Do photos of sorrow equal exploitation?

Shay Stephens

Some may not be comfortable with a theme of sorrow. Thoughts that such photos equal an exploitation of people may be common nowadays. But such thoughts have not always been. In the 19th century, it was very common to take photos of dead children as a way of remembering them. It wasn't until the 20th century that peoples attitude toward death and unpleasantness took a turn toward denial that they even exist.

I found this interesting article that deals with that very subject here:
http://imsc.usc.edu/haptics/LostandFound/abstracts_hur.html

Photographs of people experiencing sorrow, pain, or any other strong emotion are powerful images that can move and motivate people. They can be historic, they can be profound, they can be life changing.

We talked about this once in this thread:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=53639

The discussion started about talking about the death of Anna Nichole Smith and if it was ok or not to have photographed the happenings of that day. An interesting read.

Don't be afraid of photos, especially photos that move us profoundly. The discomfort we experience is important for us to feel. Just be mindful not to take that to an extreme, especially when it comes to staging such a photo. A good example is the many photos we all have seen of someone pointing a gun at the camera or at their heads in an attempt to infuse the photo with emotion. That is nothing more than a cheap trick and devalues human life and in my view is actually exploitive...of the viewer of the photograph.

pyroPrints.com

Shay Stephens wrote:

Don't be afraid of photos, especially photos that move us profoundly. The discomfort we experience is important for us to feel. Just be mindful not to take that to an extreme, especially when it comes to staging such a photo. A good example is the many photos we all have seen of someone pointing a gun at the camera or at their heads in an attempt to infuse the photo with emotion. That is nothing more than a cheap trick and devalues human life and in my view is actually exploitive...of the viewer of the photograph.

I agree with the first part of your post, but not so much with the second. I've done those kind of photographs before (an indeed there was some controversy in that thread about this). I view these kind of photos as illustrations. I'm not trying to make the viewer believe that some one is actually in danger of getting shot, just illustrating the "possible" situation.

Now I'm not going to argue that I'm not a product of the "violence" in the media, because I am. I like Tarantino, I like comic book art (though I don't read comics), I'll watch anime now and again, I've seen a good 75% of cop dramas that have come out in the past decade. But I, myself am not violent. So to me saying these photos are "a cheap trick and devalue human life" is a bit like saying Grand Theft Auto is corrupting the children.

That being said, some photos can be in bad taste. But I think that's a part of a "social" contest such as this. Not everyone will find everything pleasant.

Just my 2 cents. Hopefully this comes of as an opinion and not a rant.

Shay Stephens

Good points

pyroPrints.com

Shay Stephens wrote:

Good points

well played sir, well played!

Tentacion

Everything is photography, you are there to record events, to a lot of extent you are as my people would call the "Story Teller", but we have far advanced from the days of cavemen we don't draw it on the wall, instead we illustrate it in photographs....would I go as far as the Papparazzi...I don't think so, I believe to some extent we need to value a person's privacy, they are human after all and deserve some respect!!

I beleive in photography depending on how you display or depict your composition of whatever aspect of life, it can and should be tastefully done and present a life teaching to some people that otherwise would never be able to see that side of the fence.

For example, my niece was very sick, oxygen mask, tears, fretting mom, the whole nine yards...some did not like that I invaded my niece's episode taking photos, but the mom was very happy to have the photo, she stated it was a good thing and was very happy to have the pic. for when my great niece was big, she could show and tell the story of how she was sick when she was a little girl.

Everything is double standard and how you perceive what you see , just how well you can see outside of the box. To be able to place your own morals, scruples, and emotions aside, you must disattach yourself to view things objectively!

Did this make sense?? I hope so...I tend to go off on a tangent sometimes..

Stormdancing

We all want to take pretty, happy pictures, but unfortunately that is not the reality of the world we live in. Who will ever forget Ut's photo of shear terror or Adam's photo of an execution? Did the photos of our soldier's caskets returning from Iraq not move you to tears? Why are media coverage and photos not allowed of those returns? Because we don't want to face the strong emotions and truths that they represent.

Sorrow an uncomfortable subject? Yes. Treat it with respect and the dignity it deserves.

Even in times of great personal sorrow photos can preserve some memories and mean the world to some.

http://www.nowilaymedowntosleep.org/

richtersl

I think you need to be very discreet when photographing any non-staged scene that depicts sorrow. The problem is finding the opportunity.

