| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/07/2007 03:13:12 PM · #51 |
btw, "hoist one's pitard" means to stew in one's own juice, such as in letting one rip while in a phonebooth and not being able to get out.
------
as for the rest of the thread, shoot what moves ya, share what you like. "you can't please everyone, might as well please yourself" |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:14:42 PM · #52 |
Hmm, seems I have been misunderstood a little. What I wanted to say is NOT "Don't shoot homeless people", it is NOT "Waterfalls suck" and NOT "Insect macros are too hard for me to shoot". I'm with the OP, I 'm tired of seeing homeless people in each and every challenge, regardless of the topic. I have the feeling it has become "hip" lately to take these shots because DPCers know, technically well done shots of homeless do well in challenges. These shots aren't taken for another reason and that makes them exploitive. This doesn't mean I (or pawdrix) want to control what is shot or entered here. Go on, shoot your waterfalls and blurred seascapes, I will go on and try to do original shots without exploiting others and without riding on a wave for ribbons sake. I still love to be on DPC, in the end it is the variety of opinions and tastes that make this place worthwhile.
Excuses for bad grammar. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:20:11 PM · #53 |
I also think that if you are shooting homeless people, without even asking them first, with an expensive gear, without giving them anything in return, there is something wrong.
...but I don't think we should depreciate photos of homeless people, just because they are featuring homeless people.
Have a look at Joey Lawrence portfolio:
 Joey Lawrence
He has several homeless people in his portfolio, and to me this is totally fine. He is talking to them, and telling us about their own stories. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:26:11 PM · #54 |
| How is photographing homeless people on the street different than photographing anyone else on the street? What is the motive behind any kind of street photography? Is it exploiting street vendors, musicians, etc. to take their photo? Children? |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:26:38 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Gabriel:
I also think that if you are shooting homeless people, without even asking them first, with an expensive gear, without giving them anything in return, there is something wrong.
...but I don't think we should depreciate photos of homeless people, just because they are featuring homeless people.
Have a look at Joey Lawrence portfolio:
Joey Lawrence
He has several homeless people in his portfolio, and to me this is totally fine. He is talking to them, and telling us about their own stories. |
Joey's approach is the exception, and it is exemplary. He forms relationships, however fleeting, with these people, he listens to them, he photographs them, he gives them food and money, and he tells their stories to us.
R.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:31:04 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Skip:
btw, "hoist one's pitard" means to stew in one's own juice, such as in letting one rip while in a phonebooth and not being able to get out. |
\
Here's the definition from the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy;
Hoist by oneâs own petard
(pi-TAHRD) To be caught in oneâs own trap: âThe swindler cheated himself out of most of his money, and his victims were satisfied to see him hoist by his own petard.â A âpetardâ was an explosive device used in medieval warfare. To be hoisted, or lifted, by a petard literally means to be blown up.
"Hoist by one's own petard" thus means, literally, to be blown up by one's own explosives, and more generically to be brought down by one's own aggressive machinations.
R.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:31:14 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by mk:
What is the deal with people wanting to control everything everyone else shoots? I just don't get it. Just because we share a common hobby doesn't mean our interests, goals, pursuits, etc. are the same. So you're above and beyond shooting bugs, macros, flowers and homeless people? Bully for you, then don't do it. Don't want to see other people's shots of the same? Then look elsewhere or keep gazing at your own navels. But encouraging other people to stop shooting something because you stopped or never had any interest to start is crap and I just don't understand these constant requests for it. |
Not to change the subject, but isn't that exactly what the Site Council (often a single member) does when they lock a thread because they don't agree with or like what's being said? |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:36:17 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by photodude:
Originally posted by mk:
What is the deal with people wanting to control everything everyone else shoots? I just don't get it. Just because we share a common hobby doesn't mean our interests, goals, pursuits, etc. are the same. So you're above and beyond shooting bugs, macros, flowers and homeless people? Bully for you, then don't do it. Don't want to see other people's shots of the same? Then look elsewhere or keep gazing at your own navels. But encouraging other people to stop shooting something because you stopped or never had any interest to start is crap and I just don't understand these constant requests for it. |
Not to change the subject, but isn't that exactly what the Site Council (often a single member) does when they lock a thread because they don't agree with or like what's being said? |
Our standard practice is to lock threads which violate the forum rules, have long outlived their original purpose or have veered quite far off-topic and, despite requests to get back on track, do not. If you have examples of threads that you feel I've locked simply because I don't agree with or like what's being said, feel free to PM me. In exchange, I'll send you a list of threads I would have locked if that were really how it worked. ;) If you have issues with the other SC, I guess you can take it up with them personally or submit a ticket via the Help menu. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:38:22 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Gabriel:
I also think that if you are shooting homeless people, without even asking them first, with an expensive gear, without giving them anything in return, there is something wrong.
