Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Candid photos of young women
Old 07-15-2009   #1
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Candid photos of young women

I'm posting this question because I would like to hear everyone's opinions on the matter. Being RFF, I imagine candid photography is one of the genres most of you are very passionate about. I won't put in any specifics because my purpose isn't trying to reveal anything about this particular photographer, but rather asking if my photographic and artistic vision is too short-sighted.

Basically, on another forum, I found a photographer who particularly likes to take photos (or at least show on the internet) of young women. These aren't model shots, portraits, or anything like that, but just random young women he bumps into wherever he may go. Some of these places include on the street, some indoor social activity, but also at the beach. The photos aren't of all types of young women either...I'll describe them as young women who probably take care of their bodies. The street photos aren't invasive or anything (nothing like pointing down a blouse), but the beach photos obviously have young women in swimsuits, bikinis, etc. His photo website is pretty much (90-95%) comprised of these types of photos.

My gut reaction is that this is pretty darn creepy. I wouldn't appreciate my wife being photographed in that manner. If I see some guy trying to sneak shot of my wife from the back when she's wearing her swimsuit at the beach, I'd go up to him and have a word or two. I imagine a lot of people with daughters in college would not want their kids being photographed and put up on the internet like that either.

Now, I'm not asking about the legality of the situation, but rather the morality and ethics of it. Seeing as how a certain demographic of young women is his target, I feel uncomfortable with this type of guy walking around.

The point of my post is, what do you guys think of this? Is my reaction normal or too conservative? Am I possibly missing some purpose where this is part of a bigger project that makes it artistic? By the way, the photos look pretty much like snapshots to me. I can't see any artistic touch to these the candids.

I'm very interested in everyone's responses - thanks in advance for the discussion.
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #2
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 39,979
i'd say you are on the conservative side.

the guy may be creepy and if photography and/or art were his aim, he likely needs to change his style somewhat.

i hate to judge this sort of thing because i like street shooting and would hate for someone to try to censure me.
__________________
heart soul & a camera

xe2...xe1...16...23...56...55-200

original canon F1...T90...24/2.8...100/2.8...200/2.8...300/5.6
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #3
maelswarm
Registered User
 
maelswarm is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Age: 32
Posts: 98
Hey Jerry, I read the thread back on the other forum too. I can see where the people attacking him are coming from -- there is an "uncomfortable" nature to the photographs. It may seem snapshot-ish, but I find a lot of stuff called contemporary art is like that, e.g. Martin Parr, Terry Richardson.

There are people who travel and take photos of poor, destitute children, or naked tribal women, or beggars and handicapped people. Where would you draw the line? It's a slippery slope once you start making judgement calls about what is appropriate and inappropriate.

I've taken photos of young girls before, and also stolen very private moments that have happened in public areas. I admit it made me feel uneasy to do it, but I've liked the moments that I've captured. One time I asked the girl to take her photo, and she asked me to ask her mom! It was okay in the end, and I love the awkwardness that I captured in her. I think as long as your intentions aren't bad, you can have a clear conscience about taking the photo. If you start worrying about what every subject would think, then it'll disable you from taking a photo of a stranger without their consent.

Here are some of my candids of young women:
She told me to ask her mom


She gave me a dirty look after I took the photos:


Completely random and candid moment


Another random moment that I captured while walking behind the group, with the camera held to my face and I was focusing as I was walking
__________________
Flickr

Last edited by maelswarm : 07-15-2009 at 21:08.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #4
david.elliott
Registered User
 
david.elliott is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,568
edit - decided to stay out of this thread altogether.

Last edited by david.elliott : 07-15-2009 at 21:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #5
antiquark
Derek Ross
 
antiquark's Avatar
 
antiquark is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,469
He sounds like a wierdo to me. Maybe he's unaware that people might be offended by his technique.

I'm sure he'll reconsider his hobby when an irate husband threatens to smash his camera.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #6
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Thanks for the replies so far, everyone. Something Joe said triggered another reason perhaps why I felt uneasy about it.

The photographer received mixed responses, and of course, he defended himself from the negative comments. However, what I started noticing was that he never defended himself by revealing any artistic intentions through these photos. His response was mostly along the lines of , "I'm within my legal right to do so." Maelswarm , please correct me if I'm wrong - I always could have accidentally missed something. (By the way, nice to see you here, T )

What some of you guys have said is true and does make sense to me, which is why this is a bit of a struggle for me, and I'm asking these questions on this forum.
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog

Last edited by panda81 : 07-15-2009 at 21:13.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #7
Pappy
-
 
Pappy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 28
lock 'im up an' 'trow away de key
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #8
david.elliott
Registered User
 
david.elliott is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,568
edit - decided to stay out of this thread altogether.