With regard to funerals, it's in the American where taking pictures at them is considered tacky. In Eastern European cultures it's quite commonplace to see people taking pictures at funerals. Good Lord, I've even seen them videotaped! My grandmother died in 1966 and someone took 8mm movies at her funeral. All I could do is stare at the photographer in amazement and wonder who the heck would ever want to watch THAT? Yet, that's what my mother and father wanted.

So if you happen to know where and when an Eastern European funeral is taking place you may have an opportunity there.

rgbivens

Has anybody else heard of James Nachtwey? He is one of my favorite photographers of all time. His work is some of the most compelling I have ever seen. You can check out his website http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ but if you really want to see what he has done you need to watch his documentary dvd. It is amazing and I've watched it several times. If anybody is interested send me a PM and I'll send it to you. A sample of the dvd without any commentary can be watched in the following link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7217522404250291156&q=james+nachtwey+duration%3Along&total=23&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

-Grant

eoren1

Incredible

rgbivens wrote:

Has anybody else heard of James Nachtwey? He is one of my favorite photographers of all time. His work is some of the most compelling I have ever seen. You can check out his website http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ but if you really want to see what he has done you need to watch his documentary dvd. It is amazing and I've watched it several times. If anybody is interested send me a PM and I'll send it to you. A sample of the dvd without any commentary can be watched in the following link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7217522404250291156&q=james+nachtwey+duration%3Along&total=23&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

-Grant

Thanks for sharing that link Grant. His work is incredible. A great example of the sheer power that images of sorrow can hold.
E

UP N MTNS

rgbivens wrote:

Has anybody else heard of James Nachtwey? He is one of my favorite photographers of all time. His work is some of the most compelling I have ever seen. You can check out his website http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ but if you really want to see what he has done you need to watch his documentary dvd. It is amazing and I've watched it several times. If anybody is interested send me a PM and I'll send it to you. A sample of the dvd without any commentary can be watched in the following link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7217522404250291156&q=james+nachtwey+duration%3Along&total=23&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

-Grant

WOW....

Thanks for sharing that link...

S. Horton

rgbivens wrote:

Has anybody else heard of James Nachtwey? He is one of my favorite photographers of all time. His work is some of the most compelling I have ever seen. You can check out his website http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ but if you really want to see what he has done you need to watch his documentary dvd. It is amazing and I've watched it several times. If anybody is interested send me a PM and I'll send it to you. A sample of the dvd without any commentary can be watched in the following link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7217522404250291156&q=james+nachtwey+duration%3Along&total=23&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

-Grant

Wow - Great link, amazing work there. Thx for posting that.

@op - Even when the photos exist, I wonder why they don't have more impact.

3phase

Do photos of sorrow equal exploitation?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.


In general, I think if the purpose of the photo is to bring attention to the photographer then the answer is almost always yes. If the purpose is to bring attention to the subject matter then there is a much greater chance that the audiance will not feel manipulated. I think James Nachtwey's work exemplifies this.


For me another example is Migrant Worker, (1936) by Dorothea Lange.

sunita

I agree - James Nachtwey is one of the best in photojournalism today. Another of my faves is sebastiao salgado. His photos can be found at:
http://www.terra.com.br/sebastiaosalgado/

I think it takes a lot of courage and a certain amount of detachment to be able to go out and photograph tragedy in this world. I find that in the Western world there is a greater concern about privacy, being sued etc. and personally I am very reluctant to take anyone's photo without their permission - of course, the decisive moment is lost in the meantime, but at least my conscience is clear....oh, well...

sunita

S. Horton

sunita wrote:

I agree - James Nachtwey is one of the best in photojournalism today. Another of my faves is sebastiao salgado. His photos can be found at:
http://www.terra.com.br/sebastiaosalgado/

I think it takes a lot of courage and a certain amount of detachment to be able to go out and photograph tragedy in this world. I find that in the Western world there is a greater concern about privacy, being sued etc. and personally I am very reluctant to take anyone's photo without their permission - of course, the decisive moment is lost in the meantime, but at least my conscience is clear....oh, well...

sunita

That is curently a big issue here -- Our laws and rights to photograph have not changed, but I think Google/Web have changed the culture. And, sadly, America is far too quick to sue than mature.

David_S85

This subject just came up in our town's internet forum a few days back. The town is beginning to have a sort of situation where we have, what some of us believe, are too many homeless hanging around and asking people for things that are, well, illegal. So being known as the photog of the group, they asked me to begin taking pictures of the indigent population and posting them or collecting the pictures for some future appeal to the town.

