What I have been shooting for the last 10 years...

[leanne_newton]

No, Travis, you are wrong here, I think. It is not possible to present this kind of work without being judged on a personal level by participants capable of reasoning thought. We will all disagree, for sure, but nobody needs to feel ashamed for feeling offended by these images.

 

When you get beyond technical difficulties and reach a certain control over your images, you are judged on vision alone.

I feel sure that these images are exactly what Robert wanted to convey. And they are certainly not "charming" in any sense of the word.

[patricks]

Regardless, if one post one's images on a global international discussion forum for photography, one can/should expect feedback on those images, especially if the subject matter is one that touches people.

 

Some people will like the images, some will not. As much as RMJ has the right to post the photos/share his inner vision/creativity on how he sees is subject matter, as much right has other people to interpret their feelings about viewing them.

[ray .]

<doubt he was asking for aesthetic critiques of his pictures>

<p>

<i> I think he was, or, more accurately, was looking for effusively positive ones.</i>

<p>

AZ, since you seem to make a career of offering your opinion, perhaps you could post something of your own so we could all see a bit better where you're coming from???

<p>

Surprised, Rob, that you'd pronounce these crap without seeing them in full context, and apparently because they're not <i>pretty</i>enough.

<p>

I must admit to being a bit perplexed as to why Robert would post these with so little follow-up. My understanding is he's quite proud of the body of work these are a part of, and maybe just doesn't find the response here relevant to what he's doing.

[ray .]

Let's also not forget, as Robert has mentioned and is obvious from the images, his subjects have a more serious handicap than the people portrayed in Bender's link.

[ray .]

I see now, AZ, you like Hallmark cards. Nothing wrong with that, but it does seem to fit with the opinion you offer here, doesn't it? Critiques often have to do with the viewer's prejudices as much as anything else.

[nesrani]

I don't find them not pretty enough, Ray; it is simply not evident from the pictures themselves what it is Robert is trying to communicate. To that extent they are failures. Maybe a longer series would be more effective, but it was Robert himself who chose to present only three of them. As I said, he sent me some snaps some time back which were much more achieved.

 

Wordy explanations are all very well, but it's the pictures themselves which have to do the explaining, IMO. These don't.

[ray .]

Some agreement with you there, Rob. The one thing I've been a bit disappointed in is that he hasn't shown more images that might help explain better what these are about. He did choose to show them without that context, and I'm not sure why he would do that.

[travis1]

It's like Stanley Kubrick who left us suddenly without explaining to us Eyes Wide Shut. Of course, Robert is well and kicking.

[._._z]

<i>The one thing I've been a bit disappointed in is that he hasn't shown more images

that might help explain better what these are about. He did choose to show them

without that context</i><p>

 

To his detriment. In the past he's posted other images from his project, like here:<p>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004hdi <p>

 

Also without much context, but as more conventional portraits. Here he seems to

have gone out of his way to proffer unsettling, stark images here, but shock value

alone does not necessarily impress.

[._._z]

<i> you like Hallmark cards</i><p>

 

You like goading people. We've seen that trolling before.

[nesrani]

"It's like Stanley Kubrick who left us suddenly without explaining to us Eyes Wide Shut."

 

Not much to explain there, I'm afraid. But I would have liked to hear just what the hell the last 40 minutes of 2001 were all about. Just as well Spielberg took over the AI project.

[travis1]

2001 was great. The last 40 mins was still about 2001. Which version did you watch, Rob?

[robert_m_johnson]

I have been following this thread. The reaction that some of you are having

here is the same as some people have when they see these guys in public

places. "Why are they in this restaurant?" I have heard it with my own ears.

These folks do not have "Downs Syndrome!" Do some research. Why is

Steven's face red? Because one of his "behaviors" was to punch himself in

the face. Something he did most of his life. Why is Joe looking at a toy on the

end of a string? Because Joe spent most of his free time twirling things so he

could watch them spin. With the thousands of people in the world like this ask

yourselves, why are these the first people like this that I have seen? (most of

you) Then ask yourselves why are these people the FIRST on the list to be

aborted?

 

Lee Ann, you take good photos, pretty images of pretty people. Rob, you are a

great photographer, exotic people in exotic places.

