Keep Calm and Free Palestine!

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've held off posting whilst I got my head around this. I have tried to be non-controversial as I explain the background to my thoughts on this post.

 

I am Jewish and have family in Israel who are constantly off to their bunkers. The only reason Israeli children aren't dying is because of the Israeli missile defence system, not because of any lack of intent by Hamas who do not even recognise the right of Israel to exist and specifically target civilians.

 

Having said that, the mounting civilian deaths in Gaza ) whilst Israel tries to dismantle Hamas' infrastructure are indeed appalling irrespective of the background to the conflict which is of course very complex and not appropriate for discussion here.

 

I look at these depressing and unsettling photos, especially coming from 'the other side'. I am very sad for the Palestinian people and also for the Israelis who do this to maintain their security - each deserve a homeland where they can live in peace and dignity and security. So a two-state solution is the only solution.

 

So I do not have a problem with these photos being posted as they are reportage of very high emotional and technical quality, the title is indeed that of one of the posters in the photo, and I think I have interpreted Wilfredo's comments as non-partisan and humanist even though they portray only one (albeit tragic) side of this conflict. The sooner the fighting stops the better.

 

 

Mods - I understand if you think you need to delete this post but I think it's appropriate to the thread.

Edited July 29, 2014 by jaapv
Political content taken out.

[erl]

Mark, I think it is entirely appropriate that you have posted here. 'We' need to, from time to time, to feel we have a member contact with what is happening 'over there'. I hope your family stay safe throughout the whole affair.

 

Personally, I despair of an end foreseeable.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[andybarton]

This thread has already been closed and reopened once.

 

Please, do not continue with the political discourse, or it will be moderated again.

[Avatar]

Avatar, I respect your POV and you report to mods. Based only on what you have written, I gather you are a supporter of Israel, fine. I take what you say about the title of this thread as being biased. It could be read that way, but, IMO, it takes title from the first photo, verbatim and thereby explains what to expect pictorialy. As such it is pure reportage, I suggest. I am assuming the entire parade was purely pro Palestine and so could only be reported that way, which is what Wilfredo has done.

 

Frankly, I cannot deduce from his pictures or brief commentary if he is partial to one side or the other. I suspect his is a humanitarian POV sympathetic to both peoples, as distinct from either government.

 

Personally, if you wanted to post a series of pics that show an Israeli position, I would have no problem, providing it is reportage and not political comment, same as for Wilfredo's post.

 

Thank you for this response. I hear and understand your take on the title of the thread being taken from a poster and not a position one way or another. We can agree to disagree. I covered the Support For Israel Rally and believe me, I could use one of many 'slogan's on the signage and title the thread but would never think of doing so out of sensitivity that there are many who would be upset over it.

 

I took your advice and did make a thread of the Rally I covered. As I reported to the Mods and posted here, I do not think any political discussion or debate is good for the forum (other than comments about the photography) but respect whatever you guys decide as you are all very professional and excellent at your jobs.

 

PS: At all rally's and protests, especially in NYC you can find dissent and opposing viewpoints including posters and graphical material making their case. Choosing a thread title name from one of the posters and thinking it is non biased is I believe naive, just as if a newspaper or media did that (and they do all the time!)

Edited July 29, 2014 by Avatar

[erl]

Thank you for this response. I hear and understand your take on the title of the thread being taken from a poster and not a position one way or another. We can agree to disagree. I covered the Support For Israel Rally and believe me, I could use one of many 'slogan's on the signage and title the thread but would never think of doing so out of sensitivity that there are many who would be upset over it.

 

I took your advice and did make a thread of the Rally I covered. As I reported to the Mods and posted here, I do not think any political discussion or debate is good for the forum (other than comments about the photography) but respect whatever you guys decide as you are all very professional and excellent at your jobs.

 

PS: At all rally's and protests, especially in NYC you can find dissent and opposing viewpoints including posters and graphical material making their case. Choosing a thread title name from one of the posters and thinking it is non biased is I believe naive, just as if a newspaper or media did that (and they do all the time!)

Avatar, I appreciate your response and respect it.

Personally I think it is difficult to discuss most photographs without having some opinion on the content or context. Of course contentious subjects must be approached with careful words, on the forum.

