Untitled

Has this photo been removed or have I been cut out of the loop?

...removed for a bit. i tried to post a question to the moderated forum regarding that, but i'm sure it'll be deleted as it seems the elves have re-established the photo as viewable. what happened to the 191 total comments that were there? were they that bad that the photographer just wanted out of this mess? how unfortunate. (edit - i guess there are still 191 comments, don't know what i was reading...)

 

Tris, sorry to have engaged you...I should have known better. I just had to laugh when I read your statement that you ought to be good writer because you used to do it for a living. If you were being funny then sorry for not catching the joke.

 

I'm not trying to attack you, just a friendly jab at something you wrote that I found humorous.

 

Aloha

This is a brutal string of criticism from site members. Personally, I wouldn't frame the photo. But, I wouldn't slam the photographer for taking it either- whatever the reasons. It's a moment of life, both foreground and background, that we experience every day.

Ah! Now I understand. POW is a very, very bad thing to be avoided if at all possible.

 

Too bad criticism aimed at the photograph, the photographer, even the "elves" can't be constructive all the time but I guess that's just not human nature. Reading this thread is like looking in a mirror and being very disappointed in what you see.

When I read that Aldo had deleted his photo and the elves had restored it, I thought "They can't do that; Photo.net leaves ownership with the photographer." But it seems they can, 'cause in the "Terms of Use" lives the following clause:

 

Ownership of Submitted Material. You retain the copyright to material that you submit to any of our forums, chat rooms, image critique areas, or photo sharing systems. However, by submitting the material you grant photo.net a perpetual non-exclusive world-wide royalty-free license to modify, publish and reproduce that material for the purpose of operating, displaying, distributing and promoting photo.net.

 

Aldo doesn't have a leg to stand on, so to speak. But it would seem... considerate to let him out if he wants. In this "community" being held up for the world to see and discuss as POW should be voluntary. I suspect that Aldo feels that he has been pilloried. C'mon, elves - if he wants out, let him out!

The elves did not change the setting to this photo. A photographer can choose to make his or her work publicly viewable at any time. Go to http://www.photo.net/frequent-questions to learn how to edit your image info.

First the POW disappears without notice, then the thread in the public forum discussing same, along with a nomination for Mike's picture to serve as POW stand-in as it were for the rest of the week, and now . . .

prrrrrrresto!

. . . we're back in business again, as the lady once sang.

(hasanyoneheardthatalbumbytheway...goodstuff)

P.S. Are we having fun yet?

Hum, Tris... I don't mean to plead in favor of Antonio, but here you show a new facet of your personality, which I had not discovered yet... 2 POW's ago, I remember you called me " confused " and got a bad reply from me because I don't accept direct attacks. Fine. Case closed. But today, when you accuse Antonio for his lack of objectivity, and give him a moral lesson, I suddenly remember something: didn't you erase all the ratings you gave to about 15 pictures of mine after what I told you in the POW that day ? Hum... I didn't bother much and I still don't - actually, in a way, I even understand what you did - but I'm not blind or THAT confused, and I find it tough to swallow when you slap Antonio on both chicks today for doing what you did 2 weeks ago... But I guess that was ok, for some reason that you might want to bring to the audience...

I've no idea what you're talking about. To my knowledge I've never rated one of your pictures and I've never erased one of my grades, or for that matter one of my comments. I've had at least one of my comments erased (censored), but that was by one of the staff people here who, apparently, didn't enjoy the light it cast on him. (Water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned, but as long as you've chosen to bring this up . . . .)

Again, please clarify. I'd be happy to reply in detail, but I need more to go on.

Objectivity is something you have completely lost in my opinion...

First of all, objectivity is a happy ideal, something good to strive for but for all practical purposes impossible to actually achieve.

Secondly, I doubt if you ever gave me credit for even trying to be objective. That would be for the reason that, like most people, you demonstrate every desire to react emotionally to my message instead of analyzing what that message is in its own context.

That represents a failing and is, of course, on you. Go deal with it. If you can.

And week after week, I keep on seing that you have a point to make every 5 minutes...

An exaggeration, In point of fact I've been known to go days without any comment at all, and that is a matter of public record. As the ol' perfesser said, "You could look it up!"

...and I see more and more people getting tired about it... Do you care about this very fact at all ?..

