Observations on some photos

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ardvark,

I did not read the ethical thread. I have just deleted it and would do so with similar types. However, there is this forum here for JOKES .

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=21

Threads from this forum do not show up on the front page as recent posts. So if you have a political joke that is CLEAN, it may be posted on the forum in the link above.

Keep in mind that this forum will delete any obscene material.
 
there is a big difference in the things you mentioned kiev4a. part of them cannot be argued for logically (racism, sexism, ext.), and the others can be.
 
Not just here, and not just now, but throughout my entire life I have always wanted to see everything. I hate censorship in every form. Censoring a photograph does nothing to change the past; history remains regardless. Censoring a KKK or Swastika photo does nothing to change the horrible events they represent -- are we to pretend these things never occurred? And who is to say anti-war holds a position over pro-war? If it did we might all be saluting a Fuhrer today. I'll only speak for myself: I'm a big boy, I can handle the sight of a swastika, a rebel flag, KKK hoods, and peace signs...
 
Honu,

I would not censor a phot of a swastika or a kkk rally if used in the proper context. For example a rally of a neo nazi group or a kkk protest. This would be considered journalistic type photos. However, I would delete a photo of a poster showing bush with a swastika.
 
einolu said:
there is a big difference in the things you mentioned kiev4a. part of them cannot be argued for logically (racism, sexism, ext.), and the others can be.
Click to expand...


Logic? what is the definition of logic? If someone agres with you, it is logical? If they do not agree it is illogical?

Some say there is evidence, and therefore it is logical that global warming is caused by man. But there are others who can provide evidence that global warming is simply one of the climatic changes that occurs periodically and therefore their beliefs are logical. Which is the true logic?

There are cultures that consider sexism or anti semitism logical.

I am not saying the problems of the world should not be debated (not that it will change anyone's minds). But there are sites for doing just that. I don't believe a photography forum is the place. And as I stated earlier, I am not saying all photos with political content should be banned. I just believe there is a difference betwee sharing a photo that captures the emotion of a moment and uploading a dozen photos -- all with the same theme -- to make a political statement. I have the same objection to gallery members who load down the site with every photo they shot on their non politital summer vacation.
 
If I may speak very freely here, the one thing I have liked about this site is the lack of various rules, formality, and things like that.

Unfortunately we've seen restrictions on the gallery, up until this thread all technical in nature, quantity of postings and size of postings.

Now we've had a hint of restrictions based on content. I can live with size and volume limitations. If a content limitation were imposed, well, I don't know what I would do. I could threaten to leave but I'm not the type to take my toys and go home.

It bothers me, however, to hear even a hint of -- well, I won't call it censorship -- but limitations due to political content. This idea leaves me a very foul taste in my mouth, and it does not reflect positively on the site.

That's really all I have to say.
 
Jorge Torralba said:
Honu,

I would not censor a photo of a swastika or a kkk rally if used in the proper context. For example a rally of a neo nazi group or a kkk protest. This would be considered journalistic type photos. However, I would delete a photo of a poster showing bush with a swastika.
Click to expand...


Jorge, you would NOT censor a photo of a swaztica, a neonazi group, or a KKK rally, but you WOULD delete anti-war/anti-Bush photos? Who is being political here?

I viewed all of Neils' photo essay on the anti-war demonstration and I saw only 2 photos where the context of the rally was not clearly evident. Those photos were, however within the context of the photo essay. And this IS a photo essay so yes, there are a lot of photos of the event.

I'm not liking the smell of this at all.
 
Jorge Torralba said:
Honu,

I would not censor a phot of a swastika or a kkk rally if used in the proper context. For example a rally of a neo nazi group or a kkk protest. This would be considered journalistic type photos. However, I would delete a photo of a poster showing bush with a swastika.
Click to expand...
My comments were of a more general nature; I respect fully your right to censor what is posted on your site and I mean this most sincerely. You have gone above and beyond to be fair about discussing this with us and I hope your efforts are appreciated by all.

Lately I've been opposed to the recent removals of items in public parks, buildings, etc. This doesn't mean I support the views of the items being removed (ten commandments, nativity scenes, etc.) but why not encourage the inclusion of other symbols instead of removing things? This would seem to broaden everyone's understanding.
 
