TWoK
Well-known
I went out today and took three high calorie, shelf-stable meals to 4 homeless gents today.
So the four of them have to fight it out to see which one doesn't eat?
Or were the meals immediately traded for alcohol or drugs?
Or were the meals immediately traded for alcohol or drugs?
Al Kaplan
Veteran
This thread is going off in sensless directions. Not every homeless person uses alcohol or drugs, no more so than photographers.
With the current state of the economy how many of us have put off buying that new camera, a new car, redoing the kitchen, going to Jamaica for a week? Some of the homeless were living a lot closer than us to the financial edge when the economy tanked. Some have underlying mental problems that have nothing to do with alcohol or drug use. Some just might want that Kerouac experience of being On The Road.
With the current state of the economy how many of us have put off buying that new camera, a new car, redoing the kitchen, going to Jamaica for a week? Some of the homeless were living a lot closer than us to the financial edge when the economy tanked. Some have underlying mental problems that have nothing to do with alcohol or drug use. Some just might want that Kerouac experience of being On The Road.
I've put off redoing my kitchen for the last 56 years.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
TWoK
Well-known
No, sorry I meant 3 to each person. This particular park has only 4 homeless people, so although they may fight it out for other reasons and routinely do, they had more than 10,000 calories each wroth of food.
TWoK
Well-known
In my area I've yet to find a bum who doesn't have a taste for Orion Southern Star. I know not everyone on the streets drinks all day, but I've yet to find the one or two that don't.
KenRothman
Takes really bad pictures
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I'm reminded of the movie Pecker by John Waters. The idea of shooting people who are on the street seems artful to some. When the tables are turned some don't seem to like it. This topic should never be considered art, it's documentary.
As Al Kaplan pointed out above, many people who were 'on the edge' now are 'on the street'. I knew one. The topic needs coverage to initiate some level of action in response to a growing social problem. I never saw this level of poverty 15 years ago. Now people are accustomed to it. For me this acceptance is totally wrong. Human lives are being wasted. It's time to do something and it's time to reach out.
My 2 cents.
As Al Kaplan pointed out above, many people who were 'on the edge' now are 'on the street'. I knew one. The topic needs coverage to initiate some level of action in response to a growing social problem. I never saw this level of poverty 15 years ago. Now people are accustomed to it. For me this acceptance is totally wrong. Human lives are being wasted. It's time to do something and it's time to reach out.
My 2 cents.
dmr
Registered Abuser
I agree, but even then I'm not so sure that it even works anymore. The issue to me seems that photos of the homeless end up in galleries and are bought and viewed by the rich... that's just pure exploitation.
KM-25
Well-known
Look Away...
Look Away...
I was homeless from age 15-16, about 9 months. Things at my folks house were bad, abusive, verbally, physically. I left, it was better. I lived under a freeway abutment, in a park and the best place, in the attic above the garage in my friend's mom's house for three months, she never knew.
I got back on my feet, worked two jobs while going to night school to get my HS diploma. Then I joined the Navy, launched my career as a photographer, never looked back, never had to. I haven't ever photographed a homeless person because I have not seen the photograph I absolutely *had* to take. I don't care for cliche's and that is what I see most in images of the Homeless.
But in my book project, I have decided to touch upon it. The idea was born of a conversation with Eugene Richards following a workshop a couple years back.
It's gong to be hard, very dangerous and very, very disconcerting. I am going to be homeless again, with no money, no phone, no food. But I will have a camera and I will show you what a homeless person sees in his world. What it looks like to have cameras pointed at your face, knowing you are about to be exploited in yet another Flickr bred cliche...scraggly beard unshaven, hungry, no money, a ratty beater Nikon hidden from view, looking up from my cardboard on the sidewalk as a homeless person.
The reason?
I want to remember what it was like to be homeless and to get fed up enough to have had enough, to find comfort in the pain of the changes that will have to happen. I want to touch that helpless pained youth and frame how I saw a world that looked away when I looked up to it.
I will not photograph the homeless, but only my self....and what it feels like to look up at a world that looks away...
This one is for you Alan Kaplan.
Look Away...
I was homeless from age 15-16, about 9 months. Things at my folks house were bad, abusive, verbally, physically. I left, it was better. I lived under a freeway abutment, in a park and the best place, in the attic above the garage in my friend's mom's house for three months, she never knew.
I got back on my feet, worked two jobs while going to night school to get my HS diploma. Then I joined the Navy, launched my career as a photographer, never looked back, never had to. I haven't ever photographed a homeless person because I have not seen the photograph I absolutely *had* to take. I don't care for cliche's and that is what I see most in images of the Homeless.
But in my book project, I have decided to touch upon it. The idea was born of a conversation with Eugene Richards following a workshop a couple years back.
It's gong to be hard, very dangerous and very, very disconcerting. I am going to be homeless again, with no money, no phone, no food. But I will have a camera and I will show you what a homeless person sees in his world. What it looks like to have cameras pointed at your face, knowing you are about to be exploited in yet another Flickr bred cliche...scraggly beard unshaven, hungry, no money, a ratty beater Nikon hidden from view, looking up from my cardboard on the sidewalk as a homeless person.
The reason?
I want to remember what it was like to be homeless and to get fed up enough to have had enough, to find comfort in the pain of the changes that will have to happen. I want to touch that helpless pained youth and frame how I saw a world that looked away when I looked up to it.
I will not photograph the homeless, but only my self....and what it feels like to look up at a world that looks away...