...but I don't think we should depreciate photos of homeless people, just because they are featuring homeless people.
Have a look at Joey Lawrence portfolio:
Joey Lawrence
He has several homeless people in his portfolio, and to me this is totally fine. He is talking to them, and telling us about their own stories. |
Joey's approach is the exception, and it is exemplary. He forms relationships, however fleeting, with these people, he listens to them, he photographs them, he gives them food and money, and he tells their stories to us.
R. |
I dont know anything about Joey, but just from looking at those pictures, they arent any different content wise then any other homeless picture. Maybe I missed the part where it says he gives them money and listens to them. Exceptional pictures though. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:41:20 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I know JL is involved in a social program that deals with this issue so that I can understand and those images are being used for the cause but for the rest of us, what's the point? |
I did mention JL (Joey) in the OP, fwiw.
mk-It's ALL exploitative but as I see it a guy at the Hot Dog stand, let's assume isn't at a low point. Is there a difference?
I gave a guy $5 once to take his picture he was hungry...I spoke with him a for a few moments and I snapped the shot. His eyes were so sad and he wasn't going to say no to a picture, he was hungry, even though I now realize he really didn't want to take one. I feel that I took advantage of that moment. The sadness and loss in his eyes was powerful and that will always strike the viewer. Now it just seems trite to tug at those heartstrings.
I'm trying to figure out why I took the shot...or at least a good reason.
I took this one for an entirely different reason. I thought she looked cool, majestic and artful. I liked her style and wasn't trying to show her in a bad light but in a good one. Such a good light in fact, that I blew the highlights in her head-wear.
Message edited by author 2007-08-07 15:56:09. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 03:41:35 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Joey's approach is the exception, and it is exemplary. He forms relationships, however fleeting, with these people, he listens to them, he photographs them, he gives them food and money, and he tells their stories to us.
R. |
But why should we think that many others don't do the same? Just because they aren't published in magazines or popular on a photography website doesn't mean that they don't care for those they are shooting.
If you looked at the majority of Joey's images without having the knowledge of who he is or his stories, you'd never know that he made any attempt to have a relationship with these people. I think it's unfair to assume that shots of homeless people are exploitive simply because a person exploited them for personal benefit when he shot them and now has had a change of heart. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:00:04 PM · #62 |
I believe this is the only homeless shot I have ever taken and submitted online at all. I hung with him for 30 minutes or so. Talked about where he came from, where he had been, why he didnt like hanging at the homeless shelter. When I asked him if I could take his picture (specifically for this challenge) he was actually happy. He even suggested shots for me. It was truly an odd experience.
There was one other time I went downtown with the hopes of getting a pic of a homeless person. I ended up talking to this one guy for 30 minutes or so and found out he had been stuck in Columbus for 6 months with no way of getting back to Cincinatti. I called my wife to find a bus schedule, brought him to the station and bought him a ticket. Never got the pic, but in the end that part just seemed so trivial.
A shame that it takes wanting to get a picture to be the instigator of communicating with these people, let alone seeing them in the first place. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:02:50 PM · #63 |
Personally taking a picture of a homeless person can be productive if taken the right way. I don't take pictures of homeless people while sleeping or without their permission. If I find an interesting homeless person that I would like to take a picture of I will ask him and offer a meal or money for his photo and story.
 I felt this picture was ok to place in the street challenge. After talking with this gentleman for about 15 minutes, hearing his way of life (ups and downs) reminded me that we all are only one or two pay checks from where was currently. Think about that!
When I offer someone money for a photo regardless if they agree of decline I always give them the money.
I do believe that homeless pictures can be both good and bad. As a photographer you have to know where that line exist.