More and more people are fed up with me, eh? That may well be (probably is) the case, but if it is then I put it to you that it is 1) hardly surprising considering that more and more people come to this forum for the first time, and the percentages never change, 2) more and more people have come round to accept my contributions for what they are, 3) more and more people are also bothering (have found the nerve) to leave comments of a more, shall we say, honest? nature on this thread, a circumstance I happen to view favorably. How these people might feel about me in any personal sense is immaterial to my purpose here.

To be frank, I find this missive from you to be immature. Try to do better, please.

Does it really matter if the guy is really homeless or not... I don't think so. The moment is captured (you get what you see). Interpret it any way you like. Should the photographer go up and ask the guy if he is really homeless. The photo will still look the same no matter what.

Tris, sorry to have engaged you...I should have known better. I just had to laugh when I read your statement that you ought to be good writer because you used to do it for a living. If you were being funny then sorry for not catching the joke.

Okay. That one slipped past me, Michael. I guess I wasn't expecting it (as you normally play it straight).

Your point!

I'm not trying to attack you, just a friendly jab at something you wrote that I found humorous.

No problem. I can take it. It's a free-for-all in this forum, as should be, and if someone can't take the heat . . . .

Aloha

Agur

P.S. I am a good writer, though. :)

Aldo doesn't have a leg to stand on, so to speak. But it would seem... considerate to let him out if he wants. In this "community" being held up for the world to see and discuss as POW should be voluntary. I suspect that Aldo feels that he has been pilloried. C'mon, elves - if he wants out, let him out!

I (think I) agree in principle, and in any event that disclaimer is nothing more than a contract of adhesion and isn't worth the bandwidth it consumes. Aldo's copyright to his work is sacrosanct and can only be re-assigned willingly and knowingly by Aldo.

You could look that one up, too.

The thread ought to be left intact, though. That belongs to this community and is valuable in its own way.

A long lens shot of a homeless person that appears to be taken without his knowledge. There's nothing gutsy about it.

i do not know the name of this man, but i hope he took the chance to hug his kids.

I think the photo works as an editorial photo. You can read whatever you want into the photo. You can read that homeless have it tough, or you can read that the guy's a bum, etc.

 

The photo has virtually no "art" to it. Street photography? What is it anyway? Editorial photography of street scenes, etc.

 

Maybe someone can do a photo essay and post it someplace else(PLEASE!) so all those who have been "touched" or "moved" by the photo (it makes me wonder what planet they live on if this shocks them) can debate the merits of life, society, the world...

 

 

"Maybe someone can do a photo essay and post it someplace else(PLEASE!) so all those who have been "touched" or "moved" by the photo (it makes me wonder what planet they live on if this shocks them) can debate the merits

of life, society, the world... "

 

-- it makes me wonder what planet YOU live on if this DOESN'T shock YOU --

 

As for the picture, I have lived in the SF area for two years now and I must say that I have not been one time to San Francisco without being shocked by the number of poor people living in the streets. See, I've lived in Africa for two years some time ago and most of the people here were not rich so I can't say it's the first time I see misery in action but it's a very different kind of misery: it's not only the lack of money that is hard, it's the loneliness and I think this picture conveys this feeling, thus making it all wortwhile in my opinion. Now call me a wimp if you like but it seems I just can get used to it. Looking at this picture, I realized that I have hundreds of pictures of this city, architecture, Chinatown, people in the streets... you name it, but I haven't recorded one on this important and significant composant of SF. Maybe because I think that I have nothing to do documenting it (what would be the profit for them or for me?). Giving a buck seems more appropriate. Maybe also because I don't dare trying but mainly I think I should have a larger purpose than making a "heart-wrenching" picture. This picture got me to think about my own "work" (which is not a really a work for me) and I thank its author for that.

Another thread with everything from the occasional photographic critique to politics to the requisite Tris-bashing and bashing-by-Tris. I am appalled by some of the flames, as I suspect are many other readers. I agree with an above poster who derided this is as the highest noise-to-signal ratio in recent memory. We've even got America-bashing and American jingoism, neither of which reflects well on the poster.

 

Ok, down to a couple points, but first an important disclaimer: if you feel that I've got no right to post my thoughts, or that they lack any credibility because I've got no images posted, please skip onto the next comment. I haven't had time to get stuff right and get it posted. Sorry. I'm honestly not sure that the quality (or lack thereof) of my own work makes me unqualified to comment, but I'll respect the opinion. I know I find myself respecting the opinions of some more than others because I happen to like many of their images, but I'm certainly willing to read and consider well thought-out writing by folks without images online.

