SATS Loc: Belgium

Since Erich is having a catharsis moment re Morning Jo, I thought I would put up the one photo I am having trouble deciding is in good taste or not. I have to say that I do not care for the late Diane Arbus's style of photography, particularly her general themes of photographing the mentally and physically impaired and those on the bottom rung of societies ladder. As most people get older they require either reading glasses or far seeing glasses and seeing people wearing specs is regarded as normal. The guy in this photo is not wearing corrective glasses but has an extreme short sight problem. Since the recent conversation has gone about line drawing, what do folks here think about this offering. Does it lie within or outside the bounds of what is regarded as acceptable?

(Download)

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Well on the edges of CD cases the printing gets worn and smudged, making the seeing by even the normal eye tough.

SATS Loc: Belgium

That is true enough, thanks for the comment John.

Voss

I'd go with it. He may have forgotten his glasses, as I do on occasion. I wouldn't regard this as a put-down of him.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Hey, it's Diane Freaking Arbus; on our best days we only touch 10% of her talent. When we can take a photograph and process an image like this, then you can make the point.
Our world is built on the shoulders of giants, Diane Arbus was one of those.

krl48 Loc: NY, PA now SC

What the man said....

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Something worth noting for this discussion is that while Arbus personally knew and worked with many of the most prominent Street Photographers of her time, she did relatively little Street Photography herself. She shot documentary portraiture that shared many of the more difficult social aspects of Street: difficult access to a subject's private life, etc. She documented the character of a person and their relationship to themselves. Street is about relationships to life and the surroundings.

Discussions of Arbus always include references to Street, but hardly anyone ever labels her as a Street Photographer. Not that she didn't produce some Street, just that it is rare and typically did not become famous.

AZNikon Loc: Mesa, AZ

Great story shots, particularly #2. What year is it that you could smoke at the counter? Is she meeting someone? Is she troubled by something? The shot really sparks the imagination. A great photographer to say the least.

SATS Loc: Belgium

I am sorry I even mentioned Dianne Arbus now:-( This is not going to degenerate into a let's bash Dianne Arbus session.

Let me break this down into a number of small bits. Firstly the two photos rgrenaderphoto submitted are of exceptional quality. This is especially so when we consider the range of tones in the lighting; developing in a high contrast developer and then final adjustments in enlarging. There is a level of skill demonstrated here that goes beyond moving a few sliders about. The subject matter in these is also very good, the first one is posed and makes very good use of natural lighting, the second is candid and from the captured expression it forces you to consider the subject”s life. If a photograph can make you do that it has achieved its purpose. She looks as though she has experienced some of life's difficulties. There is something here I see only once in every two to three years, you see a person at random and from their expression on that moment you can imagine them ten years younger and ten years older at the same time. It is a peculiar feeling when it happens and I think DA has caught something of that here.

Secondly, let me mention the general ethos of her work. I have seen 'typical or representative' examples of what she did in those compilations of say ten or twenty photographers works. Not exhaustive by any means but somebody thought they stood for her. Some were mild but others I would have baulked about taking. Apaflo was quite sympathetic in saying “She shot documentary portraiture that shared many of the more difficult social aspects of Street: difficult access to a subject's private life, etc. She documented the character of a person and their relationship to themselves.” I have heard less charitable people refer to her as a “Chronicler of the human freak show”. I suppose it one of those areas where opinion will always be divided. Balancing the two photos above with one or two odder examples I have seen, I realize that I do not know enough to make a judgmental comment and should not have mentioned her name at all.

Finally, referring back to the photo I took, at the top of the page, most peoples sight deteriorates as they age. The question I posed is whether this type of photo is on the borderline of what is normal or is it exploiting the vulnerable?

SATS Loc: Belgium

Thanks for that Voss.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

He's in a public place, so I'd say you're good to go.

SATS Loc: Belgium

Thanks for that vote, John.

truckster Loc: Tampa Bay Area

Jeez, Sats that could be me WITH my glasses on. I see no problem with the ethics of the picture. Not bad for a capture either.

SATS Loc: Belgium

Thanks T.

dragonfist Loc: Stafford, N.Y.

I would hardly class that as an objectionable photo. The guy seems to have a problem with close up vision. You in no way are making him look ridiculous or the butt of ill considered humor. By the way Diane Arbus is one of my favorite photographers. I think what makes folks uncomfortable with her work is that they see what could have been their lot in life. A lot of people would rather sweep those things under the rug.