Last edited by david.elliott : 07-15-2009 at 21:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #9
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by antiquark View Post
I'm sure he'll reconsider his hobby when an irate husband threatens to smash his camera.
Because violence, theft and property destruction is a rational response to someone taking a photo of a person in a public place

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #10
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
 
drewbarb's Avatar
 
drewbarb is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,370
Ok. Being a straight male, I admit I like looking at women- especially "young women who probably take care of their bodies". However; yes, it's creepy, sad, and generally pretty lame when men snap surreptitious and altogether artless pictures of women merely because they find them attractive. But is this a surprise? This sort of pathetic behavior is unbearably common, and just not worth complaining about. These guys don't deserve even the negative attention we're giving them here. Please don't encourage them.
__________________
-drew

Last edited by drewbarb : 07-15-2009 at 21:22.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #11
maelswarm
Registered User
 
maelswarm is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Age: 32
Posts: 98
I'm surprised to see you here too! When'd you get a RF?

I think he was overly sensitive and he just used a blanket defensive statement. What's legal and what's ethical are different things, and perhaps he didn't have the sensitivity towards his subjects. However, an internet forum isn't the best place to have a witch hunt, and some of the replies were just not constructive. I felt some people overreacted as well, and there must've been a better way to address it.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #12
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Maelswarm, another thought..

I can clearly see and appreciate the art behind the examples you posted and all the other ones in your Flickr stream. There is a certain thoughtfulness I can see in your photos. Sure, the girls are attractive, but the purpose is not the girls themselves, but capturing what the moment they are experiencing at that moment in their lives. Perhaps it is the contemporary art, but I couldn't see that in any of other person's photos, and thus why I feel what I feel.

I think the main purpose of this post is to at least say I can appreciate good photography
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #13
Pappy
-
 
Pappy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 28
well let's see a link to this guy's site so that we can give him a fair trial before hanging him
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #14
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by maelswarm View Post
I'm surprised to see you here too! When'd you get a RF?

I think he was overly sensitive and he just used a blanket defensive statement. What's legal and what's ethical are different things, and perhaps he didn't have the sensitivity towards his subjects. However, an internet forum isn't the best place to have a witch hunt, and some of the replies were just not constructive. I felt some people overreacted as well, and there must've been a better way to address it.
Received my first RF last week! Although I was lusting after one for several months. By the way, I was the person (if you didn't know) who added you as a contact on Flickr within the last week or so...figure it was easier to keep up with your stuff that way

Yes, I do agree with you on the many overreactions people had. It would have been very easy for people to voice their opinions with much more civility.
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #15
antiquark
Derek Ross
 
antiquark's Avatar
 
antiquark is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfunnell View Post
Because violence, theft and property destruction is a rational response to someone taking a photo of a person in a public place

...Mike
Personally, if he took a picture of my wife/daughter/grandmother, I would probably just give him a funny look.

I'm just saying that there are people out there who would take great exception to someone photographing their wife.

I watched an online speech by Steve McCurry where he talked about taking a surreptitious picture of a man's wife, and the husband threatened him with a gun afterwards.

So it's not just a hypothetical scenario, it could really happen.
__________________
flickr

Last edited by antiquark : 07-15-2009 at 21:26.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #16
rpj
Grumpy
 
rpj is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Seattle, WA (USA)
Age: 75
Posts: 47
Since Panda81 links to both Fliker and his blog are invalid, I suggest that this be recognized as a troll and treated accordingly. If you want to start violent actions against photographers taking photos in public, I suggest you have an attorney on retainer. The law in most countries is very clear on this. You may not like it, but it is not up to you to initiate vigilante action based on your own legal system.

I also am surprised that Australians would support this crap. Australian law on this is very clear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #17
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpj View Post
I also am surprised that Australians would support this crap. Australian law on this is very clear.
As the only self-identified Aussie here, and as one who questioned the rationality of violent etc. reactions, I've now become even more confused.

Why bother writing if people won't bother reading?

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #18
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpj View Post
...