 

Anyway, the picture is a nice street grab. It's got a couple flaws in framing (cut off foot/crutch) and I do find the background car

distracting. Actually, I think the car is good for establishing a sense of place; I just wish it weren't quite as prominent as it is. The lack of detail in the pants is probably a worthwhile trade vs. having the image too much brighter. For many folks, this image will lack emotional punch because there's no face. On the other hand, it could become more of a generic view of 'the homeless' because it lacks an individual identity (except, obviously, to the posters here who are personally familiar with the subject), and it clearly has struck a chord with many who have looked at it. Nonetheless, we are also oriented to language, and this image becomes dominated by the sign and its words. The image would be more successful to me if it were not so dominated by the words, but it also reflects the reality of (we assume) this person's daily existence.

 

Do I have a bottom line opinion? Well, I don't love the image, because the sense of place isn't well established, because the language dominates, and because of the static composition. But even if it isn't art, I wouldn't call the picture terrible either. It's an adequate photojournalistic capture of what is unfortunately a real-life, everyday scene for too many people in the midst of the richest country in the world.

 

Aldo's been both fairly and unfairly criticized here. There's also been a lot of uncivility towards each other. That's unfortunate.

 

Enjoy -

Sure are alot of flames on this thread.... the fact is this photograph sparks an emotion that few of us are human enough to understand. I to take photos of homeless people and interact with them at the same time. I talk to them about their stories, how they survive the cold weather, how they handle people trying to tell them how to live, etc. I say good job and if our job as photographers is to document the human spirit then a photo like this should be included and not dismissed.

This is simply a photograph. Nothing more in reality. One either likes it or doesn't. It's based on editorial. I really find the personal attacks in here ridiculous. Is there nothing better in life for you to do? Constructive criticism is fine. Personal attacks are downright childish. Get a life!

I do agree that those who have 0 uploads would do very well to just be quiet and walk away. This is supposed to be a photo critique forum; not a sparring match. This thread is full of pompous garbage from some very pompous people. I'm outta here. Better things to do than read people ripping each other apart. I wonder how many would if they were face to face?

Note: well-fed dog.

Here is a hypothetical scenario for you to consider;

 

Imagine a troll going around belittling others pictures (I know it is hard to imagine but try).

Now the Photo.net elves select one of his/her worst pictures and make it the Picture Of the Week.

Within a few short days the troll/member is virtually Nuked.

 

Viola, problem solved but what a dastardly way to moderate a forum. The POW has truly become a weapon to the elves.

 

I think Aldo has MUCH better shots and the elves sentenced him from the beginning by choosing this one.

 

Neat theory Kyle, but doesn't apply here. Aldo's pre-POW comments are models of propriety. The jingoistic nonsense post-POW was made under provocation.

So sorry I've been away! Look what I've missed. Well, I'm so disgusted right now with the slug fest that I am for once at a loss for words.. Kind of. I'm walkin away from POW's for a while. I'll bet there is one person who is glad of that. But, if you think you've "won" - I would say no..because you still have to live with yourself and that inflated grandiosity. Sorry, I try not to directly insult people, but I must say that you bring out the absolute worst in me. You piss me off. Why? Because you have no regard for people except for yourself. You don't play by your own rules, you ridicule and use this forum to show all of us idiots how smart you are. I could go on and on ... because I have an awful lot to say after reading your "lectures". I'm breaking my own rules. 1) Attempting to stick to the photography in question 2) Being mature and responsible by not attacking 3) Ignore Tris 4) Say something Positive along with the negative... Just Can't. So, I am banning myself from POW until I can control my bursting impulses.

Well you may be right Tony but I still maintain that the elves did Aldo a great disservice by selecting one of his not so good shots.

 

A word of advice for Mary and others; I simply skip past anything written by Tris. I can surmise anything relevant from responses by others. It saves a lot of time.

 

No offence Tris, but if you were half as good with the pen as you claim to be, you wouldnt need to write a novel to get your point across.

 

I find the image to be quite powerful. It's not technically perfect, but it certainly does cause an emotional response in me. Even if the man is playing on his poverty, or disability...I still feel sadness for his situation.

 

As for many of the above comments...I am disgusted. Name-calling, personal attacks...I thought this site was about encouraging/improving photography. How people can display such judgemental dislike towards others that they don't even know...is beyond me.

 

I think this POW also highlights a failing of the ratings system. I can't understand how someone could rate this as 1/10...but perhaps I am just ignorant of what constitutes a bad photo?