 

I think most of you are reacting to these images from your fear of the

unknown. One shot that I did not post is of a GREAT man that was abandoned

as a baby, (like most of these people were/are), by his rich family that owned

a chin of super markets. How many skeletons do we have in our own closets?

 

Keith, I do understand your concerns!

[leanne_newton]

The main thing is that you are posting again, Robert. And with passion, which is what everyone else here has been doing.

[travis1]

Robert, I think almost all of us care for these folks in one way or the other. If anyone reading this don't agree, please say it (but of course you won't).

 

The "negative" reaction is to the presentation of the images above. Your pictures caused people to react in some ways. I think you have succeeded in that sense.

 

I for one, would like your continual sharing of this project here with us. We can hopefully come to a better understanding then.

 

my 2 cents.

[keith_laban]

Robert is a talented photographer. I have no doubt that he made a conscious decision for the photographs to appear as they do. I also suspect that he posted the photographs for reasons other than mere critique. The trouble is I still have no idea why he chose to depict the subjects as he has or post them here. I doubt he would choose to depict others including his friends in this way, so why these subjects?<p>People with a learning disability are all different, some are wonderful, warm and caring, others are not, but they are all individuals and should be portrayed as such. Robert has pointed out that people with a learning disability in the USA are integrated into the community and are well cared for and yet the images show nothing of this, in fact quite the opposite, the way he has chosen to portray them is isolating and harsh. He seems to be obsessed with how the subjects look rather than trying to capture their personality and character (which by the way has nothing to do with beautifying).<p>Robert, I�ve no idea why you feel you have to leave this forum. Your thread has prompted a fascinating discussion. Surely you are not leaving just because a few opinionated bastards such as myself have criticised your images and questioned your thinking, which is after all, part and parcel of this forum. Please reconsider.

[nesrani]

Robert, I always hoped that my pictures would have the effect of making exotic people less exotic, of describing and explaining their lives. I have evidently failed in that, as I know from the many emails and other responses I get about my work.

 

But be honest - what could be more exotic for most people than what you have shown us in these three pictures? I suggest that Maximishin's picture is remarkable precisely because it manages to make the unfamiliar familiar by using cultural references we can all understand.

 

You are now telling us something about your subjects. But the problem is that you are telling us, not showing us. Maybe you should write a book and illustrate it with your pictures. But your entire approach here demonstrates that your pictures do not stand on their own.

 

It is pointless to show us images as images, and then want to make us feel bad because the images are not successful and need specialist knowledge that only you possess to be understood. Your aims may be totally laudable, I'm sure they are, but photography is photography, not writing. Emotionally blackmailing your viewers will not gain anybody's sympathy for your subjects.

 

It would be interesting if you'd explain some of the thinking that went into making these pictures in the very particular way they have been made. But it would be even more interesting if that came out of the pictures themselves.

[._._z]

What Rob said. <p>

 

I like many of your other photos, going back to the stuff from the '70s on your

website, but these photos obviously don't illustrate what you hope they would, and

many of us don'tlike them as much. Closing your eyes to this and saying, <i> "The

reaction that some of you are having here is the same as some people have when

they see these guys in public places."</i> is your perogative, but it's wrong.

[robert_m_johnson]

Everyone, your points are well taken! Here are a couple of "happy snaps!"<div></div>

[robert_m_johnson]

<div></div>

[Allen Herbert]

Regardless of what you think of Robert�s photographs, one thing is for sure, they created reaction. Some how i doubt the more artistic impressions would have. Do the reasons why matter? Or is it about the end result? Thoughts to ponder. If the thought was to gain attention for these folk, then he has succeeded.

 

 

Only posts usually about politics create so much interest, passion ,and controversy. Pleasant change.

[ray .]

Aha! Appleby an artistic conservative! Prefers Spielberg (Mr. Sappy) to Kubrik!

 

AZ, I'm not trolling, just trying to get at the preconceptions you bring to the table when offering an opinion. How about we just agree that you prefer romanticized, pretty images? As I say, nothing wrong with that, but let's be aware of it at least.

[robert_m_johnson]

This is a better example of MOST of the images from my project.<div></div>

[Tony Rowlett]

A Z, would you mind giving me a few technical details of the picture you posted? It's really quite remarkable. It's a neat photograph of a happy moment, but there's something about it's color saturation that I really like.

[robert_m_johnson]

My LAST photo.net images post! (EVER!) :-)<div></div>