-SDW |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:07:55 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by swhiddon:
Personally taking a picture of a homeless person can be productive if taken the right way. I don't take pictures of homeless people while sleeping or without their permission. If I find an interesting homeless person that I would like to take a picture of I will ask him and offer a meal or money for his photo and story.
I felt this picture was ok to place in the street challenge. After talking with this gentleman for about 15 minutes, hearing his way of life (ups and downs) reminded me that we all are only one or two pay checks from where was currently. Think about that!
When I offer someone money for a photo regardless if they agree of decline I always give them the money.
I do believe that homeless pictures can be both good and bad. As a photographer you have to know where that line exist.
-SDW |
My question to you is, do you think you would have gotten the same score if you didnt have HOMELESS in the title? Because at first glance, that man doesn't look any different that any other person you might find in the city, besides a little messiness on his jacket. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:12:14 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
Originally posted by swhiddon:
Personally taking a picture of a homeless person can be productive if taken the right way. I don't take pictures of homeless people while sleeping or without their permission. If I find an interesting homeless person that I would like to take a picture of I will ask him and offer a meal or money for his photo and story.
I felt this picture was ok to place in the street challenge. After talking with this gentleman for about 15 minutes, hearing his way of life (ups and downs) reminded me that we all are only one or two pay checks from where was currently. Think about that!
When I offer someone money for a photo regardless if they agree of decline I always give them the money.
I do believe that homeless pictures can be both good and bad. As a photographer you have to know where that line exist.
-SDW |
My question to you is, do you think you would have gotten the same score if you didnt have HOMELESS in the title? Because at first glance, that man doesn't look any different that any other person you might find in the city, besides a little messiness on his jacket. |
Maybe / maybe not. I put the word HOMELESS in the title because thats what he was. It helped explain the newspaper being used as a read and cover since the temps were to be near freezing that night. If you look at my entries I go for shots that have a story and the title is part of the story. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:20:48 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
My question to you is, do you think you would have gotten the same score if you didnt have HOMELESS in the title? Because at first glance, that man doesn't look any different that any other person you might find in the city, besides a little messiness on his jacket. |
Now, that's an interesting question. It's a very well taken shot. Sharp shows the details well but is it a 6.45 image without the homeless factor? |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:31:48 PM · #67 |
Well, I've learned one thing from this thread...how to spell "petard"...
|
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:33:10 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Well, I've learned one thing from this thread...how to spell "petard"... |
So if someone is hoisted by their petard, afterwards is it safe to call them petarded? |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 04:43:08 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Now, that's an interesting question. It's a very well taken shot. Sharp shows the details well but is it a 6.45 image without the homeless factor? |
Looking at the 18 comments received during voting (only one referenced homeless) I would say I may have received a higher score. But who knows, the title was appropriate and described my subject. I'm sure there were many that did not like the fact that it was a homeless person in the picture. So one could ask, how much did the placing homeless in the title hurt it's score? For me I don't care about the score - I posted the picture - I did it tastefully - I titled it for what it was - an let the voters have the final say.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:19:41 PM · #70 |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:27:11 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by hopper:
the same holds for homeless person shots ... vote them down, they go away ... just like woody. |
Woody just don't get no respect. Not even homeless Woody.
At least there will always be those of us who don't give a rat's ass about scores and will continue to shoot / exploit for their own entertainment. :)
|
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:29:29 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by hopper:
the same holds for homeless person shots ... vote them down, they go away ... just like woody. |
Woody just don't get no respect. Not even homeless Woody.
At least there will always be those of us who don't give a rat's ass about scores and will continue to shoot / exploit for their own entertainment. :) |
LOLOL
There was a great on of you with your face super-imposed over my homeless color portrait entry. Is that still around somewhere? |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:31:34 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
There was a great on of you with your face super-imposed over my homeless color portrait entry. Is that still around somewhere? |
I forgot who did that one, but here is one of Captain Jean-Luc Petard:
...seemed relevant. |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:34:42 PM · #74 |
I'm Petarted!
 |
|
|
|
08/07/2007 05:38:10 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
I'm Petarted!
|
Art that one went straight into my faves. Awesome shot. |
|
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: 06/21/2025 06:13:09 PM EDT.
