michael j hoffman 0 Posted November 9, 2005 I would not have taken this photo. I would have refrained based on my own standard of ethics. I also would not impose my standard of ethics on another - admittedly brilliant - photographer. There are images by Sally Mann, Weegee and Joel-Peter Witkin that I personally would not indulge as a photographer. However, the fact that I would not make these images does not make these images wrong to take. In fact, it is vital to the furtherance of artistic freedoms that some artists push the envelope of acceptability. I think many responders to this image are missing that very point. You have raised great discussion and debate with this image. For that reason alone, this photo is a success, even if I don't like your decision to make it! All of your images are fantastic. You truly are a gifted artist. Michael J Hoffman Link to comment
tony_dummett 0 Posted November 10, 2005 Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Michael. After three or four liters of Bavarian beer, ethics went out the window (or should I say, down the toilet). Link to comment
blowingsky 0 Posted February 22, 2006 Dear Tony, your instincts were right twice. Once when you took the picture, once when you decided to post it here. It is obviously about surprise at being observed during a (not so) private moment and the irony runs in all directions here. One tends to focus on their business in these situations but this one gentleman has popped right out of that reverie and he shows a sense of being violated even though he is in a stall-like room with a bunch of beer soddened gents all holding the same thing he is holding. I'm amazed at Tom Meyer's dry, ugly remarks...but having seen some of his other posts, it seems he doesn't trust the street photo genre. Link to comment
twmeyer 0 Posted April 8, 2006 I too, am surprised by Tom Meyer's remarks... I'm not usually such a d**k. I do have my issues with street photography, but not to the extreme I seem to have expressed here, and I feel compelled to apologise for my choice of words and tone, if not their sentiment. It doesn't seem up to your usual insightful work in this genre, but that's no excuse for me to be such a twit. It must have been a bad day. Sorry. I try to save my rudeness for idiots, and you're definately not that. And I actually sympathize with and respect Howard Stern's philosophy and attitudes about his work, it's just that those philosophies in practice are sometimes more than I can sit through (but Tom Green is still an idiot)... t Link to comment
tony_dummett 0 Posted April 9, 2006 Tom, I re-read your critique from so long ago. Please don't apologize for your earlier remarks. They're as valid and useful as any others. No offence taken at all. My skin's thicker than that. What I thought set this one out from a purely "adolescent" shot (although I was hardly out of adolescence at the time, and, yes, pretty plastered) is that you can only see one face. That's what makes the guy stand out. The rest of the men there are doing what men do in latrines full of strangers: trying to avoid each others' eyes. Having said all that, I can fully understand why the chap with the umbrella became angry. It's just that I couldn't understand it at the time. Cheers, Tony. Link to comment
twmeyer 0 Posted April 10, 2006 I didn't even look at the date... what a surprise. Still good (and interesting) to keep tabs on oneself... t Link to comment
blowingsky 0 Posted April 10, 2006 This might win the coveted Photo.Net TLD award (Thread of Longest Duration). Link to comment
tony_dummett 0 Posted April 12, 2006 Amazing! Lurkers on a thread this old! Good-on you all. Thanks for visiting (and arguing). I love it. Link to comment
street photography karina 0 Posted November 23, 2006 You will have to excuse me that I didn't read the whole tread. So I will probably say what already has been said. The scene and the man's expression are BRILLIANT! But the digital (?) grain is terrible :) Link to comment
tony_dummett 0 Posted November 27, 2006 The shot was made in 1974, well before digital cameras. The frame was exposed by rating Tri-X at ISO800, and then double-developing it. Hence the extra grain. You could also say the photo as presented is oversharpened, so that aspect could be called "digital grain". Link to comment
street photography karina 0 Posted November 27, 2006 ... for your reply. Now you say so, it could be due to the sharpening. Great scene though and it must have taken quite some courage! I am not shy taking my street shots, but this one? I don't think so :) Link to comment
tony_dummett 0 Posted November 29, 2006 All I needed was beer. That gives me enough courage to do anything. Link to comment
lutz 3 Posted February 26, 2007 Great shot, Tony. Just correct the spelling... ;-) I lived in Munich right opposite the Oktoberfest site from 1978 to 1984, BTW. Cheers! Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now