 

Choosing the thread title from a poster for example, as you say, is commonly done by press, so much so that we all assume that to be 'normal'. Personally I saw no offense in the technique but can understand others who might. Sometimes at home I can be heard berating local press for their 'sensational' headlines. The point is, as a headline it does encapsulate what is to follow, one hopes.

 

Whether Wilfredo's coverage was biased or not, I cannot say. I gained the impression it was a view of events on the day. I assumed, by default, that no substantial opposition was present. If it was, then the portrayal was biased.

 

Now to be pedantic, I consider all photographs to be biased, by definition. By it's very nature it excludes everything outside the frame. The phrase, 'the camera never lies' has always been one of my pet hates. Personally I have always said, 'the camera is the greatest lier on earth, except perhaps for me'. My point is that we need to accept points of view with the original 'colour' that they were drawn in. No compulsion to agree with it, just permit it to exist.

 

Sorry for the rant. I haven't had my morning cuppa yet. Shall go for it now.

Edited July 30, 2014 by erl

[CaptZoom]

[mention=2744855]wilfredo[/mention]

The title photograph is fantastic. The composition, the tonality, the use of relatively wide aperture is superb; the photograph has so much movement and a vividness that makes the viewer seem part of the action. A superb photograph. I can see why you chose it as the leading photo. That being said, my favorite is of the sleeping child holding a sign. It just about sums up political malaise most Americans* enjoy. The photo is very much in tune with the times.

 

*I am an American.

Edited July 30, 2014 by CaptZoom
Formatting error correction

[Avatar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Avatar, I appreciate your response and respect it.

Personally I think it is difficult to discuss most photographs without having some opinion on the content or context. Of course contentious subjects must be approached with careful words, on the forum.

 

Choosing the thread title from a poster for example, as you say, is commonly done by press, so much so that we all assume that to be 'normal'. Personally I saw no offense in the technique but can understand others who might. Sometimes at home I can be heard berating local press for their 'sensational' headlines. The point is, as a headline it does encapsulate what is to follow, one hopes.

 

Whether Wilfredo's coverage was biased or not, I cannot say. I gained the impression it was a view of events on the day. I assumed, by default, that no substantial opposition was present. If it was, then the portrayal was biased.

 

Now to be pedantic, I consider all photographs to be biased, by definition. By it's very nature it excludes everything outside the frame. The phrase, 'the camera never lies' has always been one of my pet hates. Personally I have always said, 'the camera is the greatest lier on earth, except perhaps for me'. My point is that we need to accept points of view with the original 'colour' that they were drawn in. No compulsion to agree with it, just permit it to exist.

 

Sorry for the rant. I haven't had my morning cuppa yet. Shall go for it now.

 

Thanks for the post and I will be very clear in response as I think it's important.

 

Firstly I agree with you completely that by nature photography is biased or let's say the viewer sees what we want him or her to see and by the choices of subject that we choose.

 

I don't want to make this personal against anyone and I know that the OP absolutely means well and is sympathetic to any or all who are suffering or living with the constant threat of violence. I think the majority of us would agree with that.

 

All I am saying is that in my coverage there is never, ever and not once any words at all about the politics. The pictures speak for themselves. Period.

 

The OP made a comment how it was not either parties fault really but the fault of 'the west'...That's an opinion and a political one..I've made it clear that I do not think the forum should have political comments at all but that's not my decision and clearly I will abide and respect whatever the Moderators and Admins choose to do.

 

You said it extremely poignantly that the camera is the greatest liar of them all. Brilliantly said and just dead spot on true.

 

I think what happened in the forum is understandable and not a huge big deal. It's actually to be expected during these very sad, stressful times in the Middle East. it's a subject that touches on so many hot buttons it's best to be avoided ..at least by me and I have not and will not say a word about politics on this forum as I like this place and people and my experience with forums and politics has been epically difficult and extremely stressful as an Admin on two very large forums. As I have said previously, I regret ever allowing political discussions and they did great damage to friendships. It would be hard to make up the stories that I have.

 

Peace to all.

