patois
Established
I'm a homeless outreach worker by day and I visit people living in all sorts of spaces. Our main rule is that regardless of what my opinion of where the person is living it is still their "home" and we must behave the way we would as a guest anywhere. Our agency has a no photo rule which we have only broken once. Your challenge is to keep the humanity and the notion of "home," in the images. Far too often, I find street photography and poverty related images parasitic and gross. The key is not to feel what the other person is feeling, because you can't but to treat the person with respect.
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor 300 2.8 IF-ED AIS on F2AS taken with Tri-X.
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. And that's cool. I personally have never felt what I do as a street photographer is "parasitic and gross." So I don't feel like I need to be offended. Not at all.
Patois: I would like you to expand on why this type of photography is so objectionable to you. And the way you mention that you work with the poor and others photograph them makes it seem like you have some moral superiority. Which you don't. Well, not IMO.
What I shoot is real, it's not set up ... It's life.
Life isn't always pretty but "to me" a real unstaged photo on the street is a rare and beautiful thing.
For me, a touched-up photo of a model lit up with lights and pasted with makeup is objectionable. But that's just me.
The fact that some of my subjects are poor had nothing to do with it at all. I don't ask how much money you've got in your pockets before I consider you a worthy subject.
Nikkor 300 2.8 IF-ED AIS on F2AS Tri-X
Nikkor 16 mm 2.8 AIS on F2AS Tri-X
Your results are based on your approach.
Last edited:
AgentX
Well-known
A lot of great, compassionate and/or interesting work has been done of the poor, and I'm sure will be done in the future.
However, the poor, the dispossessed, citizens of developing countries...they've become part of a general dialogue of what's "picturesque," or at least worthy to photograph simply by nature of what it is. Like picket fences, clapboard churches, and old factories. So no, I tend not to photograph this stuff simply for the sake of adding yet another stereotyped image to the cosmic file folder of "pictures of poor people," and maybe showing them off for my own ego, helping me craft a "man of the world who's seen things, sometimes terrible things" self-image.
I have two photos from Africa in the gallery (and more not posted) that I find problematic for just this reason. Took them and still not sure what to make of them, even though they're not particularly interesting images. While living in Africa, I found it very hard to just take photos of people for no specific purpose, both those in really vulnerable situations like refugees and those just going about their daily lives.
I have friends who can joyously engage everyone everywhere, snapping digital shots of people in the third world without the least bit of self-consciousness or enjoining a bad reaction from anyone. I can't do that; part of it may be some general thing about my demeanor, part of it may be the fact that I'm often using more elaborate-looking equipment, and most of it's probably my own conflicted-ness about doing it and a good deal of over-thinking. Although as a teenage photo student, I thought Sontag was full of it, I have come to see photography as an act of possession in many ways, which can easily take on aggressive or exploitative overtones. But at my moments of the least self-loathing, I can also manage see these shots as simple notes from my diary of where I've lived and what I've seen.
If I was a journalist, documentarian, or artist with a story, agenda, or project going on, I might have felt differently. I did consider several projects, such as a portrait series of people involved in transport (bearers, bicyclists, moto-taxi and mini-bus drivers) or even some more arty stuff about Western perceptions of the "other," but work and civil wars and elections kind of got in the way.
However, the poor, the dispossessed, citizens of developing countries...they've become part of a general dialogue of what's "picturesque," or at least worthy to photograph simply by nature of what it is. Like picket fences, clapboard churches, and old factories. So no, I tend not to photograph this stuff simply for the sake of adding yet another stereotyped image to the cosmic file folder of "pictures of poor people," and maybe showing them off for my own ego, helping me craft a "man of the world who's seen things, sometimes terrible things" self-image.
I have two photos from Africa in the gallery (and more not posted) that I find problematic for just this reason. Took them and still not sure what to make of them, even though they're not particularly interesting images. While living in Africa, I found it very hard to just take photos of people for no specific purpose, both those in really vulnerable situations like refugees and those just going about their daily lives.
I have friends who can joyously engage everyone everywhere, snapping digital shots of people in the third world without the least bit of self-consciousness or enjoining a bad reaction from anyone. I can't do that; part of it may be some general thing about my demeanor, part of it may be the fact that I'm often using more elaborate-looking equipment, and most of it's probably my own conflicted-ness about doing it and a good deal of over-thinking. Although as a teenage photo student, I thought Sontag was full of it, I have come to see photography as an act of possession in many ways, which can easily take on aggressive or exploitative overtones. But at my moments of the least self-loathing, I can also manage see these shots as simple notes from my diary of where I've lived and what I've seen.
If I was a journalist, documentarian, or artist with a story, agenda, or project going on, I might have felt differently. I did consider several projects, such as a portrait series of people involved in transport (bearers, bicyclists, moto-taxi and mini-bus drivers) or even some more arty stuff about Western perceptions of the "other," but work and civil wars and elections kind of got in the way.
Last edited:
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Why are you doing it?
Answer that question and you'll answer if it's worthwhile or not. Everything else is secondary.
This reminds me of Bill Jay's long time project "Men Like Me"...a truly original, unique and very compassionate body of work. The title says it all.
Some people shoot, and show, their work to self-aggrandize. To win awards. To pump up themselves. I guess that's one thing, but just ask yourself why you're doing it.
Photography is just a means to an end...a tool. You can use a tool to build a shelter or to bash someone's head in. Your choice.
Answer that question and you'll answer if it's worthwhile or not. Everything else is secondary.
This reminds me of Bill Jay's long time project "Men Like Me"...a truly original, unique and very compassionate body of work. The title says it all.
Some people shoot, and show, their work to self-aggrandize. To win awards. To pump up themselves. I guess that's one thing, but just ask yourself why you're doing it.
Photography is just a means to an end...a tool. You can use a tool to build a shelter or to bash someone's head in. Your choice.