Power dynamics between photographer and model.

[Brad_]

<center>

<img src= "http://citysnaps.net/2011%20photos/FrankkiBruiser.jpg">

</center><P>

.

<P>

 

 

Kristina, when I shoot on the street and engage strangers for portraits, I grow a bit more each time, in

multiple ways. That growth is important to me and is something I enjoy as well. Keep on shooting out there!

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Kristina, Lange wasn't photographing just people, she was photographing individuals. She saw and found that intimacy and it is visually translated. Notice how Lange typically doesn't shoot <em>at</em> people. She typically captures a person's uniqueness, not that person's "sameness" to other people. Diff'rent strokes.</p>

[kristina_kraft]

<p><strong>Fred,</strong> yes, I feel I have a right to say about any photograph that had been taken of poor immigrants, or of the Depression era from where I <em>sit. </em>I don't judge. This is not my profession. And I am not righteous either. I simply think that case sensitive situations, such as Lange's portrait, should required a financial support. I don't have money to pay people, so I take pictures of people whose life is settled and who are happy and fulfilled in their soul, who are emotionally open in front of me, or to me. And whose paths in life intertwine with mine. <br>

I appreciate your second reply. <br>

<strong><br /></strong></p>

[kristina_kraft]

<p><strong>Brad</strong>, I browsed rather quickly through your web site. This is a nice engaging photograph. I read about this photo. You are serious about raising money for youth on the street. Here in England there are photographers who also do projects with socially sensitive people. I guess you should know how to do it, so that feels natural.</p>

 

[Norma Desmond]

<blockquote>

<p>I feel it was unfair that Lange didn't pay to the immigrant, poor mother.</p>

<p>I feel I have a right to say about any photograph that had been taken of poor immigrants, or of the Depression era from where I <em>sit. </em>I don't judge.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Kristina, "I feel it was unfair" is a judgment.</p>

<p>Of course, you have a right to say it.</p>

<p>Lange was on assignment from the federal government.</p>

<p>Here's something about the photo from <em>Popular Photography,</em> 1960:</p>

<p><em>"After returning home, Lange alerted the editor of a San Francisco newspaper to the plight of the workers at the camp, presenting him with two of her photos. The editor informed federal authorities and published an article that included Lange's images. As a result, the government rushed a shipment of 20,000 lbs. of food to the camp. The photos' wider impact included influencing John Steinbeck in the writing of his novel </em>The Grapes of Wrath."</p>

<p>Photojournalism is not about paying subjects to get photos, nor should it be. It is often about raising awareness and a good photojournalistic effort can have a great impact, as Lange and the other FSA photographers did. It demands a kind of professional ethic and objectivity. I know Ms. Thompson, the woman pictured in the famous photo, had gripes later on in life. Sometimes interests collide and neither party is right or wrong. That Ms. Thompson may have been even sjustifiably upset at never receiving a penny doesn't mean it was in any way unfair of Lange not to have paid her.</p>

<p>Of course, we can never be sure, but had Lange paid people to get her photos, my guess is that many today would still be judging, claiming that was unethical photojournalistic practice which brought into question the authenticity of the photos and her assignment. How much of the Depression had been staged? It's very easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, especially when someone else's ethics and reputation are on the line. I, for one, certainly don't want photojournalists paying subjects for taking their photos. It could undermine the core of the profession.</p>

[Brad_]

Thanks Kristina, here's a little context...

 

That particular area of San Francisco, The Tenderloin, has a dynamic that's very complex and difficult to encapsulate in a few sentences. It's a neighborhood known (to many) for its high population density, violent crime, heroin/crack/meth use, gang activity, human sex trafficking, poor social services, mental illness, alcoholism, HIV/AIDS, unemployment, prostitution, and more. I see it differently and love being in the mix, talking to people, listening to their stories, and photographing. Everybody has something on their mind and appreciate being listened to, rather than judged. It's an opportunity to learn something new. If you approach people straight-up with camera in hand, offering respect and dignity, people respond positively, even gang members and dealers, and you can shoot just about anything - to the limits of your personal ethics.

 

I mostly focus on taking portraits of people I meet on the street. Many times I return with prints to give back to subjects. Once I had a guy who controlled a block's activities, on the verge of tears when I unexpectedly handed him his portrait taken a month earlier on the street. He was moved because a portrait had never been made of himself, and it really affected him seeing it. He couldn't stop thanking me. Those are the kinds of experiences I treasure.

 

Unfortunately, it's also a place where a lot of kids wind up on the street escaping from bad and abusive family situations, usually from other cities and states. What's really bad, is if you're a 14 year old kid living on the street there with no money, out of school, no job, or local support system, and you end up in the Tenderloin, surrounded by crime, drugs, alcoholism, predators, prostitution, etc, there's little way out. It's really sad.

 

My way of helping, and what you referred to above, is donating sales proceeds from some of the project-oriented photo journals I put together, to a local youth services organization. They specialize in helping kids living on the street, offering shelter, medical services, counseling, meals, and job training. That helps kids immensely, giving them a much better chance of getting off the street and out of the neighborhood. It makes a huge difference.

 

It's a way I can give back to a city I take so much from as a photographer.

