Red on Black
January 31st, 2007
Paparazzi
January 30th, 2007
Where do paparazzi fit in to the discussion of photographer’s rights and access? Are they news photographers? I’m not so sure I have the answer to that question. But I can tell you that I have absolutely no interest in their subject matter or the photos they produce. I’m frankly appalled by all the attention our society pays to the private lives of a few celebrities, some of whom are famous only for being famous. Just a diversion from the issues that deserve our attention. Bread and circuses. So we get the celebrity circus, courtesy of a group of photographers.
There is no doubt that the celebrities need the paparazzi as much as the paparazzi need the celebrities. It’s a fairly transparent little dance for attention that we see going on all the time. A lot of theater, but sometimes some real damage, even death. And for what? Some more publicity to boost a movie or TV show. A big payday for that embarrassing photo when a celebrity looks pretty much like the rest of us? All, once again, a diversion from anything that matters.
Are any of you watching “Dirt”? I’m a fan of Courtney Cox, so I started watching it from the beginning. (And, when I say fan what that means to me is that I think she is a fairly talented actress in addition to being a beautiful woman…I have no interest in her private life, just her professional career and work as an actress.) I’m enjoying the show. Check it out, if for no other reason than to watch the schizophrenic photographer who is a central character.
You have to wonder if this serious nut job paparazzi character was created as a form of revenge on the paparazzi who have imposed on Courtney Cox and her family and friends over the years. But then, photographers are usually portrayed as pretty weird individuals on TV. Anyone remember Animal on Lou Grant?
But photographers tend to be a little bit different, don’t we? I’ve often noticed at photo conferences that there tend to be significantly more beards in attendance than would be the case with a random sample of the general population. It’s also very common to find a motorcycle parked in a photographer’s garage. I suppose it has something to do with “right brain thinking” and not a little with the nature of the work we do. We have to be there when it happens. You can write at a computer terminal back at the office. But you can’t get photos that way. Being out there in the world seeing what is happening…and doing it on your own…that’s what originally drew me to become a photographer. That and the naked women.
Here’s a softer vision of the beautiful naked Nola, courtesy of my old single-element soft-focus lens.
2007 Calendars
January 30th, 2007
It’s almost the end of January which means I’ll be removing my 2007 calendars from distribution soon. So if you still want to get a calendar, better hurry or they’ll be gone. You can see and order them here: http://www.lulu.com/Wayward
More Nola
January 29th, 2007
I hope you aren’t getting tired of Nola. I know I’m not. Every time I go back to those photos I find more that I love. Here’s another one.
Spirit Stealing
January 27th, 2007
Many years ago I used to do street photography. I was fairly successful at it, with a lot of those photos finding their way to publication in one place or another. I don’t do street photography now. I have respect for those who do and wouldn’t think of arguing that there is anything wrong with what they do. But long ago I became uncomfortable with taking photos of people in public places without their knowledge or consent. I called that photography spirit stealing at the time I was doing it, and I still refer to it that way. I think that idea which some laugh at as primitive is actually a very apt description of what happens in that kind of photography. I’m not comfortable with stealing like that. So I don’t do it.
Eventually that discomfort with “candid” photography is one of the variety of forces that moved me toward the work I do now where everyone involved in the creation of my photos is a volunteer who knows what we are doing and why. Whatever I “take” from my subjects when I “take” their photo is given by them freely, not stolen by me on the sly.
Again, this is just a personal viewpoint and reflects what I’m comfortable with and not comfortable with in the selection of subjects. I am in no way interested in trying to apply this viewpoint to other photographers. We each are entitled to make our own decisions about our subject matter and style of work. It’s really nobody’s business but our own. I just thought it might be moderately interesting to share my personal viewpoint…I guess that’s what a blog is supposed to be about anyway.
I came to this point of view gradually without a real conscious attempt to think it through. Like much of who I am, it’s a product of the 60s. Sorry about that, but I’m an old hippy in many ways, and not ashamed of it in the least.
When I was in college studying photography I received much of my education outside the classroom, darkroom and studio. I had already been working as a newspaper photographer before going to college, so I ended up working for student publications as a photographer. In the 60s that often meant I was photographing demonstrations and sometimes riots. I loved that work. The excitement of the situation, the wonderful mix of skills required to make successful photos in that situation…I loved it. You had to be able to make correct exposures (with a manual camera with no internal meter in those days) focus, compose, find the right spot to see what was happening, and know when to duck. I once had a brick remove a strobe from the top of my camera while I was shooting.
I learned about theater. During the “riot” phase of some demonstrations I learned that some protesters who were planning to get arrested would carry packets of ketchup to smear on their faces when they were being taken away so it would make a more dramatic photo.
