>>>> Street Photography eXchange #37a <<< Locked

Started Mar 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
This thread is locked.
fad OP
Forum ProPosts: 13,988Gear list
Re: But to those who yield, he is much more gentle
In reply to hexar, Mar 27, 2013

hexar wrote:

By the way I am absolutely blown away by the fact that when I ask Frank about his motivations in respect of shooting love couples as presented in this thread someone else  namely XTOPH answers that question for FAD with the following text passage:




You seem like a real nice guy, so I'll explain things one more time.

You know, this is the internet.   One has to be a little careful not to come across the wrong way.   There are all kinds of bitter, thwarted people who post on the net, just waiting to reinforce their nihilism by spurting out a little gratuitous negativity.  They are best ignored.  But Chris and I are not that kind of guy!

Here is what you wrote:

A.  Frank, what is your drive to get so deep into the intimacy of  couples like this ?   Would a pic like this not be only  of value for those exposed ?   What is your point capturing  and saving   isolated  exposures of these couples ?   I would feel myself a bit too much voyeur  rather than photograper in  situations like this .

You hit all the buzz words that nasty, soulless, joyless people who envy the spontaneity of street photography, use to try to put it down.  (I know that's not you, but that is what you said.)  What you wrote was a far cry from:

B.  Frank, we've all seen a lot of photos of couples clinging to each other.   What did you find in these shots that was interesting?

You were in fact attacking the basic artistic license that lies behind all street photography.   You accused me, not only of violating their intimacy, but of driving very deep to do so (unfortunate metaphor - trash diving?  sexual penetration?)   You accuse me of exposing them (hey, they were exposing their own feelings on a public street.)  You did not ask why I thought the photos good enough to share, but why I dared to capture and save such photos, which are very standard fare for SP and have been so forever.   You accused me of being more a voyeur than a photographer.

Their sexual content is very, very mild, PG at most, but I can understand how different people react differently to sexual stimuli and situations.  If you found disturbing what I find witty and charming and romantic and delightful, who am I to disagree with you?   It's a very personal thing.  But I'm quite happy that I can see more than the hot sexual subtext in these situations and try to follow the masters in making interesting art.

But your words were strong words, fighting words, and quite uncalled for.   You were, in effect, delegitimizing every street photographer who has ever lived.  You were waving the ultimate red flag --you SPers are all intrusive voyeurs who have no legitimacy.    Chris is a very nice guy, but your post deserved his strong response, which was measured and learned and quite instructive.  A valuable contribution, I thought, and to be applauded.

For whatever reason, you are pretending you merely said B, when in fact you said A.   For what you actually said, I think you were answered in a measured, respectful, instructive and appropriate fashion.

-- hide signature --

shot in downtown Manhattan.
http://sidewalkshadows.com/blog/ (street photos)

 fad's gear list:fad's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Nikon D3S Nikon D800 Nikon D4S Nikon D810 +16 more
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow