LIving in streets

rick_m. · January 29, 2013

For your information, photos of homeless people are not the only photos I avoid making.

</blockquote>

We all have lines we draw in the sand. When doing PJ work I do not shoot human remains. I would under certain circumstances but not at the odd car wreck or house fire. I do not shoot (or keep) wardrobe malfunctions nor submit photos that might embarrass children. When it comes to the homeless I shoot them when it is necessary to report on a story. I do not chase them around, shoot them at their worst, convert to black and white and post them to my website in an attempt to show everyone how soulful or edgy I am. They are not mine to exploit.

So how should someone shoot the homeless? How about as part of a photo essay on the subject, intended for publication, and with some balance. Balance. Not all homeless are drunk on the sidewalk. Not all are aggressive or especially unkempt. Some work at times. Show where they go. Show their particularly well developed survival skills. Show the people who work with them. Get their permission and thank them for their help. For they are being kind enough to help you. And FGS spend a few minutes talking with them as you would any other person you photograph. And it wouldn't hurt to slip them a buck or two if you can. You have no idea how much a big mac can mean.

Damon DAmato · January 30, 2013

More fun to shoot the idle rich. <img title="" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7020/6527689877_dc78d23336_o.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="700" />

spanky · January 30, 2013

I see Rick lives in an state where welfare fraud doesn't occur or he just didn't read my post. For those of us living in CA I seem to recall the numbers working out as being something like CA accounts for 1/8 of the US population with 1/3 of all welfare recipients being in CA. Too bad all I hear these days is people griping about how much extra in taxes are being taken out of their paychecks. I guess income redistribution is only favored when other people have to give up more of their income.

Uhooru · January 30, 2013

I think a lot of the problem is that people tend to think of the homeless as "other" and a problem to be fixed. There are many distinctions between peoples situations that lead up to people living on the streets. One, is the legal challenges in that lead to overturning laws that allowed putting people in institutions and treating them. There's pros and cons on both sides of that issue. So you have people who are not taking meds and are for a whole variety of reasons we sum as "mental" on the streets. Then there are temporary people that have just got hit by hard times. There are also drug-addicts with various levels of functionality. Then there are those who have just chosen that as their lifestyle. A higher percentage than you may think. And then the runaways and combinations of all the above. Photographing homeless is not going to solve the various problems of homeless. But sometimes a growth project for oneself can have huge benefits of society. Perhaps it would be useful if one used photography to cut the difference or the distance psychology between us "normal" people and those "homeless" people. If one wanted to take the time to actually get to know people and then take their portraits and present them as human beings instead of freaks could be of real service. Not in curing homelessness, but in expanding the horizons of our own perceptions and perhaps others. Of course getting to know someone who is really in another world, might be difficult.

AJHingel · January 30, 2013

I find the exploitation of the mentally ill offensive... As should anyone with any empathy or conscience.

</blockquote>

I find that Barry R. is correct to denounce any exploitation of mentally ill in photography, as it also should be when it concerns other social groups like long-time unemployed for example. You might be able to convince these people to be photographed with a cigaret or a coin and get their agreement; you might even thank them afterwards and they might thank you and still you might have exploited their situation mainly for your own benefits. "Exploitation, respect and privacy" questions are not solved because they "accept" your propositions. Therefore, one way of reacting, is to shoot "homelessness", but never homeless people ("portraits").

Rick, you come with good answers to how to shoot homelessness, as far as I see it too:

- where they go

- particularly well developed survival skills

- people who work with them

"Exploitation, respect and privacy are always on the balance."

Fred: "Anders, it may be."

Can you come up with occasions where it is not, Fred ? I have difficulties figuring out examples, where we can just let loose.

Norma Desmond · January 30, 2013

Anders, I think there are many folks with cameras and photographers who shoot first and really don't care to think too much about what they're shooting. I think there are photographers who would never limit themselves in terms of subject matter and would almost intentionally be exploitive in furthering their photographic pursuit, whatever it is.

I think if you look through PN galleries, you will certainly find examples of photos of homeless people that seem completely in disregard for their privacy. I have seen them but don't care to go in search of them. Since I think intruding on someone else's privacy, especially someone who may not have the luxury of having their own private space to be private in, shows a lack of respect and is often exploitive. When it comes to shooting the homeless, I think a lot of folks with cameras just let loose. Many of these folks are not photographers at all, but wanna-bees, thinking they can elicit cheap pathos by pointing their cameras down at someone in squalor, the art of the pathetic.

Norma Desmond · January 30, 2013

By the way, Anders, I think by now you should get the thrust of my comments here without needing to nitpick every word and phrase I use. So, for instance, when you talk of exploitation (in quoting me about it), and I say "that may be", consider that I have accepted the premise and the "may" is not a "maybe." The formulation "that may be, but" is usually a way of agreeing and adding something consequential. The consequential part is that I was saying I don't speak for all of us, so instead of saying "this is how it is" in response to your claims of what "all of us" do, I said "that may be" and would continue to say it.

It might be better not to respond to three-word phrases but instead to the spirit of the posts people are making. The spirit of what I've said here is that, for me, an important question is the one you initially raised and and then said wasn't the question: whether to shoot and show such images. I answered that I don't. I also suggested that photos of homeless people are not necessarily about their being seen as much as the photographer's (often outside and distant)* perspective of them.

______________________________________

*A distant and objectifying shot can often be taken even at close rang.e

AJHingel · January 30, 2013

""It might be better not to respond to three-word phrases but instead to the spirit of the posts people are making.""

I totally agree Fred, but after all spirits are difficult to quote, so I'm left to go for the second best.

shutterbud · January 30, 2013

As I was out getting some shots in one of China's more affluent cities today, a man pushed himself towards me on the the board he uses to get around because he has no arms and asked for money. I thought of this thread but I can assure you the last thing on my mind was to raise the camera around my neck to get "a good shot". I gave him some money. A few hours later another older man in a wheelchair asked me for money. I gave him some. There is a woman who regularly begs on the streets of the city I currently live in. She is very probably farmed out by criminal gangs who take most of what she is given. She has a very young child with her. I have been here for very nearly three years and have seen this child grow up from a tiny baby. The last time I saw them, the 'baby' was a toddler, playing with a soda bottle while his mother was in a catatonic state from the cold & shame. I have witnessed on more than one ocassion, different groups of people with their old parents on stretchers not 100 yards from a department store in which you can spend $500 on a pair of sneakers, with the hospital bill they cannot afford to pay held down by stones, literally screaming for money to save their relative.

I have on very few ocassion seen their compatriots give them anything. One woman was so shocked that a Laowai had given her something that she literally choked on her gratitude.

This is too serious a subject for infighting between people on the internet eager to try out their new fast lens.

I suggest the next time anyone reading this thread sees a homeless person, that they imagine how they'd feel if it was their mother in that situation. And then tell me they'd give a sh*t about their ISO.

Norma Desmond · January 30, 2013

Anders, it is true you can't quote spirits, but the second best could simply be absorbing the gestalt of what another poster says and responding to that. No need to quote something in every instance. Quoting can be convenient in some instances, or a way to nitpick, take things out of a greater context, or sidestep other points made in others.

In any case, the subject here is not whether we quote or not. The subject I was addressing when you went on your tangent about a few of my words was that Ton seemed to be suggesting that the conversation in this thread was unnecessary and that it's the portrait that matters and that the ethical questions some of us are asking don't. I challenged Ton, in particular, because I know how humane and decent a fellow he is, and what he said just didn't sit well with me. I offered an alternative view, which is that some things matter (to me) a lot more than the portrait. I do think some people think all that matters is the picture and the rest be damned . . . and I think some of those people make good photos. I was surprised to hear Ton expressing that view.

tonmestrom · January 30, 2013

Ton, for me, no, it's not the only thing that counts

</blockquote>

you took what I've said out of context Fred. I clearly simplified to make a point. Trouble is whenever the subject of photographing "the homeless" pops up a lot of people start to bend over backwards to prove their credibility or merely stating they don't shoot them "out of respect".

Photographically speaking there is no difference at all hence the good portrait etc.

I find both points of view often rather cramped. I shoot a lot of people out there and the decisive factor whether I take a shot or not is hardly ever if someone is homeless.

Norma Desmond · January 30, 2013

I don't think I did take it out of context, Ton, because as you've explained it, I still have a very different way of photographing and of thinking about it. I do understand what you're saying, which I think is that you will take a photo of someone regardless of whether they're homeless or not and their homelessness is not a factor to you. Photographically, you have said, there is no difference.

To me, there's a big difference. People who are homeless are in a situation of not having the privacy most of us are afforded by having homes. So, whereas I am mindful of EVERYONE's entitlement to privacy, I am much more mindful of the privacy of people who have no other place to have private moments but on the street. For me, that makes a very big difference.

tonmestrom · January 30, 2013

which I think is that you will take a photo of someone regardless of whether they're homeless or not and their homelessness is not a factor to you

</blockquote>

in essence, no it's not. Respect as they say works both ways and as such there is and should not be a difference.

Norma Desmond · January 30, 2013

I agree that respect works both ways, as a matter of fact, all ways. For me, if not for you, there is a difference between shooting someone who's homeless and shooting someone who has a home, someone who has no place in which to enjoy privacy and someone else who does.

AJHingel · January 31, 2013

Ton , "respect", what ever that is for you, does not by some magic eliminate reality. Homelessness does influence the power you have when shooting, whether you wish to consider it or not. You might get a photo from a homeless with a handful of peanut, where something more might be needed to get a shot of me.

By the way you do so many marvelous street shots, but I don't seem to remember a shot of a person visibly homeless.

Norma Desmond · January 31, 2013

Also, there's a difference between having respect for homeless people and showing respect in a photo. Very often, folks with cameras have respect but their photos don't show it. Very often they think or convince themselves they do, but don't.

The road to hell can be paved with good intentions.

AJHingel · January 31, 2013

Fred, where such distinctions become interesting, is when subjective appreciations of how "respect" is represented in a shot can be formulated in words and shared with others. With all modesty, my distinction between shooting "homelessness" and shooting homeless people, showing their identity, is inspired by that effort.

Norma Desmond · January 31, 2013

Anders, I find it very hard, if not impossible, to formulate in words how respect is shown in a photo, because it so much depends on the context and the particular photo. Tossing out generic ideas of respectful symbols, signs, or photographic representations could be akin to creating some sort of rule book, and I would advise against that.

To give an example, I often consider shooting down at people a sign of disrespect, but in many cases it could be neutral and in many other cases it wouldn't show disrespect at all. One does see a lot of pics of homeless folk, though, shot from above looking down, and it can easily suggest the photographer couldn't be bothered to join the person on his own level on the street, which can suggest something about respect. However, in a given photo or in a given context, shooting down might be perfectly warranted, for instance if someone were actually trying to show the lack of respect society often affords homeless people, which is a complicated something to try to show.

I think the best thing to do in this regard if we are serious would be look at specific photos and talk about why they seem to or don't seem to show respect. I might start by asking in what way the first photo you posted in this thread shows respect toward a homeless person?

AJHingel · January 31, 2013

If you invite me, I will of course formulate my modest efforts in showing respect:

By not showing his identity. By making the scene into a archetype of living conditions of people trying to survive in sub-

temperature in the streets. By trying to contribute to alerting fellow citizens of the fact that there are people sleeping and sometimes in danger of dying in the streets like... Pigeons..... By not waking him up to offer him a cigaret and invite him to smile to the camera.

pnital · January 31, 2013

This was a long interesting reading of a subject that as a photographer , photographing in streets as well, especially in big cities , was a problem that occupied my thoughts .I think that each of street photographers ( and photographers in general) has his/her red lines, in meeting the homeless people, ,and why/what is the reason they are living as they are.

I think that humanism level is personal to each of us , and the way of thinking is well expressed in this thread. I agree with Fred and others, that respect, and I will add, honoring human being in every situation that life encounters us with, is especially important when meeting the homeless people,looking at them from our warm shelterd homes.

I have photographed a homless woman in one of the street when I have started to use a camera as a mean of creating with it. Meeting this woman and taking her photo( with respect that was in my mind ) ,was the point that drew the line for me , I have never used that photo, even though I'm keeping it in my photos files.