I refused, explaining that it was exploitation and improper to take pictures of people in that situation. I wouldn't even do it if I had a signed release by the subject. Some lines are not meant to be crossed. At least, I won't cross that one.

But here is where I am going with this... not too many years ago, taking pictures of the indigent was not considered exploitation. Times and views change.

Strikeslip

Here's something to discuss... ever see Jill Greenbergs's "End Times" series?

Check it out. The navigation is a bit funky, but mouse over and find "End Times". It's in the top-row, right side.

It's a series of child portraits, in her studio I think. She gets them to cry... a lot! Some look extremely upset.

http://www.manipulator.com/

Her processing is very cool, I think.

richtersl

Strikeslip wrote:

Here's something to discuss... ever see Jill Greenbergs's "End Times" series?

Check it out. The navigation is a bit funky, but mouse over and find "End Times". It's in the top-row, right side.

It's a series of child portraits, in her studio I think. She gets them to cry... a lot! Some look extremely upset.

http://www.manipulator.com/

Her processing is very cool, I think.

I've seen those pictures. Her post-processing is kind of cool. But to me, what she did to get those pictures is a clear-cut case of exploitation. :pissed

pyroPrints.com

Another link to some very important photos:

http://pinguy.infogami.com/blog/vwm6

tsk1979

Regarding photos of sorrow.. would you like to see them on your wall? If not won't it remove any chances of that photo in top ten, as the foremost test of a good image is the "Would you like to be on the wall test"

Nikolai

tsk1979 wrote:

Regarding photos of sorrow.. would you like to see them on your wall? If not won't it remove any chances of that photo in top ten, as the foremost test of a good image is the "Would you like to be on the wall test"

As a big promoter of the "wall" rule, I must politeley disagree.
The thing is, the "sorrow" part is very tricky. I personally simply wouldn't like any image depicting sorrow on my wall, no matter how beautiful and famous it might be. All those war gory pics, however powerful and oftem moving they are, would not find a wall spot in my house, simply because I don't want to be looking at them those few waking hours I spend there.
Just my 0.00002 of the f/stop....

wxwax

pyroPrints.com wrote:

Another link to some very important photos:

http://pinguy.infogami.com/blog/vwm6

Fantastic.

Shay Stephens

tsk1979 wrote:

Regarding photos of sorrow.. would you like to see them on your wall? If not won't it remove any chances of that photo in top ten, as the foremost test of a good image is the "Would you like to be on the wall test"

The foremost test of a good image is if it moves the viewer. You can try to pre-test the image by asking yourself if you would hang it on your wall, but that won't answer the question of will it move a view. You won't know that until you set the photo loose on the world

And secondly, which wall are you talking about. There are many walls, not all of them reside in a persons house!

Robert

Shay Stephens wrote:

The foremost test of a good image is if it moves the viewer. You can try to pre-test the image by asking yourself if you would hang it on your wall, but that won't answer the question of will it move a view. You won't know that until you set the photo loose on the world

And secondly, which wall are you talking about. There are many walls, not all of them reside in a persons house!

You are absolutely right there. It is usually exhibition walls we view documentary photos on. Of course you wouldn’t hang it up in your sitting room unless you are some kinda sicko. Not even the photographer him/herself would. They didn’t take it for pleasure.

Robert

I have no problem with the documentation of suffering, be it war, injustice, death, whatever. What I have a problem with is when anyone puts the mental and emotional welfare of another person and even their own children second to catching a snapshot for a photo competition. This is not about documenting anything; this is just a selfish act with the lame excuse of documenting it. Perfect example: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=64518
I won’t even comment on the documentary quality of the photographs.
What that child needed there and than was the comfort only his mother could give him at that moment - not being flashed - adding insult to injury.
It’s respect that is of the utmost importance when it comes to photographing pain and sorrow, not opportunism.

Robert

rgbivens wrote:

Has anybody else heard of James Nachtwey?

Thanks for those links Grant. I’ve just created a new folder in ‘Me Favourites’ called ‘GREAT PHOTOGRAPHERS’. I know there are tons of brilliant people out there, but you have to start somewhere and I couldn’t think of a better start for my collection. ¡Good man James Nachtwey!

