Shoot the Homeless!

[Andy K]

I photograph buskers. I show them the camera first and raise an eyebrow, and usually get a nod. I'll then give them a couple of quid in their hat. Seems a fair exchange.

 

[rover]

Ah ... "Shoot the Homeless!" is not the best choice for a title, is it? "Photograph
the Homeless" would be appropriate and not prone to satire and sarcasm by some.

For all,

The title of this thread was taken from a previous thread regarding a satirical article posted on the web. It is not the creation of the original poster of this thread, nor is this a discussion of the article which touched this subject.

 

[Andrew McK]

I feel bad about photographing homeless people and it's something that I've so far avoided doing.
There are a couple of homeless people begging in the street that I sometimes pass. They are both pretty well known faces as they are alway there.
I'd love to take their photo one day but last time I didn't have the nerve to do it.
One of them I've never spoken to, the other I have.He helped me find someplace one day and in return next time I gave him money, shook his hand and now everytime I see him (or he sees me) he is always very warm and all "how are you, doing pal? are you alright!".

I don't feel in anyway bad for taking photos of buskers. They are street performers and I feel shooting them is fair game.
But I ask myself about the rights of a photographer and also of what I feel comfortable shooting and why I'm doing it all in the first place.
What is my aim of photography?
And my aim is to take good photos. To show the world I live in and to show it the way that I see it.
I'm not doing it to exploit anyone or anything and nor do I ever want to.
Now this is where I have a problem.

Walking through town last week I passed a guy meeting his girl and as I approached them he put his hand up to her face and touched her chin.
As I'm standing abour 6 feet away from them and with a busy street as a backdrop, I thought that little moment of affection would have made a great photo.
But even if I had it ready to shoot. I wouldn't have done it because I feel like I'm preying on them even though it's in a busy street and it's literally in my face.

I feel the same way about shooting homeless people, like I'm preying on them.
It seems to me that most other people replying to this thread feel the same way.
If I ever do photograph those 2 homeless people, I won't feel bad about doing so as I'll be taking a portrait rather than a candid street shot> As I'd make the effort to get to know them before I did anything.

 

[RJBender]

For all,

The title of this thread was taken from a previous thread regarding a satirical article posted on the web. It is not the creation of the original poster of this thread, nor is this a discussion of the article which touched this subject.

Mike Johnston has an update on his blog:

UPDATE: I've been forwarded at least one thread from a far-off forum (not dpreview) that discusses this post (at considerable length) as if it were for real. Really, it's satire. Would I joke about it being satire? —MJ
Is Johnston talking about RFF?

Here are a few samples of Johnston's humor:

"I used to find it difficult to keep my good side facing the cameras," said The Angel of Mercy, a homeless woman in an extraordinarily dirty taffeta tu-tu. Several others nearby mumbled in agreement, or just mumbled. One man claimed all the photographers were government agents, then ran away.

"Oh, it's annoying, all right," said English Roger, who dresses entirely in cast-off plastic bags. "It's always been annoying. I mean, it makes you want to slap them. I'd give it a shot, but let's face it, I've been drinking Sterno and mouthwash for thirty years and the lobes of my brain aren't even touching anymore. If I tried to run I'd probably disintegrate. Still, does that give them a right to snap away at me without even asking for a by-your-leave?"

Wow, this guy should write for Mad Magazine. If I was 12 years old I would be LMAO.

R.J.

 

[Andy K]

Mike Johnston has an update on his blog:

UPDATE: I've been forwarded at least one thread from a far-off forum (not dpreview) that discusses this post (at considerable length) as if it were for real. Really, it's satire. Would I joke about it being satire? —MJ
Is Johnston talking about RFF?

Here are a few samples of Johnston's humor:

"I used to find it difficult to keep my good side facing the cameras," said The Angel of Mercy, a homeless woman in an extraordinarily dirty taffeta tu-tu. Several others nearby mumbled in agreement, or just mumbled. One man claimed all the photographers were government agents, then ran away.

"Oh, it's annoying, all right," said English Roger, who dresses entirely in cast-off plastic bags. "It's always been annoying. I mean, it makes you want to slap them. I'd give it a shot, but let's face it, I've been drinking Sterno and mouthwash for thirty years and the lobes of my brain aren't even touching anymore. If I tried to run I'd probably disintegrate. Still, does that give them a right to snap away at me without even asking for a by-your-leave?"

Wow, this guy should write for Mad Magazine. If I was 12 years old I would be LMAO.

R.J.

If you take those paragraphs completely out of context, as you have done, they do not appear very humorous. However, in the context of the entire article, which satirises political correctness and the exploitation of homeless people by 'art' students and their ilk, then it is quite funny.

 

[Rich Silfver]

I have a very strong Mike Johnston filter - it filters out about 100% of what he writes anywhere on the internet. Ironically as well it's also my B.S. filter....

 

[RJBender]

If you take those paragraphs completely out of context, as you have done, they do not appear very humorous. However, in the context of the entire article, which satirises political correctness and the exploitation of homeless people by 'art' students and their ilk, then it is quite funny.

Andy,

If you removed the stereotypes in those two paragraghs, would the piece still be funny?

R.J.

 

[Andy K]

R J, I'm guessing you don't find The Office funny either. As I said, take the stereotypes in the context of the entire article.

 

[Andy K]

Since I'm not ironically challenged, I don't filter out his stuff. In fact, I book-mark his stuff. 😎

Ditto.

Now please excuse me, I'm off to download Ricky Gervais's latest podcast. 😉

 

[Rich Silfver]

I have the complete CD set (including the xmas special episode) - AND I have the Ricky Gervais podcast on my ipod..still dont like Mike Johnston.

 

[ch1]

Thank god we don't have to many homeless people here to shoot !!!

The ones which are, are that by choice, not by lack of proper government.

Now just the title of this thread "Shoot the homeless" says enough about the originator, whatever he/she tried to achive by placing this thread..... And I'm sure lots of forumists will cover this up with the usual blabla and BS and more BlaBla and more BS ...

What remains is the fact that starting a thread with "Shoot the Homeless" is pretty sick in my point of view.... no political statement here, just a humanitarian touch !

I was the originator of this thread and yes, I intended it to be as provocative as it is ironic.

Photorapher shoot lots of things: wildlife, children, wedding parties, politicians, movies stars etc. We play with the word "shoot" all of the time knowing with a wink and a nod its other ramifications!

As to not having a lot of homeless in Germany. Don't be so positive about that. Wander around the streets near the rail stations of large German cities late at night and you'll find quite a few folks "sleeping rough".

And not all homeless are visibly so. In some places, they are working poor and live in their automobiles or travel on subway trains all night. In NYC we have shelters which may or may not be preferable to the streets.

This has been a very enjoyable thread - and I'm glad I started it. As I said, NOT shooting the homeless makes them invisible to those more fortunate. Shooting them in a sensitive and caring manner humanizes and individualizes them - and I think that is a good thing.