 

Mark

 

PS: And erl, your post wasn't a rant..not even close...Mine was a rant! been working 13 hour days, 3 days in a row and have had 3-5 hours sleep a night..not enough and my nerves might be a little frayed as a result...or more than usual at least!

Edited July 30, 2014 by Avatar

[colonel]

As Avatar says there are political comments here. Some of the early ones appear to be benign and sympathetic but they are repeating an undercurrent of a political mantra accepted by many which others severely disagree with.

 

I will say, without a hint of sycophancy, that I do appreciate the moderators heavy touch here (in fact I think it should be heavier). After reading internet feedback for many years I am still appalled by the rascist, sexist and hate filled feedback on many sites such as youtube and many newspapers for example. I for one don't believe that such comments advance any kind of understanding or progress and would be pleased to see them moderated. Of course I believe in free speech and therefore that there should be some areas where people can say what they want but the sea of filth is too much at the moment.

 

That is one area where I divert from the western view of thinking that if everyone in the world is educated, has a nice house, two cars and a good looking partner there will be world peace. I believe some people have their thoughts so ingrained that they would sacrifice everything to see their imagined 'enemies' hurt.

 

Such is life and why we always need to maintain our guard.

 

Well rant over and again I would repeat I love to see reportage photography of every form and even though I don't agree with the subject of this thread, oddly it doesn't seem completely inappropriate as it's copied from a banner in a key photograph.

 

All the best everyone

[erl]

Gradually, I think we are coming together on the 'thinking' about this stuff in general and threads of this kind in particular. I agree about the photo quality to be appreciated, but IMO that appreciation falls short of its deserved approbation if we ignore the nature of the content, especially reportage photography.

 

Speaking with words or pictures, to me is the same, so if you wished to gag my words for example, you would also need to censor my images. I don't believe we are being honest if we say show the pics but don't say what you are thinking. In fact many reportage pictures can be very ordinary if the context or story is not included.

[colonel]

Gradually, I think we are coming together on the 'thinking' about this stuff in general and threads of this kind in particular. I agree about the photo quality to be appreciated, but IMO that appreciation falls short of its deserved approbation if we ignore the nature of the content, especially reportage photography.

 

Speaking with words or pictures, to me is the same, so if you wished to gag my words for example, you would also need to censor my images. I don't believe we are being honest if we say show the pics but don't say what you are thinking. In fact many reportage pictures can be very ordinary if the context or story is not included.

 

I don't disagree with you at all but here's a thought

If someone says something which one either disagrees with or believes is simply untrue, one is bound to counter.

 

Now of course there are standards of politeness and such, but perceived or real facts are facts. Therefore any statement made, and allowed, must be allowed to be countered.

 

So I am not entirely against people posting views but if this is the case others must be allowed to counter. Keeping this under control for some subjects is easier then others.

 

There is no simple answer.

[dunos]

I think first and foremost this is a photography forum and therefore if we want to tout any particular political message then doing so through photography is fine. However, when the comment thread is more about the politics than the photo itself we may want to consider the slippery slope we are heading down as a community of photographers.

 

With regard to the current conflict - it is far too raw at the moment on all sides for rational thought. I would liken this to Northern Ireland which, while very far down the peace process, is still not without its troubles. I imagine that the Israeli/Palestine conflict will play out in a similar way with either one side or the other "winning" or coming to some sort of truce that takes a long time to get to anything resembling normal. I think it would be fair to say that there are atrocities occurring in that part of the world and we are long past blaming one side or the other, whatever our personal view point might be.

[erl]

Let me make this observation. This thread started with posted images, accompanied by a thread title that is closely allied to the images and upset some members. Personally I am fine with that but the mods have discussed changing the title. I suggest that the integrity of the OP would be diluted as a piece of reportage to change it.

 

There have been reports of political propaganda and analysis that the mods find myopic and incorrect. Our collective mind has been questioned, in ignorance, because we are intensively discussing amongst ourselves, which is not easy on a global scale.

 

I think some criticisms of comments from other sources are being levelled at this thread that to my reading are not posted here.

 

Drawing a line under the discussion at this point I strongly recommend no discussion other than the merits of the original photographs and the message they carry. It may not be a complete message, but it is all we should discuss here.