Shay Stephens

Robert wrote:

I have no problem with the documentation of suffering, be it war, injustice, death, whatever. What I have a problem with is when anyone puts the mental and emotional welfare of another person and even their own children second to catching a snapshot for a photo competition. This is not about documenting anything; this is just a selfish act with the lame excuse of documenting it. Perfect example: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=64518
I won’t even comment on the documentary quality of the photographs.
What that child needed there and than was the comfort only his mother could give him at that moment - not being flashed - adding insult to injury.
It’s respect that is of the utmost importance when it comes to photographing pain and sorrow, not opportunism.

So the difference between witnessing the event with the eye or with a camera makes it good or bad? This isn't one of those Abe Simpson "You've stolen my soul" things is it hehehe?

But really, why is it bad to view the event with a camera but ok with only the eye? Surely a simple shot does not require the instant love of a parent to ward off a life time of mental anguish. I know I wasn't lavished upon every prick and nick I recieved growing up. It seems foolish to expect it here.

Greensquared

Shay Stephens wrote:

So the difference between witnessing the event with the eye or with a camera makes it good or bad? This isn't one of those Abe Simpson "You've stolen my soul" things is it hehehe?

But really, why is it bad to view the event with a camera but ok with only the eye? Surely a simple shot does not require the instant love of a parent to ward off a life time of mental anguish. I know I wasn't lavished upon every prick and nick I recieved growing up. It seems foolish to expect it here.

My daughter cries at least ten times a day. It's part of being three and is how she expresses herself. It doesn't mean she's in pain or afraid (that's a different story), usually just confused or frustrated and unable to express it in words yet. If I ran to comfort her every time she cried, she'd do it all the more. I typically try to get her to verbalize her feelings instead, but when she's tired, she doesn't even know why she's crying. I've taken shots of her at these moments, and it usually ends up making her laugh in the end.

indiegirl

The series of photos I took whilst my dd was in the hospital have healed our family in ways I would have never expected. Honestly, I don't know how we would have processed the situation without them. I had a mypublisher.com book printed and we read it once or twice a day. It's also been a way for those who couldn't be with us or who were with us and faced the same agony we faced, to process the event.

There was a time when she asked me to stop shooting and I did. Most of the time, she either didn't know or didn't care.

I think when someone is shooting sorrow or agony with honorable intention it is evident in the images. Perhaps I'm naive. That's my experience, though. It's a fine line, to be sure.

Greensquared

You're right, Jesse, it is a fine line, and one every photographer has to make a decision about in each individual situation that occurs. When a person is suffering pain and you are obviously adding to that pain by taking the photograph against their will, then I'd say it's fairly obvious that you need to respect your fellow human being and stop. If you know the shot is important for some reason, then the line can become more hazy. Yes, you may be judged for you decision by someone who may not know all the facts or your intentions, but judging others is just what people tend to do.

A friend sent me this today and I think it makes a good point. As humans, we're all in the same boat and will all have similar experiences at some point in our lives. What goes around, comes around and I guess we should try to put ourselves in the other person's situation and then make a decision we can live with.

As we grow up, we learn that even the one person that wasn't supposed to ever let you down probably will. You will have your heart broken probably more than once and it's harder every time. You'll break hearts too, so remember how it felt when yours was broken. You'll fight with your best friend. You'll blame a new love for things an old one did. You'll cry because time is passing too fast, and you'll eventually lose someone you love. So take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of happiness you'll never get back. Don't be afraid that your life will end, be afraid that it will never begin.

Robert

I’m not sure if we are talking about the same thing. I’ll try one more time:
A mother brings her child to get shots. She knows that her child will be hurting and brings the camera to take pictures of that hurt because she can’t come up with anything better for a photo competition.
She herself says in her post: ‘How horrible is THAT? Please - no "bad mommy" comments!’

Are you really telling me that those pictures have anything to do with documentary?
And what about empathy and respect for the child’s feelings?

But I guess it’s just a matter of differing standards and morals. I rest my case and now I’ll go and mind my own business.

Shay Stephens

Robert wrote:

A mother brings her child to get shots. She knows that her child will be hurting and brings the camera to take pictures of that hurt ...

Are you really telling me that those pictures have anything to do with documentary?
And what about empathy and respect for the child’s feelings?

So a war photographer should stay home? Newspaper photographers should put their cameras away? An x-ray tech shouldn't look because there may be cancer in that film? Just because you anticipate something unpleasant or bad may happen doesn't mean you should not bring a camera to capture what happens. Documentary is simply capturing what is at the moment, good *or* bad!