I also am surprised that Australians would support this crap. Australian law on this is very clear.
Are referring to Mike's post? You need to be aware that Australians are very fond of exaggeration and sarcasm. Immediately recognisable to another Australian, but often missed by folks from other parts of the world. Gets us into trouble some times!
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #19
bennyng
Benny Ng
 
bennyng's Avatar
 
bennyng is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tokyo/Singapore
Posts: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpj View Post
Since Panda81 links to both Fliker and his blog are invalid, I suggest that this be recognized as a troll and treated accordingly.
They are valid but coded wrongly by the forum.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/panda81

http://panda81.wordpress.com/

Cheers,
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #20
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpj View Post
Since Panda81 links to both Fliker and his blog are invalid, I suggest that this be recognized as a troll and treated accordingly. If you want to start violent actions against photographers taking photos in public, I suggest you have an attorney on retainer. The law in most countries is very clear on this. You may not like it, but it is not up to you to initiate vigilante action based on your own legal system.

I also am surprised that Australians would support this crap. Australian law on this is very clear.
If I wanted to start violent actions against photographers, I wouldn't be so foolish to ask a group of passionate street photographers about their opinions and to help enlighten me. In addition, I would have freely given out the photo gallery links in my first post instead of keeping it a secret.

I'm certainly guilty of not being able to code links to my sites properly, but it also wasn't terribly difficult to infer the links I was trying to get to, as BennyNg had done.

Moderators, if you think this thread is causing too much agitation, then I apologize and understand any course of action you want to do with the thread.
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #21
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
Having thought a little on my own "vaguely creeped out" reaction to the original post on this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by panda81 View Post
My gut reaction is that this is pretty darn creepy. I wouldn't appreciate my wife being photographed in that manner. If I see some guy trying to sneak shot of my wife from the back when she's wearing her swimsuit at the beach, I'd go up to him and have a word or two. I imagine a lot of people with daughters in college would not want their kids being photographed and put up on the internet like that either.
...I'm trying to think how to phrase this so it doesn't come over as accusatory in itself, but...

Would you think similarly about:

"...some guy [or girl] trying to sneak shot of my brother from the back when he's wearing his swimsuit at the beach..."

"I imagine a lot of people with sons in college would not want their kids being photographed and put up on the internet like that either."

While I acknowledge, to an extent, differences in reaction when males and females are involved in similar circumstances, I also detect a certain, um, proprietary interest being asserted over images of women. "My" wife. "My" daughters. That gives off a certain creepiness of its own or, at least, hints at a somewhat antedeluvian attidude towards women.

Just a thought.

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #22
mackigator
Registered User
 
mackigator's Avatar
 
mackigator is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 545
Hmm, probably creepy but i see some that pull off good work in this "beautiful people" category.

Without looking at the images involved - If this guy is using normal focal lengths, has shots of faces and eye contact, then more power to him.

I think that images of random women on the street shot from behind say more about the photographer than the photographed.
__________________
Images: Flickr
Work: Web Marketing
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #23
Pappy
-
 
Pappy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 28
how can we discuss this without seeing the pics? let's have a link to the site, please
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #24
panda81
Registered User
 
panda81 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfunnell View Post
Snip
My perspective was just coming from a straight male, as is also the original photographer I was referring to. I didn't really bother about writing out all the different permutations which could occur, but in the end, I really meant to just refer to the right combination of the person taking the picture, their sexual orientation, and their subjects, and what their intentions look like when picture after picture has a certain theme to it.

I am more on the traditional, conservative, and protective side than some others, so I admit that's where I'm coming from too. But, at the same time, I am trying to keep an open mind and hear what others have to say. I'm trying not to point out "why I'm right" to other people who disagree with me, although I do want to explain my feelings.
__________________
Jerry
Flickr
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #25
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
 
payasam's Avatar
 
payasam is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Delhi, India
Age: 66
Posts: 4,430
I photograph no young women who haven't called me "Uncle": and for a fellow my age, "young" goes up to around 45.
__________________
"Payasam" means a sloppy pudding. Little kids love it, and I'm a little kid with a big grey beard and diabetes.
Olympus E-3, Sony A7; four Zuiko Digital lenses; Sony FE 28-70 zoom; Nikkor 24/2.8, Nikkor 35/2, Nikkor 50/1.4, Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8, Nikkor 85/2, Nikkor 105/2.5
RFF gallery
Flickr gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #26
Tuolumne
Registered User
 
Tuolumne's Avatar
 
Tuolumne is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Negev, Israel
Posts: 2,994
I'm confused. Exactly what is objectionable about taking candids of attractive women on the street? Aren't those some of the most popular photos in the gallery?

/T
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #27
yanidel
Registered User
 
yanidel's Avatar
 
yanidel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Paris
Age: 43
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuolumne View Post
Aren't those some of the most popular photos in the gallery?