And it is not only the homeless. Some weeks ago I have photographed 3 churches in Jerusalem , in one of them at the hall of the entrance I saw a man praying, terribly handicaped (no legs and nearlly no hands, I thought about the medical Talidomid given in the 50s to pregnant women and was found disasterous for the babies).I was very impressed by his resolution ,not seeing any escort around him., and thought how it can help /encourage people seeing him praying. My camera was naturally with me ( and a photographer that took a photo of him)... but I knew that I will never use a photo like this one, as well as entering his private moment in a church full of a praying crowd.

Sorry for telling it here,but that thread brought me back to this event, and wanting to express my point of red lines.

pnital · January 31, 2013

I would like to add that the homeless woman is 'just' a portrait of her,in her own inward world.

10 minutes PN problem....;-))

tonmestrom · January 31, 2013

For me, if not for you, there is a difference between shooting someone who's homeless and shooting someone who has a home, someone who has no place in which to enjoy privacy and someone else who does.

</blockquote>

sure there is a difference. But all too often there is way too much is projected into it. Shooting out there is all about using common sense and common decency and as such I still see no difference.

Homelessness does influence the power you have when shooting, whether you wish to consider it or not.

</blockquote>

not by definition Anders, not hardly

but I don't seem to remember a shot of a person visibly homeless.

</blockquote>

oh I've done them and when I was a lot younger all too often for the wrong reasons. Nothing wrong in being honest about it. Sometimes I still do and I do it in the same way I normally shoot my photography. sometimes I talk to people, sometimes I don't.

Norma Desmond · January 31, 2013

Anders, thanks for your answer.

I find not showing identity in your photo to be somewhat neutral when it comes to respect. In itself, it doesn't convey respect or disrespect. I've seen pictures of homeless people that are direct and show their entire face that I consider to show respect.

The archetype of living conditions and survival in sub-temperatures I am not seeing. You mentioned Lewis's photo and something about a man keeping warm with pigeons on a grate. But I don't see it here. Nothing tells me "warmth." I notice the grate, but don't feel either the cold in the air or the warmth from the grate.

The hair and the pigeons and the downward perspective seem to want to convey some sort of message or have some symbolic import, but what that is is not clear to me from looking at the photo. The lack of contrast seems imposed, though it seems to want to convey a sort of dreariness or lack of clarity. The photo doesn't say much to me or make me feel much. Contributing to alerting fellow citizens doesn't persuade me much, since I think fellow citizens are already alerted and I'm not sure what your photo would alert them to. I think mostly (and I mean mostly and not in ALL cases) the cumulative effect of pictures of homeless people is to de-sensitize the populace to the issue and the individuals.

AJHingel · January 31, 2013

""I've seen pictures of homeless people that are direct and show their entire face that I consider to show respect."" I accept that, but us an example and explain why you have that conviction. Concerning the messages inherent to the scene of the shot we are discussing, they all demand a certain knowledge on the context (just like this week's pow). Iron air-outlets, as shown on the shot, are hot air outlets from the Metro/RER/underground/sub-way in Paris and are the main hot air opportunities for people living the streets of the city. You would not choose to lie there, and neither would the pigeons, unless it is freezing cold around it. Furthermore , whether this shot would actually alert more people for the dangerous conditions of fellow citizents living in the street, is another question, then the one of "showing respect". The intention is the key element. Your thought on de-sensitizing the populace (sic!) by overfeeding it with images of homeless people are yours, not mine. I happen not to agree. Finally, by the way, you do not see any 'hair" in the frame, only a false fur cover.

""You mentioned Lewis's photo and something about a man keeping warm with pigeons on a grate."" If you don't see that, we are not discussing the same shot !!

Norma Desmond · January 31, 2013

Anders, I'm familiar with grates, men, and pigeons and the warmth the grates provide from the cold. I know all about that, having grown up in NYC and currently living in San Francisco. Though I can't remember ever lying on one, I have certainly sat and stood on them to keep myself warm when waiting for buses, etc. My point was not about what I know about such things but about what I see in your photo. I think it would be a more effective photo if I could see and be made to feel the warmth and the cold. Again, I do know about it, but for me that's not enough.

I know we disagree on a lot of this but you were gracious enough to talk about your photo and I wanted to respond by telling you my thoughts.

Sign In

LIving in streets

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in