I have no problem with your referencing my photo, and I don't think Shel's photo is particularly cruel. Although I'm not fond of homeless pics in general. They're easy. Like shooting fish in a barrel -- or shooting cats curled up on a chair. No value judgement, but I've come to see pics of homeless as a waste of time. That being said I still like my SM Jesus pic, because I found him to be a unique individual in many ways.
My subject actually did make more than a professional model would earn: $% for 2 minutes work translates to $150 per hour Not bad. And while this fellow lives on the street, he's a professional pan handler who "owns" the best corner in Santa Monica. He also seems to be rather intelligent, although angry. I suspect he earns in excess of 20K per year. He probably sleeps on the beach and gets fed both by the free feeds that a local charity group holds in the park on Ocean Avenue and by people exiting restaurants. (It's the custom in Santa Monica to request a to-go box then give it to one of the homeless outside the door.) Santa Monica is probably the best place in the world to live if one is homeless, and while it's a beautiful city. it probably boasts more homeless residents per square mile than any other in the U.S. If my wife kicks me out, I'm heading there. Paul On Jul 21, 2011, at 2:05 PM, William Robb wrote: > On 21/07/2011 11:36 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: >> >> >> On 7/21/2011 12:59, William Robb wrote: >>> On 20/07/2011 8:27 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> I paid the guy five bucks to take his photo. He wasn't being taken >>>> advantage of. He earned some money. >>>> >>> That you paid him, and that perhaps Shel didn't pay his subject (though >>> it's entirely possible that Shel bought him that coffee, and perhaps >>> some food) is beside the point. The point was, since both were taken >>> with permission, how is one more cruel than the other? >>> If payment is the only reason, did you pay him the going rate for >>> modelling? >>> For that matter, would my TFCD studio work be considered cruel (not >>> commenting on how I tend to butcher things, just the act of taking the >>> images in the first place)? >>> >> Ok don't jump on Paul for what I said about Shel :-) >> >> I used cruel a bit losely... and personally. change "Cruel" to "sneaky" >> if you wish. >> >> But I just could never do either what Paul did or Shel did. >> >> >> ann >> > > Sorry, not meaning to jump on anyone, but I am finding this to be an > interesting discussion. > Paul, if you want me to stop using your image as an example, I surely can > search the web for another that will do as well. > I realize that a lot of people see the type of image that Shel created as > exploitative and cruel. I think often we see the photograph as a power thing, > with the photographer taking unfair advantage of the underprivileged person. > When I was travelling in the USA a number of years ago, I came across a young > man on a pier in Oregon. Just him, his dog and a backpack. He was obviously > down on his luck, and I paid him a few dollars to allow me to take some > pictures of him and his dog. > He freely admitted that he was going to spend the money on booze and tobacco, > so I went and bought a bag of dog food for his Rottie as well. > In this instance, the act of paying the subject wasn't going to help him out > at all, and would more than likely just add to his plight. > My point here is that paying the subject isn't necessarily a good thing, even > if you get a warm feeling from doing it. > Was Shel "sneaky" because he waited for the decisive moment to get the > picture that would tell the story that he wanted to tell? > Was Paul "sneaky" because he waited for the decisive moment to get the > background just the way he wanted? > How about any street image that shows the subject in less than stellar light? > > How do we alter the human condition for the better if we hide the parts of > the condition that can be improved on from the light of day? > > > -- > > William Robb > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