I learned the value of access. I had press credentials, so I was left alone by the police. Those same credentials from the “pig press” as it was sometimes referred to then, could, however, get you in trouble with the demonstrators and restrict your access to them. I had a classmate who had no press background. He was a Vietnam veteran recently discharged from the army. At one demonstration he decided to take a photo of the scene with is pinhole camera. He was arrested and hauled away. Worse, the police opened up his pinhole camera and exposed the sheet of film inside, so he didn’t even get a photo for his efforts.
It was around this time that the shootings at Kent State happened. After that I found I could no longer go to the demonstrations as an observer/photographer. I put my camera away and became one of the demonstrators. I was a strong supporter of non-violent protest and worked hard to prevent violence and destruction. My views were in the minority, however and before long what had been peaceful demonstrations turned into violent riots. One day I walked up town from my dorm to find a National Guardsman with fixed bayonet standing by every parking meter. The school soon closed for the year. Less than a year later I was drafted and was off to a new phase of my life. I’ve never regretted my decision to stop being a photographer for those last weeks of that school year.
One more story from that time that I think speaks to the power and the moral issues of photography. One of the things I covered in those days was the Weather Underground. I went to their meetings. I did not photograph at their meetings, but they provided context for the photos I was doing at the demonstrations. The members of that group were very paranoid, or so I thought. They always covered their faces when they went in and out of the meeting place because they were sure they were being photographed. I laughed at them. Afterall, isn’t this America where we are free to assemble and share our views…we are a free country, right? Well, a few years later I met and became friends with the photographer who was across the street on top of a building taking those photos with a telephoto lens as the members of that group came and went. He assured me that there were photos of me in that file.
I don’t think he stole much of my spirit.
Photography and Privacy
January 26th, 2007
Well, that last post lead to some interesting discoveries. First, someone is actually reading this stuff! That’s pretty frightening. Remember what I said in the last post about photographers usually not being able to express themselves in a comprehendible manner…
But, Morgan makes a very valid point, one I certainly would not dispute. The conflict between the right of a photographer to freely photograph anything she sees and the right of a potential subject of those photos to have privacy and be free of the intrusion of a photographer goes to the core issue of freedom. Where does my freedom end and yours begin? The classic answer goes something like my freedom to swing my fist ends at your chin. Of course, in practice it tends to get a bit more complicated than that. And much of our legal system exists just to define those boundaries. Laws against murder, assault and theft are obvious examples and go back to the beginnings of society and laws.
So, I’ll blame the blog format for my not following through with this full thought yesterday. I thought the post was getting too long and just stopped before getting into this part of the discussion.
The question of what is fair game for photography has troubled me for all the many years I’ve been a photographer. Some answers are obvious, at least to me. News events are free game. The cleanup of Ground Zero was a tremendously important news event where photography was improperly prohibited. The prohibition was for political purposes and was counter to the core values of a free democratic society. I object to that. And there’s been a lot of that going on in recent years. The return of flag draped coffins to the US from Iraq and Afghanistan has been closed to photographers. The stated reason is to preserve the privacy of the dead and their families. BULLSHIT! The reason is to prevent the American people from seeing a powerful visual representation of the cost of the war. And that violates the foundation of a government that derives its authority from the consent of the governed. The citizens of a democratic society have a right and an obligation to be informed about the policies of their government and the consequences of those policies. Why? Because it is their responsibility as citizens to work to change those policies if they disagree with them.
(As an aside, if you haven’t read Harry G. Frankfurt’s On Bullshit, I highly recommend it to your attention.)
This is getting long again so I’ll wrap up and continue tomorrow with some of my own personal experiences with the issue of what is ok to photograph and what isn’t.
Just a couple more comments. Sheba mentioned a contest of subway photos. I wasn’t aware of that contest, but I was aware of the very improper ban on photography in the NYC subway system. I don’t think that ban was motivated by the political purposes of the ban at Ground Zero, but rather is just stupid bureaucracy in action. There have been a lot of that kind of heavy handed mindless restrictions since 9/11. I don’t think the motivation is usually evil, but rather just stupid overreaction. We have to be careful not to lose this “war on terrorism” (the problems with that name for what’s going on could take up several more posts) by giving up our freedom that the terrorists want to take away from us, thus giving them victory at our own hands.
And, one more story. An old friend was also at the Meyerowitz talk. He was the overnight photo editor for AP in NYC on 9/11. He told me that the AP never succeeded in getting a photographer into Ground Zero during the cleanup. That’s wrong. That’s a violation of the freedom of the press that is so essential to the functioning of a democracy that it was written into our constitution. The AP didn’t try to sneak photographers into the site, but simply rented an apartment with a view of the scene and kept a photographer there at all times monitoring, photographing and transmitting what they could see. Better than nothing, but it shouldn’t have had to be that way.
Thanks for the comments, folks. It really is nice to know that some come here for more than the naked photos.
Today’s naked photo is Nola in her attic again. A very private place. I chose this one especially for Morgan. She’ll know why.
