Should I Stop Posting Images?

[Davesw]

I WANT STUMPS! Tree branches and STUMPS. Maybe some clouds too

I do enjoy seeing your work. Keep it coming.

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.

 

[Jim Chinn]

I can be somewhat conservative at times, but I find nothing wrong with the images. As others have stated it is part of the tradition of photographic documentation.

Didn't we go through all this a couple of years back with someone else's nude images in the gallery?

It's a photo gallery and were lucky that there are some folks who like to go out on the "edges" with their work. Like it or dislike it and discuss it in the gallery comments.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Now, this is an intelligent, mature father who will raise wise children capable of understanding the world and be compassionate against other humans.
I applaud your approach and thinking.
If the photographs of those poor sex workers shock them, they will have a better comprehension of the evils of the world and may even help make this a better place.

I'm with you there Ari.

My daughter is seven so she's a tad young to wrap her head around such things, but when she gets older I'll introduce her to this kind of work and that of war and famine documentary photographers. Imagine the conversations these photographs would springboard us into. Imagine as well, how in the safety of our home, I could help her understand aspects of this world she should consider before I release her into that world on her own.

Murray

 

[Andy K]

Members and surfers do not have access to the galleries.

Dude thats harsh! If I shake the sand out my thongs, tie up my dreads and leave the board at the door can I come in then?

 

[TheDreadPirateRobins]

Now, this is an intelligent, mature father who will raise wise children capable of understanding the world and be compassionate against other humans.
I applaud your approach and thinking.
....

Thanks, Arigram, for the compliment!

 

[JBrunner]

Dude thats harsh! If I shake the sand out my thongs, tie up my dreads and leave the board at the door can I come in then?

Well, ok, surfers can come in, but NOT THE IRISH!

 

[BWGirl]

Hm... this thing seems to be going off point (again... as usual)... the point was whether gerry should stop posting his images. (And yes, ari... you can be extremely intolerant... look back at your posts about a father wanting to protect his children... he never said he wanted you to not be able to see th images, only that he wanted to have a way to keep younger kids from seeing them. This is an ongoing issue here.

I have to say that I am not overly fond of nudes in general, but I think your work, gerry is quite good. I hate the idea that people are in these situations and often, I suspect, put in them at a young age without being able to choose. The body of work is NOT exploitive... trust me, I would have no problem saying it if I felt it was exploitive. It is sad, and great, and handled with care. I do think there should be a way that people who subscribe, and people who post images can have an option to see or not see images if they do not want to see them, but I cannot see censorship for the sake of censorship as a viable response.

 

[Andy K]

he never said he wanted you to not be able to see th images, only that he wanted to have a way to keep younger kids from seeing them.

It strikes me that it isn't very difficult to make sure children are not looking at the computer when those images are being viewed. This is simply a case of parental responsibility.

 

[arigram]

And yes, ari... you can be extremely intolerant... look back at your posts about a father wanting to protect his children... he never said he wanted you to not be able to see th images, only that he wanted to have a way to keep younger kids from seeing them.

I am sorry you read it as that.
He didn't say that though. What he posted was a vague statement that people under 18 browse this site and that he is serious about being a father.
What I wrote was that fatherhood is his business and has nothing to do with the rest of us.
If that seems like intolerant to you, then I am sorry, but I am not rephrasing mine or anyone else's words any more. People are free to see them however they like.
I think my position on the matter is pretty clear and have been dealt with in the past as Jim Chinn mentioned. I do not want to touch this subject again.
After all, this is Sean's site and has plenty of people to assist in keeping the philosophy and order that he chooses. I do not wish to be a pompous ass of a crusader.
Look at the image if you like them, don't look at them if you don't, its all your personal responsibility, no one else's. That's it, case closed from my viewpoint.

 

[Ian Grant]

We had a similar dilemma when Scott(TheFlyingCamear) was posting male nudes a 18 months maybe 2 years ago, and Aggie took offence. She left APUG as a consequence and her then new Emulsion magazine lost out heavily because of her decision.

Personally I find Gerry's images slightly disturbing but not remotely offensive. I can't see why APUG like many other site can't flag certain images as "Adult Content" I shoot both female and the very occasional male nude and think this is a simple and easy solution.

No image on APUG I've seen has remotely been pornographic and obscenely ofensive, so there's not really an issue.

So keep posting Gerry.

Ian

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

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.

 

[r-brian]

Last comment by me on this subject.

First, I never implied I have a problem keeping my children from viewing these images and I'm sure every responsible parent would do the same, until the time they thought it was acceptable. The laws of the land may see differently. Unless we live in anarchy, then the laws of the land should be addressed.