[jaapv]

And I will add that the moderators will delete posts - as fairly as they know how - that edge on the political. We will not PM members routinely about this as life is too short.

[A miller]

Let me make this observation. This thread started with posted images, accompanied by a thread title that is closely allied to the images and upset some members. Personally I am fine with that but the mods have discussed changing the title. I suggest that the integrity of the OP would be diluted as a piece of reportage to change it.

 

There have been reports of political propaganda and analysis that the mods find myopic and incorrect. Our collective mind has been questioned, in ignorance, because we are intensively discussing amongst ourselves, which is not easy on a global scale.

 

I think some criticisms of comments from other sources are being levelled at this thread that to my reading are not posted here.

 

Drawing a line under the discussion at this point I strongly recommend no discussion other than the merits of the original photographs and the message they carry. It may not be a complete message, but it is all we should discuss here.

 

Erl - agree with you but even would go one step further and suggest that it is in the best interest of the integrity of this PHOTOGRAPHY community to refrain from even talking about talking about (yes, i meant to say that twice) political discussion. Even talking about talking about political discussion unecessarily instigates emotions that are irrelevant to the scope of this forum, which i (like many of us) happily financially sponsor.

[stuny]

Barbara completed her masters in French literature in Paris before she was old enough to legally drink in the US. During that year one of her professors told each student that on the day after Genral Franco dies they should pick up a copy of every different newspaper they can find and bring them to class. When that day arrived she was amazed at the strong and strikingly different slants written about Franco.

[colonel]

Barbara completed her masters in French literature in Paris before she was old enough to legally drink in the US. During that year one of her professors told each student that on the day after Genral Franco dies they should pick up a copy of every different newspaper they can find and bring them to class. When that day arrived she was amazed at the strong and strikingly different slants written about Franco.

 

wow, she must be very bright

 

not just the masters but changing country to legally drink

 

I had a Basque friend once. She told me Franco allowed Hitler to do practice bombing runs for his airforce on Basque villages before his invasion of Belgium. Not much sympathy for Franco in that region .....

I guess I can mention this as its 76 years ago. These people recall it like its yesterday though ....

[stuny]

Harold -

 

Oh, she it.

 

Piccaso's Guernica is about that. He also refused to let it go to Spain until after Franco died.

Edited July 30, 2014 by stuny

[colonel]

Harold -

 

Piccaso's Guernica is about that.

 

Some great Capa's here:

 

The Spanish Civil War.

[wilfredo]

I want to thank the Moderator for not shutting this thread down permanently. I never saw the controversial commentary before it was shut down, and so I was taken by surprise.

 

Let me say this with the deepest humility. Some of the most renowned Leica M photographers in modern history have produced some of the greatest iconic photographs of the world, and many of them have been charged with political ramifications. It is in the Leica DNA to produce photos that will generate controversy, sometimes changing the course of history. Look at the work of the Magnum photographers, and you will immediately see what I mean. And take for example the Che Guevara photo by Korda. That's probably one of the most famous Leica M photos ever taken. BTW, Leica itself capitalized on this photo with one of its advertising campaigns. The photo I'm attaching here is from one of my Leica advertising booklets, one I won't part with. The caption on the cover reads: "Leica M, How Revolutionary Should Your Camera Be?"

 

Politics will usually get a thread shut down on this forum but perhaps the Moderator should only delete comments that become insulting, and leave the rest? As much as I enjoy posting happy family and friends photos, or photos simply for their esthetic and artistic value, we would be denying a major chunk of the Leica legacy if nothing that could be construed as political were prohibited from being posted here.

 

As I become an aging Leica photographer myself, I'm learning to keep my cool, but some of my photographs will always contain some level of fire. I would hate not to be able to post them on my favorite photography forum simply because some will use it as an opportunity to attack.

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!

Edited August 3, 2014 by wilfredo

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[A miller]

Wilfredo -

 

Your photos are perfectly fine. They will never be subject of removal. It is the editorial commentary that is the problem.

 

The "renowned Leica M photographers" of our time only shot the scenes. And their photos speak for themselves.

 

The purpose of this forum is to share and discuss photos, not political viewpoints.