DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> pictures of men crying
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 43, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/19/2008 09:47:47 PM · #1
this is an interesting set of pictures. apparently this photographer got some of hollywoods leading men to produce tears for her so she could shoot their "vulnerable" side. i think i am even more impressed with what must be considered method acting. there have been times when i have felt i needed to, or should be crying due to circumstances in my life but its not something i can do on cue. it usually comes when i least expect it....
 05/19/2008 09:57:25 PM · #2
Some of those are very well done. I especially like the ones of Daniel Craig, Laurence Fishburne, and Robin Williams. The ones of Michael Madsen, Kris Kristofferson, Forest Whitaker and Willem Defoe come across blurry and snap-shotish. Kind of a waste of time when you're photographing such famous people. And the shot of Ben Stiller looks like he's hiding his face from the paparazzi as he's leaving a restaurant. So as with most people's portfolios, some good, some not so good.
 05/19/2008 10:01:49 PM · #3
Some good photos there, but I don't care for the out of focus ones.
 05/19/2008 10:22:03 PM · #4
Originally posted by Moose408:
Some good photos there, but I don't care for the out of focus ones.


and seems like a few, woody harelson and some others are just putting on a sad face, definitely an interesting excercise
 05/19/2008 11:37:12 PM · #5
I found the fact that most were out of focus very distracting. Not really impressed with the photography but am impressed with the idea.
 05/19/2008 11:41:58 PM · #6
So this threat isn't about my self-portrait as I looked at my scores.

Jokes aside, Laurence Fishburne looks like he had tears photoshopped in and Ben Stiller looks like he is hiding from paparazzi. The one that I really like, as it truly looks genuine, is Tim Roth.

Message edited by author 2008-05-19 23:45:00.
 05/19/2008 11:42:33 PM · #7
Robin Williams is so harry, I wish I could grow hair on my shoulders!
 05/20/2008 06:33:09 AM · #8
Kris Kristoffersen looked... well... just like Kris Kristoffersen always looks. :)
 05/20/2008 06:56:18 AM · #9
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Kris Kristoffersen looked... well... just like Kris Kristoffersen always looks. :)

;-) Agree with you there. Love the Ed Harris one.
 05/20/2008 07:29:55 AM · #10
i think her autofocus is broken :)

I wonder if anyone would go to the exhibition if it was just regular guys crying and not famous actors.
 05/20/2008 07:33:02 AM · #11
I've been wondering about the politically correctness of it on the other hand. I swear I am not trying to stir the pot. I wonder how people would react if it was a collection of women actors crying or women in general crying.
 05/20/2008 07:53:30 AM · #12
Originally posted by togtog:
I've been wondering about the politically correctness of it on the other hand. I swear I am not trying to stir the pot. I wonder how people would react if it was a collection of women actors crying or women in general crying.

That's kind of what I see as the point of the shoot. We expect to see women cry. It's socially acceptable for women to cry. Strong, tough, masculine men are not supposed to cry (says the zeitgeist). This exhibit takes us out of that "box" and I love it!
 05/20/2008 08:05:57 AM · #13
I wonder if... we're not seeing photos of photos. When I got to the end of the images and saw the gallery shots, it made me thing some of the out of focus ones were in the duplication, not the original. Don't know for sure, but a thought.

Also, they lose their impact, to me, seeing them all in a group like that. Since they are all actors, you know they are faking it and the illusion is shattered seeing them all doing the same thing.

It think it would have had more impact had they NOT been famous. You could just as easily see the photographer doing a study of them laughing -- to show their humourous side. Or in a rage, showing their angry side.
 05/20/2008 09:13:54 AM · #14
Originally posted by Tez:
I wonder if anyone would go to the exhibition if it was just regular guys crying and not famous actors.

Many photographers make their mark by photographing famous people. I guess people just love celebrities. In this case, the fame makes the candid/out-of-focus quality work.

Btw, did you this exhibit was 2005?

05/20/2008 09:16:46 AM · #15
What a bunch of wussies. Boo hoo I have to go home to my enormous house with my super hot wife and sit around my killer pool while the nanny brings me drinks and makes sure that all of my needs have been met.

Now I am starting to cry...

Message edited by author 2008-05-20 09:18:42.
 05/20/2008 09:50:40 AM · #16
You own a Nikon, you have no reason to cry. Let them keep their silly lifestyle, you have what matters more, a desire to capture life.

Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
What a bunch of wussies. Boo hoo I have to go home to my enormous house with my super hot wife and sit around my killer pool while the nanny brings me drinks and makes sure that all of my needs have been met.

Now I am starting to cry...
05/20/2008 09:54:08 AM · #17
I still think they are wussies.
 05/20/2008 11:51:46 AM · #18
Originally posted by Monique64:
I found the fact that most were out of focus very distracting.

Focus is highly overrated. :-P
 05/20/2008 12:02:11 PM · #19
Is Robin Williams turning into the wolfman??

05/20/2008 12:12:03 PM · #20
Just a sad little tune on a tiny harmonica. (Photog playing up hirsute?)
 05/20/2008 12:43:57 PM · #21
i liked this concept, and I think I'd be interested in it still if it were just regular men crying (because its not something many of us get to see very much). I suppose the celebrity aspect makes it a little more intriguing but it doesn't change the inherent concept.
 05/20/2008 12:45:50 PM · #22
I don't mind the focus issue so much as that most of these are just not good photos - snap shottish. The one of Laurence Fishburne is stylistically the most interesting - and he looks pretty hot in tears.

I've seen many photo exhibits whereby the photographer blows up a photo to a huge size and calls it art. This seems to be one of those cases.
 05/20/2008 12:46:47 PM · #23
@ Frisca: ok, might be a little more intruiging for you, but they still are actors...

I do like the concept though (skimmed them very fast this morning with sleep in my eyes), but I think better with "normal" people from who we know acting is not their occupation.
 05/20/2008 12:52:09 PM · #24
Originally posted by redjulep:
I don't mind the focus issue so much as that most of these are just not good photos - snap shottish.


But it's the focus issue that makes you say that. You don't understand how a photo can be out of focus and still work. I call it DPCitis.
 05/20/2008 01:17:32 PM · #25
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by redjulep:
I don't mind the focus issue so much as that most of these are just not good photos - snap shottish.


But it's the focus issue that makes you say that. You don't understand how a photo can be out of focus and still work. I call it DPCitis.


I don't understand how a photo can be out of focus and still work? Have you looked at my portfolio?

Please refrain from making blanket statements about my artistic sense.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/24/2025 03:40:18 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/24/2025 03:40:18 PM EDT.