Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/10/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Chris, In your ideal world, what types of photography would be tolerated? I'm curious to see if I'm misunderstanding something in your various posts. Thanks Dante NO ARCHIVE On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:19 PM, Chris Saganich wrote: > What I don't wish to see displayed in public: > > Kids eating happy meals. > Middle class families eating KFC. > Sugary foods and drink adds during children TV shows. > > http://www.spurgeonworld.com/blog/images/obesity.jpg > > http://www.bored.com/billboards/images/mcdonalds_hip.2.jpg > > Remember, not so long ago: > > http://www.bored.com/billboards/images/reagan.jpg > > Example of perceptual shift or what we call creating negative > valence for a product: > > http://www.soloflex.com/wp-content/uploads/Glass-of-Human-Fat-Debuts-In-New-Health-Department-Ads-Gothamist.jpg > > Art and the counterfactual argument to "just making a living". > > http://www.chrisjordan.com/current_set2.php?id=11 > > > > > At 03:26 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote: >> The contempt is aimed at the industry. I suppose there aren't too >> many LUGGERS photographing children eating happy meals for >> bilboards. For those who are, please stop. >> >> >> At 02:05 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote: >>> Gee Chris, YOU NEVER MENTIONED TV ADVERTISING very 3 minutes or so? >>> >>> Is it we the photographers who tick you off or is it the constant >>> bombardment by TV commercials that make you so angry? >>> ted >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Saganich" <chs2018 at >>> med.cornell.edu >>> > >>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> >>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 10:17 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Stock Photography >>> >>> >>>> And if anyone wishes to save photography from oblivion there >>>> needs to >>>> be a serious critical perception shift away from the devaluation of >>>> imagery which is promoted through editorial and advertising. This >>>> can start by critically thinking about the role of imagery in >>>> non-ethical advertising practices. I consider all advertising >>>> non-ethical but that is just my somewhat radical (but justified) >>>> view. Yes. I'm likely to deface a billboard rather then chain >>>> myself >>>> to an old oak tree...so laugh if you like I find advertising an >>>> initial condition for much of the modern ill's we face, from >>>> economy >>>> to obesity, because it creates and manipulates all our cues. Cues, >>>> or another way to look at it is our salient attention, what we pay >>>> attention to. Images are used predominantly to create and >>>> reinforce >>>> our cues. As Tina's images cue people to care or give money on the >>>> positive side, similar images could be used to cue people to >>>> despise >>>> and vilify the same people. When I walk around I see images that >>>> are >>>> predominantly used in ways to cue people into unhealthy socially >>>> and >>>> civilly degrading behavior and thinking. I don't see a cell phone >>>> advertisement, I see the promotion of a product that will very >>>> likely >>>> have profound health effects on its heaviest users 20 years from >>>> now. When I see a child enjoying a Happy Meal I don't see a happy >>>> kid, I see 100 million 25 year olds with a health profile that >>>> makes >>>> most doctors shudder and the collapse of our health care >>>> system. Call it a crusade I suppose but I HATE ADVERTISING and >>>> images are it's core component. So it turns my stomach to see >>>> photography and images used like that to cue people into all these >>>> unhealthy, negative behaviors just for the profit. Profit over >>>> people is mostly how I see images being used. It's just a >>>> living?...a living breathing, breeding, disaster in my opinion. >>>> >>>> >>>> At 06:11 PM 10/21/2009, you wrote: >>>>> From: "Chris Saganich" <chs2018 at med.cornell.edu> >>>>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:50 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Stock Photography >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Advertising IS maleficence in action. Editorial is not so much >>>>>> better in my book, just promoting the rational. It's easy to >>>>>> rationalize "making a living" doing just about anything. Too bad >>>>>> that seems to be where the argument ends, that making a living >>>>>> justifies ignoring the ethical comportment of the industries we >>>>>> work >>>>>> in. I can only wish I could choose which images could be >>>>>> stripped >>>>>> naked, exploited, and discarded and which ones could not. >>>>>> The very >>>>>> idea of purposely making an image for that destiny turns my >>>>>> stomach. Like a rack of ribs to a Buddhist. >>>>> >>>>> Gee Chris I sure wish I understood what you mean ? Maybe I could >>>>> be >>>>> of help to clear this up in your description. Maybe? >>>>> Dr. ted >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>> information >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>> information >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.26/2451 - Release Date: >>> 10/22/09 08:51:00 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information