At RFF things have been very civil for the most part. Very seldome do yo see someone starting a flame war over a topic. Esepcially political ones. The diversity of people on this forum is quite broad and I am sure that politics on religion falls into the scope here. Having said that, my intent is to keep such topics down to a minimum if not completely out of the forum. If 100 people are in agreement with a thread ot pictures message there will be 100 people in disagreement with the same thread. With the gallery in place on really does not need words to start a thread. You have heard the saying, a picture is worth a thousand words. I want to keep the focus of the forum on what it was put in place for. Not knowing your political views will keep the people on the forum interacting with eachother. However, we all know politics can be a deviding subject even among the most rational and civil people.
 
Frank,

I believe if someone was to put a photograph of a poster of Bush, Clinton or Gore dressed as Osama or Hitler and that photograph was focused on the poster I would consider that a political statement. If I saw a scene of a croud and someone was holding up that poster I would consider that a journalistic type photograph.

Anyway, who says Sunday nights are boring ?
 
I am the photographer whose photos were censored and I totally disagree with their removal by the list moderator. Jorge as the list moderator has the authority to do this. Every image removed was an integral part of the demonstration and each image removed was either an anti-war sign, anti George Bush sign, and in two instances people dressed as George Bush. If you remove the signs of demonstrators, then you have no demonstration. I have been a professional photojournalist for over thirty five years and never had a picture censored on any subject that I covered. I find this very disturbing and a chilling warning to anyone who may want to post images of a controversial nature. Neil Schneider
 
neils,

Please attach to this thread the photos I removed. I would like to get the feedback from others on this. If everyone could remove their donkey or elephant hat and give their opinion it would really help.
 
I understand the desire to be a strict constructionist in favor of free speech (which always seems like an especially good idea when somebody else is paying for it, i.e. Jorge in this case.)

But I think there's a certain amount of sophistry going on here. Suppose I am running for the office of dogcatcher here in Dogpatch. And there are some "documentary images" posted in my gallery:

-- One is a distant view of a man holding a sign.
-- The next is a little closer. You can see that the sign says, "JLW For Dogcatcher."
-- The next one is closer, so that ALL you can see is the sign.
-- The next one is closer yet, so you can't even see that it IS a sign; all you see is the text "JLW For Dogcatcher."

At which "zoom level" does this stop being a document, and simply become an advertisement?




As Justice Robert H. Jackson didn't quite say, the Constitution is not a suicide pact, and neither are RFF's terms of service. If it's considered mandatory for RFF to carry ANY type of message as long as it's communicated in a photograph, we're going to be in for a long, long nightmare of spam of all sorts.
 
Last edited:
All, I do not want to use the excuse of this is my forum and I do what I want. This is the point I am trying to drive.

At RFF things have been very civil for the most part. Very seldome do yo see someone starting a flame war over a topic. Esepcially political ones. The diversity of people on this forum is quite broad and I am sure that politics on religion falls into the scope here. Having said that, my intent is to keep such topics down to a minimum if not completely out of the forum. If 100 people are in agreement with a thread ot pictures message there will be 100 people in disagreement with the same thread. With the gallery in place on really does not need words to start a thread. You have heard the saying, a picture is worth a thousand words. I want to keep the focus of the forum on what it was put in place for. Not knowing your political views will keep the people on the forum interacting with eachother. However, we all know politics can be a deviding subject even among the most rational and civil people.
 
Isn't it ironic that the freedom of expression, one of the benefits of democracy that America is at war over in Iraq, is not practiced here? Shame on you, Jorge. If censorship stays, then I goes. Like I said, I'm "all in" on this one. Some principles are worth standing up for.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MP Guy
Are you a 50mm lover?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
4K
Leon C
L
Mos6502
Ferrania P33, first roll, and some observations.
2 3
Replies
53
Views
7K
luuca
luuca
G
Using a Nikon Super CoolScan 4000 ED versus a digital camera w/VALOI easy35 (or other similar alternatives).
Replies
7
Views
2K
Godfrey
Godfrey
G
Konica I Ab and As number of units manufactured.
Replies
0
Views
899
gopalravishankarnair@gmai
G
jaredangle
De-pinking in Lightroom?
Replies
6
Views
594
jaredangle
jaredangle
Back
Top Bottom