This one is for you Alan Kaplan.
Last edited:
_mark__
Well-known
All you need to do to empathize with one facet of homelessness is abandon you home for a week and live on the streets, take absolutely no money and two blankets. Report back to this thread with your experiences.
@KM-25 good luck with your project.
@KM-25 good luck with your project.
csg
csg
When I first picked up a camera I took a few snaps of homeless people, thrilled that I would have a picture with some 'grit' in it. But the pictures were no good. As someone pointed out, as subjects go photographing homeless people -- its like the twinkies of photography: quick rush, but of little value and you feel like crap after taking the picture. But I digress.
I am somewhat conflicted by this thread. One post suggested that their poverty was not a photo-op. But if not, then what is a photo-op? Is then someone's wealth not a photo-op? Is someone's distress, happiness, boredom, etc., not a photo-op? We're not left with much, are we.
Other's object to the exploitation, that we take these photos but don't compensate the homeless person. That its a cheap thrill. But is this not true for all of street photography? Do not all photographers (except for professionals using paid models) exploit their subjects? How about the lover's in Lovers Lane? Every time I take a picture of a stranger that is of interest to me I am indeed 'exploiting' them. Its the nature of what we do, no?
I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm honestly interested in these questions.
I am somewhat conflicted by this thread. One post suggested that their poverty was not a photo-op. But if not, then what is a photo-op? Is then someone's wealth not a photo-op? Is someone's distress, happiness, boredom, etc., not a photo-op? We're not left with much, are we.
Other's object to the exploitation, that we take these photos but don't compensate the homeless person. That its a cheap thrill. But is this not true for all of street photography? Do not all photographers (except for professionals using paid models) exploit their subjects? How about the lover's in Lovers Lane? Every time I take a picture of a stranger that is of interest to me I am indeed 'exploiting' them. Its the nature of what we do, no?
I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm honestly interested in these questions.
dseelig
David
Homeless
Homeless
I was orphaned at 16 been on my own since then I ma 52 now a working phiotogrpaher. when I shoot homeless people they get to know me.
http://www.davidseelig.com/Site/Personal_Work_and_New_Orleans__/Pages/Hollywood_Boulevard_.html#32
Here is a link
Homeless
I was orphaned at 16 been on my own since then I ma 52 now a working phiotogrpaher. when I shoot homeless people they get to know me.
http://www.davidseelig.com/Site/Personal_Work_and_New_Orleans__/Pages/Hollywood_Boulevard_.html#32
Here is a link
_mark__
Well-known
Look at it from another perspective, it seems photographing the homeless on one's doorstep is in bad taste but when done on another continent the homeless living in poverty are fair game? One is cliché where the other is sophisticated reportage, give me a break!
DRabbit
Registered
I'm not a big street photographer (though have always wanted to get better at it). With that in mind, here's my opinion...
I look at it this way: Folks without a home are people just like everyone else. I have taken a few photographs of the homeless. Sometimes there was a wonderful opportunity to talk with them, buy them a slice of pizza and get to know them. Sometimes there was no such chance (because they were sleeping or far away). I'm an equal opportunity shooter... if I'm going to take a picture of a homed-person I find interesting, than why not a homeless person I find interesting?
I recently had a discussion on another forum about someone on the street who had a visible disability (not homeless). I did not want to take his photo because of his disability, but because he looked like the most interesting person in general and his disability was certainly part of his overall presence. I did not take the photo (my own fear kept me from it) but the discussion we had on the forum went in all different directions... including several who thought it was exploitive to want to take the young man's photo.
I could make the argument that treating someone with "kid gloves" or as "special" is quite offensive. I grew up with a father who was disabled, semi-homeless for a short period of time, and a drunk. He did NOT like when people treated him like a "gimp" (his words) or as if he were different. He wanted to be treated like a human being.
And from that perspective, if I'm willing to talk with, walk with, or even take a photo of any stranger on the street, why not someone who is without a home?
----
ps. KM-25: Your project sounds incredibly interesting.
I look at it this way: Folks without a home are people just like everyone else. I have taken a few photographs of the homeless. Sometimes there was a wonderful opportunity to talk with them, buy them a slice of pizza and get to know them. Sometimes there was no such chance (because they were sleeping or far away). I'm an equal opportunity shooter... if I'm going to take a picture of a homed-person I find interesting, than why not a homeless person I find interesting?
I recently had a discussion on another forum about someone on the street who had a visible disability (not homeless). I did not want to take his photo because of his disability, but because he looked like the most interesting person in general and his disability was certainly part of his overall presence. I did not take the photo (my own fear kept me from it) but the discussion we had on the forum went in all different directions... including several who thought it was exploitive to want to take the young man's photo.
I could make the argument that treating someone with "kid gloves" or as "special" is quite offensive. I grew up with a father who was disabled, semi-homeless for a short period of time, and a drunk. He did NOT like when people treated him like a "gimp" (his words) or as if he were different. He wanted to be treated like a human being.
And from that perspective, if I'm willing to talk with, walk with, or even take a photo of any stranger on the street, why not someone who is without a home?
----
ps. KM-25: Your project sounds incredibly interesting.
Last edited:
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I take offense. But then I do not differentiate people as homeless vs. with homes any more than I do male vs. female, young vs. old, gay vs. straight, immigrant vs. native born or any of the other labels some chose to assign.
I simply treat them all with dignity and respect.
And I am very opposed to assigning labels to people.
edit: DRabbit said it better than I did.
Last edited:
