Photography=Exploitation?

[Digital Prophet]

Originally Posted by Rick Waldroup

The photos are interesting but as far as her using these to make a political statement, well that is a little far fetched. I mean, when I first looked at these, the Bush administration never crossed my mind. When I found out that was what she was trying to accomplish, well it does kind of make you roll your eyes. Hey, I'm all for any kind of art that pushes political buttons and shows the utter incompetence of this administration- but I'm afraid this does not do that. These photos are just silly.

I could not agree more. What this could possibly have to do with anything other than over post processed images of kids balling is beyond me. But leave it to the easily offended to play right into her hands and give her all the free press she can handle.

Really in truth though I don't know why anyone is surprised or offended. Personally Pika and I thought they were kind of idiotic. But hey, whatever rings your dingy.

Prophet out.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by thejakestir

I think if Eddie Adams was killing people Just so he could get a picture you would almost have a point.

He took no action to prevent it....

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

http://www.paulkopeikingallery.com/current/index.htm
To be honest it doesn't take much to get kids at this age to start bawling their eyes out, especially if they are over tired.
I looked at the pics and rather saw some of the expressions as "comical" and thought what would their dad or mom look like in the same pose and just as mad at the world.
(may make a great project-get the kid all worked up-process the pic and then try to recreate the same shot using the parent-drool and all, but you would really need some adults that would let themselves be subjected to this).

Yeah it can be political but heck even a picture of a banana can be considered political: Banana Republics, Nixon's Nose, etc.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

He took no action to prevent it....

So are you saying that a photojournalist NOT stopping something from happing is the same thing as Greenberg pissing off little kids so she can put on a "art" show and make a political statement about whoever?


I would like to go up to Greenberg and say "I'm sorry, but your husband and kids were kill in a tragic accident." and when she starts crying, take her picture and say "Thanks! This will be perfect for my Donald Trump blows gallery"

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by thejakestir

So are you saying that a photojournalist NOT stopping something from happing is the same thing as Greenberg pissing off little kids so she can put on a "art" show and make a political statement about whoever?


I would like to go up to Greenberg and say "I'm sorry, but your husband and kids were kill in a tragic accident." and when she starts crying, take her picture and say "Thanks! This will be perfect for my Donald Trump blows gallery"

I think not acting to prevent a death is a bit more serious than taking lollypops away from childern. As for art and political statements, all art is some form of political statment.

I think once more we are seeing preceptions of her politics affecting the preception of her art.

[TxKent]

Originally Posted by thejakestir

I would like to go up to Greenberg and say "I'm sorry, but your husband and kids were kill in a tragic accident." and when she starts crying, take her picture and say "Thanks! This will be perfect for my Donald Trump blows gallery"

Man, who peed in your post-toasties? LOL

I just say to my wife "I have something I need to tell you" and she gets all panicky. Usually it's something like "I noticed your tire is a bit low on air, so I filled it up." :)

[Abel]

Discussing the topic at hand is fine... Let's just keep politics etc out of the discussion.

I am not saying the thread is guilty of that... I can see how this thread could take a turn for the worst in an instant hence the fari warning now.

At first mention of anything political from this point on will result in the thread being closed.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

I think not acting to prevent a death is a bit more serious than taking lollypops away from childern.

That sounds like you are saying that Eddie Adams was makeing snuff pics?

Edit: Sorry, I'm just being a d*ck

[Daniel Bates]

I guess I'm just a shameless exploitationist, then...

[Rick Waldroup]

I think where John is coming from, is that Eddie Adams said numerous times that he saw what was about to happen several minutes before it happened, but that he still felt powerless to do anything to stop it. Still, does that make it right that he did not try to stop it? I don't think so. What would any of us do at that moment? I think he simply reacted instictively - he raised his camera and shot

As far as the lady photographer's techniques for getting the baby shots - well, it does seem a little on the bizarre side - but if it is for art's sake AND to make a political statement, then maybe it is for the best. I do not agree with her means of getting the shot and I also think that the photos are really kind of lame - but I applaude her sentiment. Unfortunately, she is the type of liberal that gives the rest of us a bad name.

Nothing is easy in this world, especially trying to make a political statement when sometimes it seems that the majority is against you.

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter" Matin Luther King, Jr.

[Allen]

Again, even though I don't like this personal project of hers...I STILL want to know how to make my photos POP like she does, dammit! :)

[sbug_adam]

i love everything she does.. including the crying kids..

adam

[Michelle Allmon]

hmm.

i have some pretty sweet pictures of crying kids & babies. i didn't take their lollipop, tho, all i did was pull my camera out. :D