in the vein of the "social documentary and consciousness" photographic genre, always a morally ambiguous and troubling one when done well.

 

[Simplicius]

Gerry,

much has already been said in a far better fashion and a far more informed way but here I go.

Forget the complaints, your pictures are fantastic and if they offend some folks, ignore them. Everyone has a right in this subjective world in which we live to challenge each others sensibilities, that is how we grow as a culture.

keep up the brilliant work.

Anthony

 

[feeblegirlie]

Would you stumble in these footsteps?

Sawadee kaa all,

Boy, this is a tough one, gerryyaum.

If anyone currently registered to APUG can speak with the authority of "walking in the shoes" of the subject matter in question here (or at least try to channel that effect through photography), I don't think they've yet chimed in. I genuinely don't think you're most qualified to play the "lady-boy" advocate here. Not by a long shot. You are, however, best qualified to present your argument and photography as you see fit.

I have a few things to share with you and others. Before I do, I support your right to shoot the subject arcs you do and to post them on APUG, online, or in an art gallery. I don't support, however, the premise that your photography gifts your marginalized subjects with a voice.

I've now looked at a number of the Thai kathoey (literally, "lady-boy") photos you've made available -- but mostly on your web site, not the subscriber gallery (I don't yet hold a subscription). First, other contributors to this discussion have both eloquently and brusquely addressed some valid points I back plainly. I'll start with Stephen Frizza:

Personally I think these sex worker photos ... come across as a rich westerners images who goes to Asia for sexual thrills then posts on apug to receive some validation to your exploitive actions. Some guys take the sex workers to backrooms to fuck them, you take them there to photograph them. Everyone here seems to want to tip toe around this possibility. The style of these photos is clumsy & unoriginal ...

[So maybe this is the point at which someone sods the tiptoeing by stomping into this discussion sporting 20-eye, steel-tip Doc Martens ... leather finished of course in some girly colour like black. Or blue.]

Kathoey sex workers largely thrive on the traffic and largesse of Western men. Having spent time personally in Thailand (Bangkok and Phuket, largely), I know the sex tourism industry is huge and renown. Moreover, as a woman who shares a component of life experiences with kathoey -- whether they rely on sex work for income (or even validation), or do something else entirely for a living -- I can attest that this cycle and style of photography centres on a few key threads which step right up to the line of voyeurism (when not recklessly trouncing right over it).

Were this my body, whether I worked in sex trade or not, I would feel vulnerable more by the guy holding the camera than the camera itself -- if not for the fact that he's in control, then also because it's happening in my personal space on his terms, not in his personal space on my terms.

He won't ever come closer to understanding by taking more pictures. And no amount of taking revealing shots will help other people understand me any better. Only someone able to intimately comprehend and empathize can, in as little as one shot, grasp and convey to her or his audience where I, the subject, is coming from. That's the mark of a great documentarian.

An important sidebar of disclosure: gerryyaum, it's in the way you're shooting your subjects which gets under my skin. I'm someone who shares a direct social-cultural kin with Thai kathoey: I'm transsexual. I came out at high school age, over half my lifetime ago. Because to survive in this world means I must stay deathly quiet about it to most people, I equivocated as this thread evolved before finally entering it with this solitary comment. Furthermore, I chose to post this under a different registry than my regular login. This is something I really didn't want to have to do, but I do so to maintain my reputation and my credibility here on APUG. I also do so to maintain my own privacy and personal boundary space both online and offline. It's a small, ever more permanent, more Googleable world.

First, there is a token involved here. In your words, gerryyaum, "I just look at them as interesting people, with complex personalities some of whom are friends." They are "interesting" because you see them for their "sexual identity" first, which you find "fascinating". I have read in your words how you express a fixation on your subject's reasons from "chang[ing] from male to female or partly so," and this illustrates how you get stuck at the corporeal -- rather than the intellectual or spiritual -- in your subjects. I argue that this isn't the right angle to be taking to convey their "voice", but this project is your work, and that's your call to make.

From your life experience, and in the many years and dollars you've determinedly pursued this subject matter, it appears you remain stuck on the fixation of kathoey women for what they've done to take some control over their bodies and their lives, given their own set of social-economic barriers to make do. You could take your show on the road to India to find dalit hijras, or to the laneways of West Hollywood to find tranny hookers, but the results would remain the same. While Thailand is more "tolerant" of sexual minorities, it's no more accepting -- that great, difficult leap beyond merely "tolerant" -- than anywhere else on the planet. Tolerance is full of interpretative latitude, but I find acceptance to be fairly cut and dry: either you accept or you don't -- no equivocations or conditions.


