Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/08/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Legs
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 18:24:27 -0500
References: <AANLkTi=+r+aAVfVDOY1CTgj-MCSfR8-uRiZO+RsuHBNh@mail.gmail.com> <20100829013554.2448957b@linux-wbgu.site> <66C05887-7D0F-4D2F-8AF9-07947A09061F@gmail.com> <20100829021523.5369025a@linux-wbgu.site> <5BA29308-0153-4D66-B38C-603825BFE287@mac.com> <20100829184918.5a32248e@linux-wbgu.site>
 
For me the line is crossed when
we see no attempt to achieve respect,
grace and/or beauty.

I consider it okay to photograph
the homeless
or
any other men and women in public
as long as we do it with respect, grace and beauty.

We all know what trash photography looks like.
The photograph in question does not qualify as "great" IMO.
Yet it certainly does not come close to 
exploitation, crass, derogatory, opportunistic,
or defamatory to this or any other woman.

However opportunity did play a role;
as it does with all "street" photography.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist





On Aug 29, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Phil wrote:

> We shouldn't take opportunistic photos of the homeless
> but this theme is ok? That's what I'm getting at, is all.
In reply to: Message from pswango at att.net (Phil Swango) ([Leica] war is personal)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Legs)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil) ([Leica] Legs)