earleygallery Posted September 30, 2011 Share #1 Posted September 30, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Photos of the homeless and buskers? Thankyou in advance for your cooperation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 30, 2011 Posted September 30, 2011 Hi earleygallery, Take a look here Can we ban?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted September 30, 2011 Share #2 Posted September 30, 2011 I don't think so....I guess you are objecting because some are in bad taste, but we are not the taste police.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 30, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted September 30, 2011 Please note the smiley. But they are in my room 101! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 30, 2011 Share #4 Posted September 30, 2011 Not sure where you wanted this to go James. I believe they (some) 'homeless' people should be documented. It is the only way many of us can be aware of their presence and plight. In that way, maybe some help will be subsequently forthcoming. I have included some such images in published books and I do get feedback on the content. The dripping tap syndrome, I hope. I'm neutral about the buskers, but would happily 'ban' a lot of pics of protesters. Just my bias showing, again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted October 1, 2011 Share #5 Posted October 1, 2011 Photos of the homeless and buskers? Thankyou in advance for your cooperation I'd go further and ban any street photography where the photographer does not engage with the subject. Otherwise I don't see the point. (Note lack of smiley) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted October 1, 2011 Share #6 Posted October 1, 2011 I'd go further and ban any street photography where the photographer does not engage with the subject. Otherwise I don't see the point. (Note lack of smiley) .................................................................... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted October 1, 2011 Share #7 Posted October 1, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'd go further and ban any street photography where the photographer does not engage with the subject. Otherwise I don't see the point. (Note lack of smiley) Well that would also consign a significant amount photographic history to the Room 101 bin. I'd like to take it further though, and ban all photographs not taken by me (note the smiley). Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted October 1, 2011 Share #8 Posted October 1, 2011 Firstly to say that I don't want to get in a slanging match with friends but Louis I'm afraid that one of the common definitions of street photography is that you don't engage with the subject. see below London Street Photography Festival Street photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As to the homeless etc for me it depends on the context and intent of the photographer. If this is to document or highlight the human condition and to bring attention to the plight of others and thus to make us have a more compassionate or insightful relationship with them then I am 100% for it. In fact this can be the true power of a photograph. After all the world is often not a pretty place and I personally often try to bring a sense of meaning and beauty to this side of our existence. Lastly If the camera is not an eye on the worls what is it as I said it is really the intent that counts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2011 Share #9 Posted October 1, 2011 All's fair in love, war and viewfinders. I think the issue here is "easy meat" - a busker or a sleeping vagrant is hardly likely to object to your taking their photo. By that token, perhaps we should ban all architecture, flower photos, etc etc... Personally, I wouldn't want to see anything banned (with the possible exception of living statues and French mime artists). In fact a moderator was standing right beside me when I took this one, a few years ago... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Regards, Bill ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/163122-can-we-ban/?do=findComment&comment=1807054'>More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted October 1, 2011 Share #10 Posted October 1, 2011 I'd go further and ban any street photography where the photographer does not engage with the subject Why? If you engage with the subject you're changing the very thing you're trying to photograph in the first place. As mentioned earlier, it would also consign a significant amount of amazing photography to the waste bin.HCB, Ronis, Boubat, Doisneau, Erwitt, significant parts of their work would fail to pass the test. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted October 1, 2011 Share #11 Posted October 1, 2011 Firstly to say that I don't want to get in a slanging match with friends but Louis I'm afraid that one of the common definitions of street photography is that you don't engage with the subject. see belowLondon Street Photography Festival Street photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As to the homeless etc for me it depends on the context and intent of the photographer. If this is to document or highlight the human condition and to bring attention to the plight of others and thus to make us have a more compassionate or insightful relationship with them then I am 100% for it. In fact this can be the true power of a photograph. After all the world is often not a pretty place and I personally often try to bring a sense of meaning and beauty to this side of our existence. Lastly If the camera is not an eye on the worls what is it as I said it is really the intent that counts Virimati Fair point, I was being a tad extreme. I have enjoyed some really clever street photographs here in the forum, some of which are candids where the subject is unaware. The street photographs I have enjoyed the most here in the forum have come with some explanation of the subject. Louis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted October 1, 2011 Share #12 Posted October 1, 2011 In fact a moderator was standing right beside me when I took this one, a few years ago... [ATTACH]280883[/ATTACH] Regards, Bill Did this Moderator take this picture too? ... That is the question? ......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prunelle Posted October 1, 2011 Share #13 Posted October 1, 2011 ... The street photographs I have enjoyed the most here in the forum have come with some explanation of the subject. A good street photography doesn't need any explanation nor any title. Photos of the homeless and buskers? Thankyou in advance for your cooperation That could be useful. We would need a "ban" button for each photo uploaded. Each of us could then ban the photos they don't want to see, which would make this forum an utterly personal place. ... In fact a moderator was standing right beside me when I took this one, a few years ago... If you allow me, why did you take it then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve66 Posted October 1, 2011 Share #14 Posted October 1, 2011 Bill's photo, to my eye validates the image taking of subjects in distressed circumstances. It immediately imparts to me one of the many negative contrast's we have in society. The threads subject throws up a fine line between exploitation and social commentary. To ban these type of images would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Its a stretch I know.. but it is akin to instructing the folk protest movement in the sixties not to perform songs about civil rights, dust bowl farmers etc because of the exploitative, crappy tin pan alley versions they spawned, Steve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted October 1, 2011 Share #15 Posted October 1, 2011 Ban ? Since when is freedom of expression subject to such a notion. Have the mullahs taken over already ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2011 Share #16 Posted October 1, 2011 Tongues are in cheeks here, old chap. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveleo Posted October 1, 2011 Share #17 Posted October 1, 2011 too serious commentary deleted by me . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 1, 2011 Share #18 Posted October 1, 2011 Did this Moderator take this picture too? ... That is the question? ......... The Moderator could be IN the photograph... just a typical Mod night out... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
businessasusual Posted October 1, 2011 Share #19 Posted October 1, 2011 The Moderator could be IN the photograph... just a typical Mod night out... The Mod Squad? :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted October 1, 2011 Share #20 Posted October 1, 2011 The Moderator could be IN the photograph... just a typical Mod night out... ................................................................. :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.