Photography and Freedom
January 25th, 2007
I saw Joel Meyerowitz last night. He was giving a talk about his work at Ground Zero in NYC during the cleanup. He has a book out of the images he made there. The story of how he came to do those photos was compelling and had some important messages for all of us. It’s nice to encounter such a well spoken photographer, since so many of us are known for our inability to talk about what we do in a coherent manner…myself included.
Meyerowitz is a NYC native, but happened to be out of town on 9/11. As soon as he was able to get back into the city he went to see the site of the attack. When he got there he found the site blocked off with fence covered by tarps so no one could see anything. While he was looking he picked up his Leica to take a few snaps. Almost immediately a policewoman tapped him on the shoulder and told him all photography was forbidden.
I understand the rage he felt in response to that. I feel it any time anyone tries to tell me I can’t photograph. This is America. We are supposed to be free. No one has the right to stop us from photographing. And what we do with our cameras is important and powerful. So important and powerful that some in authority feel they must stop us from doing it because we are a threat.
Well, Meyerowitz knew that photos had to be taken of the cleanup at Ground Zero. It was important. There needed to be a record for the future and as a way of healing for all of us who have been affected by the horrible events of 9/11. So he did something about it.
Through a variety of means Meyerowitz managed to get into the site and make photos. At first he would be thrown out several times a day and simply walked to a different entry point and went back in. He didn’t sneak around to do his work. In fact, he did most of the photos with an 8×10 view camera. After a time Meyerowitz made friends with many of the people working at the site and soon they were helping him stay there whenever he was challenged.
It’s also worth noting that although he ended up being the only photographer who was able to document the cleanup, that wasn’t how Meyerowitz wanted it to be. In fact, he sent a written proposal to the mayor asking for a team of 6 photographers to be given permission to work there to produce a photographic archive. He never received a response to that proposal. So he did the job alone.
Thanks to Meyerowitz there is now an archive of fine photos to help us remember what went on in that cleanup operation. We all owe him a debt for that.
And we need to remember that we must defend our freedoms, including the freedom to photograph, from those who would stop us.
This reminded me of a memorial service for an uncle that I attended recently. His daughters spoke at the service and one of the many things they mentioned about their father was that he taught them that “No Trespassing” signs meant “Come on in and look around.”
Which, of course, harkens to the verse by Woody Guthrie:
I saw a sign
Sign said, “No Trespassing”
The other side of the sign didn’t say nothin’
That side was made for you and me.
That’s how we as photographers should be looking at the world.
This is getting long so I’ll stop and maybe write more about this and related subjects in future posts. But it reminded me that I must be careful to make sure I never let anyone tell me where I can or cannot make photos. And it reminded me of the times when someone has tried to do that to me and just how angry that can make me. When anyone tries to restrict our freedom to photograph what and where we want, it is the responsibility of all of us to stand up and protest. We can’t allow that in our free society or we have lost what is most precious. Thank you Joel Meyerowitz for not listening to the bureaucratic idiots who tried to stop you from doing what needed to be done.
The photo is, of course, Nola again in her attic, a private place that she shared with me so we could use it to make some art. Thanks, Nola.
More Nola in the attic
January 24th, 2007
Nola’s attic was a rich location. I love incorporating compositional elements like those offered by this spot with the variety of light that was available here. Add in a beautiful nude figure and a very nice model who is fun to work with and I’m having a great time. That’s how this shoot was. I plan to post several more photos all from the attic just to show the variety available in such a common location. It’s good to get out of the studio. I start to get stir crazy in the winter when I haven’t been able to shoot outdoors for a while. I try to plan trips to warm places to shoot and I also am always talking to models about shooting in the snow…for some reason I don’t get a lot of takers for that idea…but this year I’ve had to postpone my planned winter trip because of some health issues that are getting taken care of right now. But I’m planning to make that winter trip in a month or so…guess it will be a spring trip by that time…and get some new outdoor photos. Until then I’ll keep looking around for other locations and keep working in the studio. More of Nola coming in the next few posts.
Nola
January 23rd, 2007
Here’s another shot of Nola from Vermont. One of the joys of shooting on locations is finding new backgrounds and seeing how they can be worked into compositions that mean something to me. The attic of Nola’s house, though unheated, was a great spot for shooting and we did quite a few photos up there. This is one that just uses the color of the wall and the quality of the natural daylight filtered through some windows. I’ll post some more soon that show more of the environment that I found there and was able to work into some compositions that work well for me.
Nola is a fine model and a very nice person. I don’t know how long she will be staying in Vermont, so if you are a photographer in that area you should work with her soon while you have the chance. I hope to get the chance to work with her again no matter where she ends up moving to.
Candace again
January 21st, 2007
Here’s another shot of Candace from our recent shoot. Candace and Elizabeth both did a great job in a short shoot. There are a lot more from this shoot to share with you.
I’m back from my weekend out of town and I’ll be posting more of Candace and Elizabeth in the coming days. Hard to miss with models as good as these two.