Secondly, it seems everyone missed my initial point. As posted singularly, these photos, especially without an explanation of why they were taken, have no real point. Gerry's explanation of his project sheds light on the photos. (And just let me say the photos are very well done, the one that I've chose to look at.) My point was that, if this is a body of work, then they should be presented as a body of work. APUG has a vehicle for such a presentation, the Portfolio section. Put the photos together along with your project explanation and feel free to post it as a singular work. I believe it will be a much stronger presentation.

Now, please, no more father bashing. There's enough pseudo-parents in the world that we don't need to bash those who care about their job.

Brian

 

[vdoak]

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.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I can't see why APUG like many other site can't flag certain images as "Adult Content"

We tried this for a while in the form of a "not safe for work" tag, and it created more problems than it solved. There are many images in the archive that might need to be tagged in this way, but not all of the posters are even around to go back over all their images and tag them, and those who are still active subscribers don't all think to go back and edit their images. We don't delete the galleries of users who let their subscriptions lapse (unless they request it), so some people might not even have access to edit their own images. Then posters of new images don't all agree on what is NSFW, and some disagree in principle with the concept, so they refuse to tag, and if a new squad of moderators were appointed to the task of reviewing all the images in the gallery, this would precipitate endless censorship debates. Since not all the relevant images could be tagged at this point without wiping the gallery clean and starting fresh, the NSFW tag did nothing to help people who, for whatever reason, want to be able to filter the images, so Sean just decided to get rid of it.

If you're in a context where gallery images might cause a problem, the solution is to turn off the images in the sidebar and don't open the gallery until you're in a place where you feel comfortable doing so.

 

[TheDreadPirateRobins]

...
If you're in a context where gallery images might cause a problem, the solution is to turn off the images in the sidebar and don't open the gallery until you're in a place where you feel comfortable doing so.

This sounds like the best solution.

You know, someone somewhere probably thinks of tree branches and rocks as obscene images.

 

[JBrunner]

I think a simple disclaimer placed as part of the subscriber process would pretty much cover this issue, and put the vocal minority squarely responsible for their own viewing habits.

 

[removed account4]

If you're in a context where gallery images might cause a problem, the solution is to turn off the images in the sidebar and don't open the gallery until you're in a place where you feel comfortable doing so.

yep

 

[Ole]

I think a simple disclaimer placed as part of the subscriber process would pretty much cover this issue, and put the vocal minority squarely responsible for their own viewing habits.

Something like "WARNING: PICTURES MIGHT BE SHOWN HERE"?

This is a photography site. It ought to be unnecessary to mention that pictures might be shown; and there is no picture that is completely unoffensive to everybody.

 

[JBrunner]

Something like "WARNING: PICTURES MIGHT BE SHOWN HERE"?

Yes. This is apparently lost on some.

 

[Aurum]

Wow 18 hours and the thread has hit 93 previous replies. Thats pretty good going.

As for my take on Gerry's work. I won't say I enjoyed it. I found it very difficult to get into. That was down to the subject matter and the reality of the shots.

They told a story, told it well, and if I can't deal with it as has been mentioned before thats my problem.

 

[nsurit]

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

 

[Mike Kennedy]

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.

 

[Frank Hoerauf]

Well heres my two cents. As a member of APUG my opinion is that gerrys pics stay. They are proffesional in style. It is not something I woul;d pursue as a project myself, however I do think gerry is here to seek the opinions of his peers to offer suggestions to improve his work. We are all photographers here and we can not allow censorship, I think that would go against what we are about as photographers. Sooo my vote would be to accept gerry into our APUG family and continue offering advise the best we can.

 

[Jim Noel]

From time to time images appear in the galleries which I frankly do not care for or want to look at. I simply don't look at them and go on to other images which fascinate me.

 

[gerryyaum]

Good God! Where would Mary Ellen mark be, if a few people were squeemish about the hard truth? I can't comment on the reasons of the members discomfort, but I can speak for myself. Sometimes the measure of a great image is not how beautiful it is, but how hard it slaps you in the face. There is nothing gratuitous about your work. In most cases it does not even attempt to be portrayed as art...e.g. your commentary on hard shadows etc. It is a truth piece of documentary work, that requires not only photographic skill, but also inter-personal skills. You have generated trust in the vunerable, and that is a testament to you as an individual. I salute you.

Give me your work any day, over a lith rose........no offence to those with lith roses...

Kal

Thanks Kal