-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Street summer fashions
- Thread starter Jim Kaye
- Start date
Are fashions only set by designers? What a snobbish attitude.
So ignore it. Who made you the arbiter of weirdness, anyway?
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Amazing how much attitudes vary on this topic.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
I know, I was responding to the other poster.
I know that, too. I was just trying to avoid this turning into another debate about the ethics of "street photography" in its various forms (which might broadly be considered as taking photographs of people around streets regardless of the photographer's methods or motivation, or might more narrowly be defined in terms of a particular approach, tradition, or artistic intent).
When this discussion comes up I'm always reminded about Paul Strand and the dummy lens he put on his camera which was meant deliberately to deceive people into thinking he was not taking their picture when, in fact, he was. "Street photography" or not?
Well sitting in a public place among a lot of other people with my camera quite visible could hardly be considered sneaky. As for dangerous, police officers have occasionally questioned me when I'm doing this sort of photography -- twice, in fact, when some public transportation was nearby. Apparently they must worry that anyone taking pictures around forms of public transportation may be planning a terrorist plot. Never mind the obviousness of using a DSLR for such a purpose (when there are so many smaller and sneakier alternatives nowadays)!
I feel the same way about mine. Jack of all trades and master of none. But it's still worth having for some occasions when I only want to carry one lens.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
I don't really care that much about fashion, it was irony. I just don't think that your photos had anything to do with Fashion, but rather, just photos of good looking women.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people taking photos of good looking women in public , but only if they seem like they want to be photographed, such as the recent photos of the Mermaid Parade in Coney Island. I dobt that any of these women would be happy to know that photos of themselves are up on the internet.
I think that if the women in these photos saw this post, they would definitely feel weirded out!
Then the real irony is that you'd bother to look here at all.
Gee, I'm so sorry I didn't meet your criteria for approval...So if you have nothing constructive to contribute here, why don't you go back to taking photos of your own paintings and complimenting people on pictures of bugs and their prepubescent sons.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Wow! You are telling me that you took the time to go through all of my past posts to try to find something to "get me" with? I guess that you really do have a lot of time on your hands, I mean with the hanging out in malls and taking photos of unexpecting women.
I try to be positive with most of my responses, and I try to encourage people on this forum, but I don;t think that posting photos like these is a responsibe thing to do. And I think that it is very disrespectful to the subjects in your photos.
I try to be positive with most of my responses, and I try to encourage people on this forum, but I don;t think that posting photos like these is a responsibe thing to do. And I think that it is very disrespectful to the subjects in your photos.
Not all of them by any means , just a few to see something about who you are and what you do here -- I quickly came to the conclusion that reading any more would be a waste of my time. And believe me, I didn't do it with any intent to "get" you, I was trying to put in context how you could suddenly appear here, make an uncalled for remark, and then complain that the post was "weird." THen you came back with that second post saying you aren't even interested in the subject of the post. I couldn't find any of your photos on a quick perusal of your postings, by the way. You do photograph, don't you? Or are you just a self-appointed critic?
If you don't ever get a free hour or two, I feel sorry for you. Maybe it explains your offensive attitude here.
OK, you've expressed your opinion. And others don't seem to mind and have made more positive comments. So I'd say you're done contributing anything useful here and should go look for other posts to latch onto, unless you're only interested in belaboring your point.
What, that I appreciate their beauty (as they have chosen to display it in public, in part through the clothing they select to wear)? And that I shared the images here (in the context of comments about the performance of a particular lens on a D300)?
How respectful is it to call someone's post here "weird?"
I guess we all have our own standards of behavior. Thanks for your comments.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Oh yes, Your response of
"why don't you go back to taking photos of your own paintings and complimenting people on pictures of bugs and their prepubescent sons."
was putting me into context.
I was trying to put in
THen you came
I enjoy looking at any and all of the posts of photos in this forum. I like to see what people are doing.
I couldn't find any of your photos on a quick
Yes, I do photograph. I don't just come on this forum for the hell of it. I worked for 4 years as a studio assistant to a professional photographer and I have a degree in art, so I do have at least a small idea about photography.
I would like to know what some of the Female memebers of this forum think of the post. I just don;t think that it is responsible for me not to bring up the issue. Maybe you are completely oblivious to the issues a person could have with this post, and I think that you might be, but you should know that this set of photographs is offensive, and other members , who might not be aware also(since most are men) should know that it is offensive, so that this kind of activity will stop.
So it is their fault? They are giving you permission to photgraph them and post photos of them on the internet because they dress this way?
And
You yourself have admitted that some of the women that you have photographed have come up to you, and that you delete the photos if they don't like their photo taken. What about the women who didn't see you photograph them? Or the women who didn't have the nerve to come up to you and ask for you to delete their photos.
Just the fact that you have had women let you know that they don't like being photographed should give you a clue that this may not be the best idea. You are right that what you are doing is legal, but I do not think that it is ethical. It is perpetuating a sexist/voyeristic impression of our hobby, and it makes people uncomfotable.
This is a great forum, and I love coming here to see peoples photos, but there needs to be some kind of responsibility by it's memebers to keep the posts respectful. You are free to post these if you want, but I am also free to respond.
Well weird was the most polite word that I could come up with. How does Sexist and Voyeristic sound?
Your welcome, enjoy your photos!
kungfusion
Senior Member
LOL, you both need to switch to decaff. There are plenty of things in the world worth getting upset about. Is this really one of them? Really?
