Nello: Aaah yes I forgot, it's 2014 so it's ok to take photos of your half naked kids and sell them over the internet. I wonder what the naked kid with the muddy feet will say when grown-up knowing that dad made money out of this "art".
These kids are not "half naked". They wear decent clothes, as every kid wears at the beach. If you think it's indecent, it's your personal moral that overrides your photographic judgment. You can think what you want, but you can't impose your moral to others people, as long they respect the common laws.
I hope Dad leaves sometimes his camera and play with his children. I think Mr. Laboile is a good photographer, I feel humanity and life in these shots, even some of them look "too much" composed. I prefer simple photographies with no effect, and I'm not interested in his family topic. But he shows us that we can make good photography just around us.I also read his biography: he tells he's a "father of 6". Bravo! I have 2 daughters, I don't know how could I bring up 6 kids. That said, I notice he don't quote the other human being who helps him and make born and educate his kids: so, where is Mum?;-)
grock: I used to think the comments on indie music blogs were the worst, but photography websites are really catching up. So much freaking jealousy and pettiness. So many people here can't stand it if someone is successful if they have what are deemed to be less than perfect technical skills with a camera, or if their composition seems amateurish or non-groundbreaking. Photography exists so that people can look at and enjoy photographs. Guess what? If someone enjoys looking at a photo you took, you succeeded. Nothing else--the brand and cost of your camera, the artistic merit, the people paying for the photo, the post-processing, the lack of preparation, etc-- matters.
Being successfull has no direct link with quality of your photographies. Being a professional doesn't mean you are an artist: it means you earn money from your job because you answer to a market. It's a big difference between art and business. It's a fact that communicating your work has became often more important than the quality of your work itself. That said, everyone, amateur or professional, can criticize any work.
Marty4650: Stanton has brought a new element to the equation, something much more powerful than better gear or photographic skill.
He brings empathy, personality, and a genuine affection for his subjects that make his portraits so meaningful.
This is so much better than those stealth street photographers who take photos of homeless people with telephoto lenses. Stanton walks right up to them, engages them, and listens to their stories.
This man is a real artist.
Nothing new. He's on the same way than many photographers before him. I' m not sure the results are really original or amazing from a strictly photographic point of view. No creation, no tranposition. I agree with reginaldwald: his use of social medias makes the difference.
reginalddwight: Stanton is able to connect emotionally with passersby and befriend them before snapping their photo. His success as a street photographer to have his subjects at ease is no different than what thousands of other photographers do on a daily basis in the studio.
What makes him name-worthy is his use of social media's largest platform and addition of quotes from his subjects in America's most populous city to enhance their portraits to give them a human interest angle.
Success needs 25% of skills and 75% of communication.
When I look at a photography, I can immediatly know if it has been "stolen" from the subject, or "shared" with the subject. That's a huge difference. My preferences always go to the second "school" of street photography.That said, I am not sufficiently educated to know whether Mr Stanton's works have "something more" than thousands of others.