Photographer Profiting from Homeless??

randomm said:
"Nice" overuse of Nik's Silver Efex's structure. I wonder how long this fad will take to fizzle out...
Click to expand...

Maybe Nik is the tool the photog used, I am not familiar with it.

When I saw the photos I thought immediately of Andrzej Dragan, and his "Draganize" post processing technique that was so popular 5 or 6 years ago. They have the same over-the-top processing to emphasize the subjects "weathering" and the heavy work on the eyes.

It is a dramatic look; but overdone in my opinion.
 
Well, either you like and appreciate this style of photography or you don't. Doesn't make it right or wrong in itself. Some people prefer close-ups of flowers. So be it.
The nature of these portraits is such that there was clear acceptance by the sitters of the process and as such i think they're totally legitimate subjects and images.
Whether there was an exchange of money (likely), a "model" release (I highly doubt it), or just a pleasant interaction with a good listener is another question. It seems that there was an implicit "contract" involved and without getting political or socially correct or overly legalistic I think what was done was probably appropriate to the situation and any amount of gum beating by people who don't photograph in that genre or who want to push a socio-political point of their own are pretty much out of order.
 
photo4ls said:
Posted by Andrea Taurisano

Unlike you, I'm sure that the pictures he could possibly get without talking to them and getting their trust wouldn't have come close to those excellent and intime portraits.

Whats the" Unlike you" thing about. Do we know each other?😕
Nelson
Click to expand...

Sorry, it wasn't meant in any possibly nasty or sarcastic way. My poor english made me think that expression could be appropriate since I was to expose an opposite belief to yours. No, we don't know each other.
 
kbg32 said:
No matter what you think, his images will sell and garner him tons of accolades, press, and make his career. He will befriend Brad and Angelina, Bono, and the Queen will bestow on him - a knighthood.

Certain subjects always attract surefire attention - the destitute, sex, and celebrities. People want to view the supposed lowest and highest denominators in life. What they want, what they desire, and what they could become. Is it real? Is it true? Is it life? Have we become numb?

"I like a look of Agony, because I know it's true -- men do not sham Convulsion, nor simulate, a Throe --"

Dickinson, Emily

Is this true?
Click to expand...

Yes it is called the National Geographic Syndrome where the non white alien cultures go on display for the white masses. I suggest only Connecticut Wasps are fair game for any reportage 🙂
 
Last edited:
Jack Conrad said:
I think Jeffries intended his art to honor these people, not pity them. He honors those people by giving their likenesses a greater meaning. He gives them a religious spiritual significance. He imbues them with the iconic soul of humanity.

I think that's what he was trying to do, at least to some degree thereof.
Click to expand...

But were the boogers necessary?
 
Chris101 said:
The accompanying story talks about one of his subjects injecting heroin and smoking crack. The second to last picture shows one subject holding a syringe. I know people who use intravenous drugs, and it is very hard to inject into a vein with an insulin syringe like that man is holding. I think perhaps the guy is diabetic, but it makes better copy to talk about heroin. Then when people see the syringe, they jump to a conclusion.

Larry Clark he's not.
Click to expand...

to be the contrarian, i have personally witnessed kids shooting everything from ritalin to crystal and heroin with an insulin syringe.

for almost three years now i have lived in that world, with the kids that live that life. i am the keynote speaker at The University of Western Ontario's social work week on the second of March. if anyone is in the area you are welcome to come see the work.
 
Jack Conrad said:
If you will forgive my indulgence,

This work is most definitely NOT photojournalism.
Nor is it intended as portraiture.

It's religious or spiritual iconography.
It's powerful stuff.

Jeffries gave these people something more than personal dignity.
He gave them a light in their eyes that depicts transcendence, a glimmer of light at the gates of Eden, so to speak. The clarity in their eyes is awesome to behold, as if God is somewhere in there.

He has made these people into more than poor old broken homeless people lazily waiting for a handout from some urbane and thoughtful corporate agent. He infused them with light, not darkness.

Even the blind guy has light pouring from his sightless eyes.

I think Jeffries intended his art to honor these people, not pity them. He honors those people by giving their likenesses a greater meaning. He gives them a religious spiritual significance. He imbues them with the iconic soul of humanity.

I think that's what he was trying to do, at least to some degree thereof.
Click to expand...
Dear Jack,

When I read what you wrote, I thought it was a little over the top. But that was only an intellectual reaction. Emotionally, your words brought tears to my eyes. You must be describing things right...

Thanks.

R.
 
I looked at these very powerful, thought-provoking images. I immediately got out my checkbook and cut a check to help the homeless. If that's the reaction that most people have to viewing this series, then I don't care if the photographer becomes a zillionaire because he did them. Job well done!

As a footnote, I don't consider the creator's intentions to malign, make fun of or "profit" from these images. I took the time to view the other series of available light images produced by the same photog. I can read a correlation between the two series in photographing the down-trodden. Both photo essays are similar in genre, and if published in printed form would be capable of garnering a Pulitzer.
 
emraphoto said:
to be the contrarian, i have personally witnessed kids shooting everything from ritalin to crystal and heroin with an insulin syringe.

for almost three years now i have lived in that world, with the kids that live that life. i am the keynote speaker at The University of Western Ontario's social work week on the second of March. if anyone is in the area you are welcome to come see the work.
Click to expand...

Are you making a profit? :socratian irony smiley:
 
kbg32 said:
No matter what you think, his images will sell and garner him tons of accolades, press, and make his career. He will befriend Brad and Angelina, Bono, and the Queen will bestow on him - a knighthood.

Certain subjects always attract surefire attention - the destitute, sex, and celebrities. People want to view the supposed lowest and highest denominators in life. What they want, what they desire, and what they could become. Is it real? Is it true? Is it life? Have we become numb?

"I like a look of Agony, because I know it's true -- men do not sham Convulsion, nor simulate, a Throe --"

Dickinson, Emily

Is this true?
Click to expand...

Yeah, right.

I look at this and I see someone who's worked hard. He's gone to places many of those who criticise him wouldn't dare. None of those people he approaches have to speak to him, and I believe he shows empathy and not a little courage. He's also captured something noble, which in its own way does make a statement about humanity.

So he's got a book out. Big deal. Probably netted him of the order of £10,000. You could probably make more per hour flipping burgers.
 
Paul T. said:
So he's got a book out. Big deal. Probably netted him of the order of £10,000.
Click to expand...

Unless it's a bestseller (in photo book terms) I'd really be surprised if he made any money on the book, let alone £10k. People have funny ideas on how much photographers earn making photo books.

Personally, I think the work is clichéd, uninspried, overphotoshopped crap but I do agree that it's really no big deal. He's getting a bit exposure but he sure isn't getting rich.
 
One thing I'm noticing and find quite fascinating. That the opionions we have on those portraits (whether ethic or not, we don't care now) vary so wildly from best-portraits-ever-am-so-touched-and-almost-see-God to clichéd-uninspried-overphotoshopped-crap. And I'm not sarcastic, this is truly interesting and fascinating to me.
 
Andrea Taurisano said:
One thing I'm noticing and find quite fascinating. That the opionions we have on those portraits (whether ethic or not, we don't care now) vary so wildly from best-portraits-ever-am-so-touched-and-almost-see-God to clichéd-uninspried-overphotoshopped-crap. And I'm not sarcastic, this is truly interesting and fascinating to me.
Click to expand...

Take any well known photographer out there and you'll find the same thing regarding fans and non-fans.
 
jsrockit said:
Take any well known photographer out there and you'll find the same thing regarding fans and non-fans.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I would. Nonetheless I find it a useful excercise to try to understand how other can possibly love what I dislike or how they can consider crap what I call marvelous, purely photographically or artistically speaking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom