Inner Jesus. WARNING: Probably Offensive.

CodyWeber

I have been wanting to do a shoot showcasing the flaws on fundamentalist Christianity.
For the record; I have nothing against spirituality. In fact, I think it can be a beautiful thing. Unfortunately, a lot of peoples spirituality affects people like me.
I live in a town where there are more Churches than there are businesses. I'm constantly battered down and told how I'm destined for hell and I live a sin-filled life. From the outset, this set me in a really weird, bitter position.
Personally, I believe that religion hinders society.
I believe religion is a prime reason for war and death and murder.
People kill in the name of their religion more than on any other premise.
I think it is healthy to have a belief in God if you need it.
I don't believe there is a need to be specific about it.
And I wanted to showcase that. This is one set.
I want to clear up and tell you the meaning of the photos.
That is something I rarely do.

The photos represent the blind-eyes of religion. The way people will flock to anything if they're accepted. How people can be more like sheep than human. I wanted to showcase those elements.

In future sets, I plan to showcase the flaws of fundamentalist Christian views on homosexuality; Catholic priests, and the idealistic view on heaven.

I am sorry if you get offended by these photos. That was not my intention.
I'm not attacking you for being religious. I'm attacking the principles. Sorry if that upsets you.









-Cody Weber Photography.

Andy

CodyWeber wrote:

I want to clear up and tell you the meaning of the photos.
That is something I rarely do.

I am sorry if you get offended by these photos. That was not my intention.
I'm not attacking you for being religious. I'm attacking the principles. Sorry if that upsets you.

You shouldn't have to explain yourself- but thanks anyhow!

Keep the photographs coming.

LuckyBob

The photos themselves are fantastic and it's great to see somebody (a) turn something that they feel so strongly about into a theme for photos and (b) have the guts to come out and say it regardless of other people's opinion

Andy

LuckyBob wrote:

The photos themselves are fantastic and it's great to see somebody (a) turn something that they feel so strongly about into a theme for photos and (b) have the guts to come out and say it regardless of other people's opinion

completely

DoctorIt

Ah some edge! we need that!

Cody, some really great work. Topic aside, for a moment, I think its really cool that you have 4 photos, with 4 very different styles. 1) a very well colored exposed, "realistic" photo. 2) bleachy almost surreal. 3) over-dramatic monochrome. and 4) almost hollywoodish colorization.

Bravo, great to see some art with a POV

slapshot

There is hypocrisy in any religion practiced to the extremes, so no offense taken.

As feedback on the photos, I'm not sure that they achieve your purpose. Without your explanation, I would not have got it. Other than perhaps the photo with the burning bible expressing dissatisfaction with religion, the photos don't have the same impact as your statements. At least for me. That's my 2 cents.

schmoo

Cody, I remember your last set of photos and I think that I really like your style. Additionally, I am also glad to see artwork that has a visceral reason behind them. Even if I didn't read your explanation I think I would have gotten the message all the same.

So in other words, fantastic work.

anwmn1

Well I will not agree or disagree on your thoughts- just comment on the photos and the idea.

I think giving some background did help with the photos and the message is conveyed a little bit in the shots. If you can find a way to describe what the shots are about in say two or three lines you will be better off.
Also try not to bring your own personal feelings in too soon. You may loose people before they even see the shots.

The first two are photojournal type shots that look like they could be in Time about a cult. Little soft on the focus and a bit dark but I like the style and the shots.

The second two are more artistic/ slanted view. Shots like this are a bit too far in one direction which will attrack people of similar views but others will just write off as *crap*.
Again I like the third a bit but too dark and soft.
Last one simply looks like kids playing with fire.

Just my thoughts-

kdog

Cody, I agree with the others. You've got guts to broach a subject like this. Fortunately, it seems that you picked the right place to do it. Bring it on.

So what book were they burning?

-joel

System

I dig it. Cool shoot Cody. Don;t ever be afraid to make a statement, regardless of whether you believe in it or not. Stirring the pot is always a good thing, especially with photography.

CodyWeber

anwmn1 wrote:

Well I will not agree or disagree on your thoughts- just comment on the photos and the idea.

I think giving some background did help with the photos and the message is conveyed a little bit in the shots. If you can find a way to describe what the shots are about in say two or three lines you will be better off.
Also try not to bring your own personal feelings in too soon. You may loose people before they even see the shots.

The first two are photojournal type shots that look like they could be in Time about a cult. Little soft on the focus and a bit dark but I like the style and the shots.

The second two are more artistic/ slanted view. Shots like this are a bit too far in one direction which will attrack people of similar views but others will just write off as *crap*.
Again I like the third a bit but too dark and soft.
Last one simply looks like kids playing with fire.

Just my thoughts-

Well, to my defense...I hate obvious art. The kind of art / photo I love is that of the conceptual / mysterious variety. I'm not a fan of saying, "Hey, this is wrong / right." Rather, I like the people to determine that and get their own personal meaning out of it.
I actually thought I was a little TOO specific on some of them; haha. Oh well. To each is own, I suppose.

wxwax

What's important is that you had an idea, and tried to execute it as creatively as you could. That's great! Love it.

More!

CodyWeber

Here are a couple more shots that I just finished.










-Cody Weber Photography.

anwmn1

CodyWeber wrote:

Well, to my defense...I hate obvious art. The kind of art / photo I love is that of the conceptual / mysterious variety. I'm not a fan of saying, "Hey, this is wrong / right." Rather, I like the people to determine that and get their own personal meaning out of it.
I actually thought I was a little TOO specific on some of them; haha. Oh well. To each is own, I suppose.

Think my comments may have been worded incorrectly. I was trying to say you don't need to give us all the back story up front. Just a title or phrase. Like you said let the viewer question it- get their own meaning or ask you what it means.

I am digging your style. Lighting in these is pretty dramatic. The recent set- second shot with the fire is pretty cool.

It is great to see such a different style on here.

Awais Yaqub

Nice photos
I get it as people follow priests blindly . I got it right ?
Muslims have same problem. They are suppose to follow only 1 holy book and Prophet but they won't . Mostly mullahs here are political even tell lies and associates with Muhammad PBUH . People follow them blindly the reason is very low litracy level . Any why i beleive terrorism or killings are not monoply of any religion but it is monoply of Polititions :cry

btw i think it may offend followers of bible (i mean burning and placing on floor) because even i am not feeling well


Anyway i liked your photos and thanks for listening

Arcayus

I really liked your images....they tell a very good and very true tale. I guess everyone looks at them in a different way. For me they illustrate how the true meaning of Christianity has been lost by men following other men. I don’t find this at all offensive. In blind ignorance you have stumbled on a graphic way to shed light on the current state of the majority of Christians!

wxwax

Ah... let's stick strictly to comments on the photos please.

We all know how incendiary a topic is religion. So no more comments on that, if you please.

Photo talk only.

Maestro

Love the photos. Very well constructed to convey the meaning.

Bob&Glennie

While I have no problem with your images by themselves (because I would not stiffle creative, visual expression) I must say that this is no place to express bias in ANY direction re. personal beliefs. If your prose (not you pictures) goes unchallanged then I must conclude that DGrin and Smugmug have sunk to a new low.

Bob

urbanaries

Cody, I really enjoy our work. I dig that you try to say something with your images, not just produce likenesses or record what you see literally. Anyone can do that.

You have ideas, and have skills to wield the photographic medium into communicating them.

Unfortunately, dgrin frowns upon the exchange of ideas, whether they're in agreement or disagreement. so while I'd love to comment on your subject matter I should probably just give you a since those seem to be received better.

RE: technique, I'm curious what you're doing in post processing to get that desaturated, green, gritty cast to your images. Or if its out of camera, good gosh, that would be even more interesting.

thanks for posting

lynne

wxwax

Final warning.

I'll remove any post from here on that discusses anything other than photography.

We have to be able to show and discuss images like these, without folks taking offense.

Bob&Glennie

wxwax wrote:

Final warning.

I'll remove any post from here on that discusses anything other than photography.

We have to be able to show and discuss images like these, without folks taking offense.

Then you should remove the entire thread because it's about a LOT more than just the images!

Bob

Andy

urbanaries wrote:

Unfortunately, dgrin frowns upon the exchange of ideas,

Actually untrue - we just want to avoid nasty flame wars.

How about the discussion related to using art to convey beliefs? To tell a story? I'd love to find out how these photos make you feel when you view them - what you think and feel.

Now don't take this last part the wrong way: I don't care how you feel about the poster's views, nor he about yours.

Does this make sense?

Bob&Glennie

Andy wrote:

Actually untrue - we just want to avoid nasty flame wars.

How about the discussion related to using art to convey beliefs? To tell a story? I'd love to find out how these photos make you feel when you view them - what you think and feel.

Now don't take this last part the wrong way: I don't care how you feel about the poster's views, nor he about yours.

Does this make sense?

Fine. Use the art. Go for it (if indeed the art can express what the poster intended), but let the art say what it will and don't let the forum be a soap-box for every would-be preacher of whatever personal belief!

Bob

urbanaries

Andy wrote:

Actually untrue - we just want to avoid nasty flame wars.

How about the discussion related to using art to convey beliefs? To tell a story? I'd love to find out how these photos make you feel when you view them - what you think and feel.

Now don't take this last part the wrong way: I don't care how you feel about the poster's views, nor he about yours.

Does this make sense?

I don't know Andy, I want to stand corrected, but IMO the "keep the talk about the picture" warning isn't always necessary. I get that dgrin wants to avoid controversy, but this isn't a knitting circle, its a forum for artists, and artists share/convey/have opinions about their own art, and the art of others.

I do think you're correct to point out the difference between communicating how an image makes you feel, rather than personal agreement/disagreement w/ the subject matter. Point taken. It is a fine line, for sure. I for one wish folks would talk less about technique and more about how an image makes them feel. There's quite an absence of that here, IMO, and I try to do my part. We all know I've been on both sides of the free speech fence.

System

Andy wrote:

Actually untrue - we just want to avoid nasty flame wars.

How about the discussion related to using art to convey beliefs? To tell a story? I'd love to find out how these photos make you feel when you view them - what you think and feel.

Now don't take this last part the wrong way: I don't care how you feel about the poster's views, nor he about yours.

Does this make sense?

It's a fine line to walk, discussing the way an image makes you feel without in one way or another making a statement that judges the photographers views. Now I'm not saying an image created by a person implicitly reflects his or her beliefs, but the viewer will most likely read into it to some degree or another. As such, the viewers feelings about the image are easily construed as judging the beliefs of the photographer.

That made my dizzy.

Clearly religion and politics have no place here, but photographs that depict such topics need to be here as much as images of birds crapping. Neither is more or less offensive in their own right but both could easily offend. If we are to be able to discuss the art for the art and not for the socio-political implications then where do we draw the line? It's a rather nebulas delineation.

wxwax

urbanaries wrote:

I don't know Andy, I want to stand corrected, but IMO the "keep the talk about the picture" warning isn't always necessary. I get that dgrin wants to avoid controversy, but this isn't a knitting circle, its a forum for artists, and artists share/convey/have opinions about their own art, and the art of others.

Not to avoid controversy, urbanaries, but to avoid the ugly flamefests that erupt on the internet.

We've all seen them. And we long ago decided that they wouldn't be tolerated on dgrin.

If we opposed controversy, this thread would have been deleted immediately. Instead, we actively seek more of this kind of photography. It's opinionated, crafted and thought provoking. We'd like more of this, not less.

Andy

Bob&Glennie wrote:

Fine. Use the art. Go for it (if indeed the art can express what the poster intended), but let the art say what it will and don't let the forum be a soap-box for every would-be preacher of whatever personal belief!

Bob

Who gives a rat's butt what the OP thinks - really? I care about how the photos make YOU feel. And ME feel.

He could have said nothing (that'd be fine) but didn't. So What? Let's talk about the photos and the art

Bob&Glennie

truth wrote:

It's a fine line to walk, discussing the way an image makes you feel without in one way or another making a statement that judges the photographers views. Now I'm not saying an image created by a person implicitly reflects his or her beliefs, but the viewer will most likely read into it to some degree or another. As such, the viewers feelings about the image are easily construed as judging the beliefs of the photographer.

That made my dizzy.

Clearly religion and politics have no place here, but photographs that depict such topics need to be here as much as images of birds crapping. Neither is more or less offensive in their own right but both could easily offend. If we are to be able to discuss the art for the art and not for the socio-political implications then where do we draw the line? It's a rather nebulas delineation.

The Photographs are OK. And by themselves they can be interpreted any way a viewer pleases. But Mr. Weber has not left it up to the viewer's interpretation. He has put his own personal bias on them by expressing his views in writing.

Let the art speak for itself (if it can). Keep your religious bias out of it.

Not a single one of you would let me away with it if I climbed up upon a soap box and started preaching what I hold to be sacred; so what's good for this goose MUST be good for the rest of you ganders.
Bob

Bob&Glennie

Andy wrote:

Who gives a rat's butt what the OP thinks - really? I care about how the photos make YOU feel. And ME feel.

He could have said nothing (that'd be fine) but didn't. So What? Let's talk about the photos and the art

I don't give a ratt's ass what he thinks either but this is no place for him to be pedaling what he thinks regardless of whether we give a ratt's ass or not. As far as the photo's are concerned ... they don't turn my crank.

Bob

LuckyBob

There's plenty of art out there that will offend some group of people or another. Everybody has their own personal beliefs/habits/objects/opinions/cars/words/yougettheidea that they hold dear, and as artists can be a fantastic source of inspiration. I have no personal issue if people shoot emotionally charged photos of the light of god or other people burning the bible and post them here. It means something to them; it's art to them.

We should all be big enough not to get hung up on whether or not their own personal ideas (or even message) offends us and accept that those photos mean something to them and let them express their art. If we spend our time stifling or attacking their work, it hurts the community in general. Think of it this way: if you shot photos that conveyed an idea or message (that may or may not need some explanation), would you want to be confronted, or your work appreciated for what you believe it is?

Sorry wxwax - I know it's not technically about the photos themselves