[Allen Herbert]

<p>"Photojournalism is not about paying subjects to get photos, nor should it be."</p>

<p>　<br>

Hmm, seems to me a rather cold statement from the "well healed". If you are asking folk in desperate need to pose for you(work) then something should be given back.</p>

<p>　<br>

Have you ever heard of the "Good Samaritan?"</p>

<p>　<br>

"That Ms. Thompson may have been even justifiably upset at never receiving a penny doesn't mean it was in any way unfair of Lange not to have paid her."</p>

<p>　<br>

Of course not! Lange was doing a paying job and Ms Thompson was just an extra...payment indeed perish the thought.</p>

<p>　<br>

"federal authoritie published an article"</p>

<p>　<br>

That's okay then. Hmm.</p>

<p>　<br>

　<br>

'donating sales proceeds from some of the project-oriented photo journals I put together, to a local youth services organization"</p>

<p>Honesty.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Yes, I've heard of the good samaritan. And I've heard <em>"judge not lest ye be judged."</em></p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>Who's the judge? Not me.</p>

<p>Simple facts.</p>

<p> </p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>And we really don't want to hear the truth...</p>

<p>A fairy tale is much nicer.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>American soldiers, a well known ongoing fact that they share their rations...and still do...to the needy.<br /> <br /> A thought.</p>

[kristina_kraft]

<p><strong>Fred</strong>,<br>

well, that's absolutely great that the federal government sent a lot of food to that camp and that Steinbeck wrote a novel being influenced by it. I only saw the movie 'The Grapes of Wrath', twice.<br>

I was judgemental due to my ignorance... Ah, knowing about knowledge - meta-knowledge! <br>

"Photojournalism is not about paying subjects to get photos, nor should it be. It is often about raising awareness and a good photojournalistic effort can have a great impact, as Lange and the other FSA photographers did." - I see, Fred. Your explanation is swell! You couldn't have explained it to me better.<br>

"Of course, we can never be sure, but had Lange paid people to get her photos, my guess is that many today would still be judging, claiming that was unethical photojournalistic practice which brought into question the authenticity of the photos and her assignment." - Sounds reasonable to me. I think so too. </p>

[kristina_kraft]

<p>Brad,<br>

wow, Brad! I'm speechless now that I read about the world you live in. I think I understand what you're talking about. Maybe you'll become their hero one day! </p>

[Brad_]

Thanks Kristina. Fortunately and unfortunately, thats a world I visit, not live in. I have kicked around

having a studio there.

[kristina_kraft]

<p>You're welcome, Brad! Thanks for an explanation. </p>

[christopher_ellington]

<p>I guess it's however you interpret the word portrait. You might say it's not a mugshot, because it isn't by nature a photo taken for an official/legal police record. Even though the concept of the shot (straight on, plain, against a wall, etc) is there, the purpose (police records) isn't.<br>

It's a picture of a person - YES<br>

It's a portrait of a person - Maybe by definition. If a portrait is simply an impression or a photo/illustration/description of a person based on their expression, mood, personality, etc. Then you could call it that. But you might qualify it by whether it is technically good from your artistic viewpoint.<br>

Or if you interpretation is that the word portrait is reserved for a photo with artistic and technical intention, then you might say no. But then again, that artistic and technical intention is based on whose standards? The artist may decided that his portrait series will be done with a point and shoot, straight on, white wall background, available lighting, no care for forcing personality, etc.<br>

Such a fine line because it's based on the artists intent. The rest (technical and visual appeasement) is left to interpretation of the artists intent. The intent may be successful, but that doesn't mean everyone will agree/like with the result.</p>

 

[christopher_ellington]

<p>The power part is tough. It may work better when both the photographer and model respect what each brings to the table, but are open to what they are seeing.</p>

<p>1) The photographer respects the models comfort, expression, technicalities (posing, knowing their best sides, improvisation), creating emotions, etc.</p>

<p>2) The model respects the photographers abilities to accent those qualities that they bring, capturing those qualities, and bringing out the best of them with their eye and technical and/or artistic skill.</p>

<p>It becomes more of an equal effort, but the model pays the photographer because the photographer is the one capturing them and accenting their modeling abilities so that they can focus on modeling (rather than using a remote and capturing themselves). The model is paying for the technical, artistic, but also trust in the photographer to see what they can't see in the live modeling process.</p>

<p>It's also about intent...<br>

The model already brings their gifts to the table naturally (expressions, poses, fashion, emotions, props, purpose, etc). It's then the photographer to bring their offerings to the table (technical skill, lighting, space, eye for detail, direction, ability to bring out the best of the models intent vs their own intent, ability to make the model comfortable enough to do their thing, etc.)</p>

<p>The intent isn't always a model paying a photographer. A photographer may pay a model to test their own photography skills and build portfolio. So the photographer is paying the model in that instance.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Or it can be a trade, to the benefit of each, with no money changing hands. Or it can be just to make a creative photo collaboratively, an art project of sorts, that both participate in and are excited about.</p>

<p>The photographer may well want the model uncomfortable for whatever reason. The model may appreciate the visual strength of such a situation. The photographer may not want, and the model may not be expecting, to bring out the best of the model. There may be many other ideas at play.</p>

[christopher_ellington]

<p>True Fred G. It's really a joint effort by both. As far as finances, they both have to know what the intention is, agree on things. Sometimes it's about who the initiator is for the project. What the end result is for, etc.</p>

<p>An I agree about the comfort. That can be different in various cases. It's really not about any hard cut rules, and may be different in every situation.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> As far as finances, they both have to know what the intention is, agree on things.

 

Many times my subjects don't know, ask or care. In other words, when I approach a stranger on the street

and ask for a portrait, the answer is simply, "Sure." Those situations interest me a lot...

[luis_g]

<p>"As far as finances, they both have to know what the intention is, agree on things. Sometimes it's about who the initiator is for the project. What the end result is for, etc."</p>

<p>That is customary but not always the case <em>where money is changing hands, </em>and that can be in either direction.<em></em></p>