On 17/10/05, Butch Black, discombobulated, unleashed:
I
think during that time there may have been 1 or 2 images I refused to print
due to being in such poor taste.
By any chance did you refuse to print any that were of poor composition?
Or perhaps poor exposure? Or maybe you just didn't like the colour of
the sky?
Sorry Butch, I'm not getting at you personally. I deplore censorship in
any form.
Best,
Cheers,
Cotty
One of the times I did that it was some kids doing disgusting things to a
dead cat. The other times I did it the companies I worked for had posted
policies towards adult material. Essentially adult nudity was ok,
intercourse was not. The few I would not print would not have made it on an
upscale men's magazine. We have this vague community standards law or legal
concept which could have penalized us for having printed those images.
Living in the Northeast I probably had more leeway then if I lived in the
Bible Belt for instance. Yes it is censorship. But until pornography is
clearly defined, or it's taboo is removed from society. it is one
photofinishers will have to struggle with.
I would like to hear from some of the other photofinishers on the list
concerning their company's policy on printing nudity, erotica, and
pornography. I do find Bob Shell's letter disturbing, as from his
description I would have had no problems printing his workshop's material.
Given the average Wal-Mart employee, I wonder if Wal-Mart just instituted a
no nudity policy so as not to have to worry about the issue.
Butch