/T
ah ah ah, you got a good point. The puritarian hypocrisy ...
Though I would be really concerned if this guy only took pictures of old women or dog ****s ...
More seriously, shooting only young women probably means is main center of interest is not photography. But for one that has the balls to publish these pictures openly on his website and face criticism, how many take them secretly and keep them on their computers ? I see many freaks with mega zooms out there ... these are more concerning IMO.

Ok, here is one ... http://blog.yanidel.com/2009/06/13/6...ealing-beauty/

The second after she saw me and I said "beautiful hat" and she had a huge smile on her face.
__________________
80 weeks around the world : http://www.yanidel.net

Last edited by yanidel : 07-15-2009 at 23:22.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #28
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 34
Posts: 3,821
what kind of perv likes taking photos of young, beautiful women? oh, right, every straight male on the planet. and lesbians.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #29
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
 
SolaresLarrave's Avatar
 
SolaresLarrave is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
Age: 57
Posts: 7,333
I wish I could photograph more beautiful young women. They make life worth living!

Attached Images
File Type: jpg GER-KOLN-Grl-&-Eis.jpg (41.6 KB, 1106 views)
__________________
-Francisco
Check out
My Leica M4-2 Blog and/or
My Nikon D700 Neophyte's Guide
Now selling Nikon RF gear
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #30
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
 
SolaresLarrave's Avatar
 
SolaresLarrave is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
Age: 57
Posts: 7,333
And, BTW, my wife is very much worth photographing.
__________________
-Francisco
Check out
My Leica M4-2 Blog and/or
My Nikon D700 Neophyte's Guide
Now selling Nikon RF gear
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2009   #31
javimm
Registered User
 
javimm is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Madrid, Spain
Age: 39
Posts: 173
I don't see it as "questionable". I find this kind of pictures boring.

I usually photograph with a group of people. One of them has all Canon line of L lenses. I mean, ALL of them. He usually uses a 70-200 f2.8 or a huge 300 or whatever long prime or zoom he brings for the day. 90% of the pictures he takes are portraits of young woman shot from long distance. This pictures aren't sexual explicit or anything. They're just portraits of women walking in the street. He has thousands of pictures, all the same, just faces of unknown girls walking. I find it extremely boring. I mean, who'd like to see an exhibition of 500 pictures of woman faces?.

So the question for me is not the morality, it's the purpose. I try to photograph people interacting, actually doing something that tells a story. If it's a girl who's doing something interesting I'll photograph her, but just having a collection of girls faces doesn't say anything to me.

Anyway, if this is the style someone likes, I don't see anything wrong with it.

EDITED to fix some typos. Sorry

Last edited by javimm : 07-15-2009 at 23:46.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #32
historicist
Registered User
 
historicist is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: lost
Posts: 566
One of my self portraits on flickr got favorited by someone whose photostream was entirely pictures of big muscular gay dudes (not sure where I fit into that) and funfairs (go figure).

A female friend had a completely everyday picture of her wearing a scarf favorited by a person whose favorites were literally thousands of pictures of girls wearing some sort of neckwear.

The world is full of people who are doing slightly unsavoury things like this, but I would suggest there's more important things to worry about than this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #33
Parker51
Registered User
 
Parker51 is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Paris
Posts: 42
@ Maelswarm
By the way , your 3 last pictures are wonderful color pictures
Cheers
Claude
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #34
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,884
My favourite form of photography at the moment - check out the first page of my Flickr

http:[email protected]/

And here is one to get you going ----------------
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20090716-174116_3535124701_00a13c54be_o.jpg (30.1 KB, 199 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #35
dmr
Registered Abuser
 
dmr's Avatar
 
dmr is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere in Middle America
Posts: 3,614
Let me give you some thoughts from a different perspective ...

In this day and age, when we're very uptight about stalkers, perverts, and the like, yes, it seems creepy. However, 40 years ago it was far more acceptable.

Sorry if I ramble on and on about this, but I still feel more or less the same as I did back then.

I know I've mentioned this here. My brother had what he called his "beach lens", which was a huge el-cheapo Spiratone 400mm telephoto. He and his bud would take the train out to Rockaway and they would hang out on the beach, smoke, drink (uh?) soda (yeah, right!), and take casual shots of the young ladies. "Boys will be boys" was my mom's attitude.

I remember that Spiratone had a kind of right-angle mirror adapter which they sold for just such things.

Nobody at all thought these guys were in any way stalkers or pervs! They weren't.

I saw through this as they very badly wanted to approach some of the girls, get to know them, and develop a relationship, but they were just too shy about it. I tried explaining this to him, but ...