--
http://flickr.com/photos/rcaron/
--
http://flickr.com/photos/rcaron/
P
pierre1
Guest
It seems that this type of photography makes self-appointed members of the morality police upset. These types have a holier than thou psychological state of mind, try to suppress freedom of expression and the celebration of beauty by laying out guilt trips. It's probably not their fault as they've been conditioned and infected by others to behave this way. I for one refuse to get infected as they have been 
Nota Bene This is a general statement FOR ALL threads like this one and not directed specifallly at any one member.
Happy shooting !
Pierre
--
' Don't let outside negative forces affect the way you choose to feel '
http://matrixone.zenfolio.com/
Nota Bene This is a general statement FOR ALL threads like this one and not directed specifallly at any one member.
Happy shooting !
Pierre
--
' Don't let outside negative forces affect the way you choose to feel '
http://matrixone.zenfolio.com/
M
Michael Oersigh
Guest
Those are pretty good, the lens seems fine. The focus seem on the clothes patterns.... if I am not mistaken.
Mike
Mike
You asked for it with your initial sarcastic remark and your choice of the word "weird" for what I posted, especially after you came back a second time to say you weren't even interested in what you accused me of not being interested in.
Well you apparently don't like what you see in this particular post, so why don't you go look somewhere else.
Oh, so working as a studio assistant and getting a degree in art make you the judge of morality for everyone, huh?
I'm well aware of the kind of mixed reactions these sorts of pictures elicit. I was hoping people would judge them just for what they are -- shots taken with a particular camera and lens with a particular purpose in mind. (You did read my words, didn't you? Or are you too obsessed with the photographs?) Obviously you didn't read what several other people wrote either -- not only were they not offended but several made positive remarks. So good luck with your crusade!
I don't believe anyone's permission is necessary for this purpose, especially yours. Look into the distinction between commercial and editorial use of photographs.
Rarely -- and BTW, I didn't say "women" specifically; men have occasionally asked me not to take their picture in public, as well, and I've responded in the same way I outlined in my previous post. When I do ask permission in a public place to take someone's picture who I don't know, sometimes they agree happily (maybe some are flattered), sometimes they agree but don't seem to really care one way or the other, and sometimes they decline. So I imagine different people have diverse reactions about having their picture taken in public and posted in an internet discussion about lenses and cameras. It is you and others with similar puritanical attitudes who are trying to turn this into something sexual or deviant -- that's the real problem (along with people who are truly voyeuristic -- snapping photos of women with cellphone cameras under bathroom stalls and such).
I imagine many are mature enough to just let it go if they don't like it -- more mature than you, apparently. My camera was not concealed and I was obviously taking pictures in a certain direction. Someone can always walk around behind me or cross the street and walk on the other side if they don't want to be where I was pointing it.
So again, if it makes you uncomfortable, don't look at it, and stop harassing me. Why don't you go chase after the pornography industry or the paparazzi who stalk celebrities, sometimes at high speeds, sometimes with fatal results?
"There needs to be..." is typical bureaucratese. Needs aren't "there" -- only people and other living beings have needs. In this instance, the need seems to be your need to harp on what you don't like about the photos I posted.
You claim to want to keep posts respectful. Your idea of respect is apparently to come into a thread with a sarcastic comment about "fashion" and then call the post, "weird." Well, evidently you think I'm weird and disrespectful, and since I think the same of you, I guess we're even.
Well, thanks for your permission. Sure you're free to go on responding, but why bother -- unless you really have nothing better to do.
Sounds like you live in a fantasy world, and if this is someone's idea of voyeurism I would say that it doesn't take much to excite them sexually. Oh, and I have made no prejudicial or discriminatory judgment or statement about women whose photos I posted here based on their being female -- which is what "sexism" is, in case you don't know. So please stop throwing around words that don't apply to the situation just to try to be insulting.
How about lightening up a little -- you're not going to save the world this way, believe me.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
The focus point was on the faces, actually, but with Continuous AF in the 21-point Dynamic Area AF mode it may have slipped off and been distracted by the brightly patterned clothes in some instances.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
I couldn't agree more! Thanks for the sensible comment.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
Wel if you read through the responses again you will plainly see that I am not the only one who thought that the post was wierd. Your intentions were questioned by several other members.
Well from the photos you posted, it is not clear that you take photos of anything other than attractive women. You yourself said that you have a cetain bent towards photographing attractive women.
Why can't YOU just be mature enough to let it go and just not do it?
Really? So you don't care about bothering people then? Then I'm sure that you would just love to be bothered on the street like this?
Well I think that you should read a few of the responses after the initial post to see how inocent they are. (this is irony again, just to let you know)
I guess not, but you sure aren't making it any better.
And what do they know of my intentions any more than you do?
Really? Please do a little homework before making statements like that. How about these:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=25692370
or these:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=20482040
or this:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=16971215
or these:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=17282612
just to list a few threads I've started or contributed to.
"It" doesn't bother me the way it apparently bothers you.
I've had my photo taken in public and it hasn't bothered me at all. What bothers me is people like you who purport to speak for everyone in the world with a moralistic message that I don't agree with. Don't you care that you are bothering me? Apparently not.
So let's be adults and just drop this, huh? It's not getting either of us anywhere.
--
Jim Kaye
'I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.' -- Ansel Adams, 1981
larsbc
Forum Pro
arielelf wrote:
[snip]
[snip]
larsbc
[snip]
What makes the photos offensive? I mean, looking at the photos only, and without making assumptions about the photographer's motives, what is offensive about them?
[snip]
You're basically saying that street photography is unethical, then. I mean, not everyone, men included, likes having their photo taken. So are you arguing that street photographers should stop pursuing their art because they are perpetuating this impression of sexist voyeurism?
larsbc
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum