re: My view
Wow. I think you've crossed the line with a couple of your inferences here, Stephen. Not fair.
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]
....discuss the work; don't slander the man.
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 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.
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. reference materials below.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
... 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
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.
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 ...
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.
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?