I share your uneasiness about photographing the indigent, Dan. As I posted less than an hour ago, I think we should afford the homeless a shred of privacy - they may be "in public", but the unfortunate reality is that bus shelters and doorways are their homes, and really should be seen as "private places".
That being said, when is "exploiting misery" acceptable - if ever? PJ's and documentary or reportage photogs take photos of people in pain all the time - accident victims, those grieving such accidents, the victims and survivors of disasters, the poor of war-torn areas - all of those seem fair game. Even if a photographer is taking pictures out of a sense of social justice, is it fair to do so at the expense of such unfortunate individuals? When and where is "the line" crossed? I'm not taking you to task on your comments, Dan, but I've often wondered where the line is, or if it even exists. As I posted before, there are rare occasions that I've asked street people if I can take their pictures, and sometimes they say yes, so I do (I won't if they say "no"). But, if one is suffering from a major mental illness, is such consent to be relied upon? Am I just asking to assuage my guilt in exploiting them? Like I said, genuine questions here, not just a philosophical debate. regards, frank Dan Scott wrote: > I applaud Glen's good works. But I don't know that good works earn > anyone the right or an entitlement to photograph someone else. I > understand that being in public entails being seen in public, but when > you are homeless you have no privacy and no choice. You can't escape. > > If you are sick, dirty, hungry and cold, you can't pop home, throw your > vomit/diarrhea stained clothing into the wash and make yourself > presentable. Unless you are fortunate enough to loose your mind, you > are entirely aware of how wretched your condition is and your > powerlessness to raise yourself out of it. When someone comes along > looking for something interesting to shoot, their interest in you is > most likely in exploiting your misery for their benefit. > > I think that is wrong. > > Dan Scott -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