My interpretation is still more or less the same. My guess is that the photographers in question here would LOVE to have a relationship with some of the young ladies they are shooting, but for some reason are reluctant to pursue such a thing.

That's my not so humble opinion, anyway ...
__________________
My Top Ten (12)
My Gallery
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #36
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by javimm View Post
He usually uses a 70-200 f2.8 or a huge 300 or whatever long prime or zoom he brings for the day. 90% of the pictures he takes are portraits of young woman shot from long distance. This pictures aren't sexual explicit or anything. They're just portraits of women walking in the street. He has thousands of pictures, all the same, just faces of unknown girls walking. I find it extremely boring. I mean, who'd like to see an exhibition of 500 pictures of woman faces?
I don't know: people's faces are interesting. And I can certainly appreciate a pretty face:


[click for photo by calzinger at dA]

Still, I expect that many people would find "character" as interesting as "pretty":


[click for photo by Heide Smith at flickr]

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #37
Larky
Registered User
 
Larky is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmr View Post
Let me give you some thoughts from a different perspective ...

In this day and age, when we're very uptight about stalkers, perverts, and the like, yes, it seems creepy. However, 40 years ago it was far more acceptable.

Sorry if I ramble on and on about this, but I still feel more or less the same as I did back then.

I know I've mentioned this here. My brother had what he called his "beach lens", which was a huge el-cheapo Spiratone 400mm telephoto. He and his bud would take the train out to Rockaway and they would hang out on the beach, smoke, drink (uh?) soda (yeah, right!), and take casual shots of the young ladies. "Boys will be boys" was my mom's attitude.

I remember that Spiratone had a kind of right-angle mirror adapter which they sold for just such things.

Nobody at all thought these guys were in any way stalkers or pervs! They weren't.

I saw through this as they very badly wanted to approach some of the girls, get to know them, and develop a relationship, but they were just too shy about it. I tried explaining this to him, but ...

My interpretation is still more or less the same. My guess is that the photographers in question here would LOVE to have a relationship with some of the young ladies they are shooting, but for some reason are reluctant to pursue such a thing.

That's my not so humble opinion, anyway ...
That makes it all seem more creepy to me. People walking around craving something they are scared of, so they decide to shoot pictures secretly so they can do what with them later? You've filled my mind with really nasty images I'm struggling to remove.
__________________
My Flickr
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #38
Chris101
Lazy Lytro Shooter
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larky View Post
That makes it all seem more creepy to me. People walking around craving something they are scared of, so they decide to shoot pictures secretly so they can do what with them later? You've filled my mind with really nasty images I'm struggling to remove.
Life itself is creepy and dark Andrew. Go with it.
__________________
101-365
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #39
yanidel
Registered User
 
yanidel's Avatar
 
yanidel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Paris
Age: 43
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmr View Post
Let me give you some thoughts from a different perspective ...

In this day and age, when we're very uptight about stalkers, perverts, and the like, yes, it seems creepy. However, 40 years ago it was far more acceptable.
I don't think it is less acceptable nowadays, young people take trillions of pictures.
But if I understood correctly, your brother had basically the same age as the girls photographed. He could have indeed gotten in a relationship with any of them I guess. Now, let say it was a family 60 years old buddy that had taken these pictures, would have this seen as normal too ? Or just shyness to start a relationship. Probably not.

Seriously, I take pictures of women (all ages) in the street but only when I feel there is a reason for it (colors, environment, situation, personality ...). One day on Les Champs-Elysées and you can come back with 100 pictures of beautiful young women, but that would be boring. Now what I don't like is the mega-zoom idiots that stand back 30 feet and do act like perverts. It is these very ones that make everybody become suspicious. Better be frank about it, use your 50mm lens, try to get the candid without worrying too much about being spotted. And if you are, smile, say something nice. There is much more chance to get a smile, funny comment or even discussion than be chased after being told "pervert pervert" Never happened to me at least.

Were I not single, I am sure this would be a wonderful first "approach" technique.
__________________
80 weeks around the world : http://www.yanidel.net
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2009   #40
dmr
Registered Abuser
 
dmr's Avatar
 
dmr is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere in Middle America
Posts: 3,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larky View Post
so they can do what with them later?
Well, uh {blush} I do know what you mean, and I really wasn't thinking of that when I wrote that, but the principle is still the same.

Whether they take photos of young ladies and/or {insert euphemism here}, it's still the same, they are substituting one or the other for a more meaningful relationship.
__________________
My Top Ten (12)
My Gallery
My Blog
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 14:21.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.