Now, to what TheFlyingCamera observed:

I think if you showed the ladyboys in a less voyeuristic way, and shot their whole lives, not just the sexual identities of them, it would go a long way to showing what you want your work to do- follow them to the store, getting ready for work, and so on ... Show them in the whole context of their living space, not just a naked man-woman on a bed.

Bingo, bingo, bingo! I don't think I could have put this more crisply and to the point.

The only way to humanize a person widely (if not universally) relegated to a dehumanized social object is to place yourself in the everyday ordinary of that objectified person's boring routine. It's also through these daily routines where a photographer can transcend being the voyeuristic observer to direct an intimate, humanized, first-person angle on whom your subjects are.

Sure, Mapplethorpe, Arbus (her particularly so), and even Warhol were pioneering masters at the same angle you're mimicking here, but their fascination fixated on the aesthetic of their subjects: be close, but not too close. Touch them, but don't try to understand them the way they understand themselves. I don't think this tack effectively helps your audience understand what you want them to take away from your work, gerryyaum. It says nothing about who your subjects are exclusive of their kathoey social caste (and let's face it, it's a sexual caste, full-stop).

But without the caste factor as part of your subject's equation, then what fascination remains? The fascination is quite boring, really: it's a kathoey's resolve to articulate themselves (n.b., what I call an "articulation of dialect" whereas others merely call it "gender") on their terms when doing do is fraught with risk. If that doesn't hold up in your mind as compelling photographic subject material, then perhaps you might want to look elsewhere for something else entirely different.


And lastly, I'll part from this discussion by offering my own suggestion.

From my experience, you demonstrate the classic qualities that many I've known would qualify as a "fancier" of trans people. That's one nice way of putting it. My closest, tightest friends who share my life experience on this level express some far more colourful, unforgiving labels which I'll reserve APUG from having to hear. Many are NSFW or unsuitable for people of any age. The labels reflect the serious contempt we have for people who just don't get it, may never get it, and blithely go back to their lives where they don't endure the barriers we live with -- barriers built and held up, incidentally, by the very social-cultural privileges afforded to and taken for granted by these "fanciers".

The point is we detest the objectification, because culturally sanctioning and perpetuating it is precisely why we stay shoved to the back of the social-cultural bus, and why we rarely see life beyond pink collar clerical careers despite our education, intellect, wisdom, experiences, and talents. More often than not, we just remain disproportionately excluded from participating in much of what others accept for granted. In my case, photography was the creative and spiritual outlet I had to forfeit over and over again when it was more important to merely stay alive in some pretty unforgiving conditions.

The minute we're "made" as the kathoey of our culture and the minute we're no longer seen -- by men, more so than women -- as "babymakers" (patently sexist and essentialist of course, but call a kettle a kettle), then suddenly we reach the end of the line in our potential as human beings. We're forced to forfeit our humanity, because we're no longer seen as the approachable, side-by-side folk you'd want to have a pint with (or collaborate with on projects like a photo shoot). Our experiences scare a lot of people, but really now. There's really nothing to be scared of.

gerryyaum, I'd like to encourage you to consider a sabbatical from this project just long enough to explore how Loren Cameron, a photographer with a transsexual life experience, approaches humanity in both his nudes and fully-dressed subjects, and how his own worldview effectively channels the humanity of his photographed subjects.

Should I ever embark on a photo essay which hits this close to home (not very likely), I'd look to his work as a starting reference point. Not for his photographic techniques, of course (which are all his own), but for his artistic and editorial ethos. He understands. He doesn't find this "fascinating". He finds this human.

Cameron's a conduit for his subjects to be seen by the larger world as merely people, whereas your subjects merely serve to indulge your evolving fascination.

Regards,
Millicent

++++

[For the rest of you who stuck through this comment, I gravely apologize for hijacking the discussion from the main point. Keep the photos on, and if you've a sensitive job or younger ones around, act responsibly and exercise prudent governance. APUG is a medium for film photographers and the personal endeavours they explore, no matter how tree-stumpy or incendiary the results are. The minute when content excisions begin over controversial subject matter is the minute when the APUG foundation as a photographer resource irreparably cracks.]

 

[Ian Grant]

Very eloquently put, especially for a first post on APUG. You've said in great detail what I'm sure many of us also feel about the work, thank you.

ian