Is taking photographs of homeless people for your own self gain wrong?

[Paulie Tandoori]

Simple question. Poll to follow.

Say if I took a photograph of a person who was homeless to enter in a comp' to further myself and my own ego, would that be wrong of me?

Bit of a strange question i think.

The apposite implication of your question is that it would be right of you to take the picture if, say, you thought that it would make a difference to a government policy on rough sleepers, or that it would illustrate a media story about why people sleep rough. Now, that might imply some grandiose implied objective for social change on the part of the snapper but it might also "further that person and [their] own ego" for eg.

What would you think about a picture series that demonstrated the humanity of rough sleepers for eg? That aimed to overcome stereotypical prejudicial views of some people. Should people only ever be allowed to take images of others with their tacit approval?

 

[Stanley Edwards]

....
What would you think about a picture series that demonstrated the humanity of rough sleepers for eg? That aimed to overcome stereotypical prejudicial views of some people.

To achieve that you would surely have to speak to the people to find out if they're homeless. No? You would also have to get to know them a little at the very least.

Should people only ever be allowed to take images of others with their tacit approval?

In an ideal world - yes.

---


Think I was a little bit lubricated when posting on this thread last night, but what really annoys me about so many pictures of homeless people are the comments that come with the pictures. "I can see the pain in their eyes" etc. Perhaps the pain is all yours. Particularly in reference to the shot that Cybertect posted as an example. The guy looks to be as happy as any other person to me.

It's this false sympathy shit. No-one wants your sympathy false, or genuine. Sympathy is worth fuck all. A chat as an equal before you go snapping is only fair and right.

I have lived homeless on a couple of occasions in the past. I still sketch on the streets here in artist scruff shyster clothes. I can look a mess and I'm often joined for a chat by people who are living on the streets. Just last week I was sitting on a bench in Plaza Nueva. I was joined by Normen - a true itinerant artist from Latvia. A stereotypical homeless hippie bum to most peoples' eyes. He served in Afghanistan for the former Soviet army. Was held as a prisoner. Had both his knees broken and all fingers on his right hand snapped in half as well as other severe beatings. He spent Three months in various hospitals in various countries before finally getting back to Latvia.

He told me about how he was just put on a train without being told where he was going to serve the USSR. He eventually found himself dumped on the front line. He was telling me all this with tears welling up in his eyes. At the same time some cunt was photographing from a distance in an alley way with a telephoto. Not the slightest bit of acknowledgment. Just a glance before he left when he realised I had seen him.

The next day Normen was gone. Onto Mallorca I think.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that one day I will actually shove someone's camera up their arse. I've come very close a couple of times, but one day...

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

In an ideal world - yes.

So what about street photography then, as in the corresponding article that editor has just posted? What about crowd scenes? This isn't an ideal world so where do the boundaries lie with regards to appropriately moral behaviour?

 

[stowpirate]

removed

 

[cesare]

Photography as voyeurism v photography as recording/capturing, age-old discussion innit. I suppose a lot depends on how much the photographer intrudes.

 

[Stanley Edwards]

Where did i say that you didn't? You're not the only person to have experience of roughing it you know.

You didn't. The opening post and poll did - that set the precedent. I'm very aware that I'm not the only person with this sort of experience. WTF is your point you argumentative tit?

...This isn't an ideal world so where do the boundaries lie with regards to appropriately moral behaviour?

The boundary is very clearly stated in law. If you (or, any person) is the main subject of the photograph then a model release is required.

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...Unless that individual is surrounded with discarded beer cans, vomit or is sleeping under a cardboard box it could be some form of scam
...

Holy shit. It just gets worse.

 

[Firky]

Photography as voyeurism v photography as recording/capturing, age-old discussion innit. I suppose a lot depends on how much the photographer intrudes.

There's degrees of voyeurism, there's the voyeurism that observes, records and details the unoticed, there's the selfish voyeurism and there's the peeping tom who boo's at me. What matters is the objective of the act of taking a photograph and not the subject.

Take photos of homeless people but not for entertainment of your audience.

http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/03/photographing-homeless-banned.html

Made me chuckle.

 

[Firky]

Holy shit. It just gets worse.

Fuck him. No wonder people end up on their arses with attitudes and perceptions like that, it's quite sad really, to have such a suburban detached attitude of real life.

 

[cesare]

There's degrees of voyeurism, there's the voyeurism that observes, records and details the unoticed, there's the selfish voyeurism and there's the peeping tom who boo's at me. What matters is the objective of the act of taking a photograph and not the subject.

Take photos of homeless people but not for entertainment of your audience.

http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/03/photographing-homeless-banned.html

Made me chuckle.

Heh, max headroom

I think it's an interesting discussion - how do you assess the objective of the act? Isn't all photography for the entertainment of the audience? etc etc

Photojournalism v paparazzi

 

[Stanley Edwards]

Fuck him. No wonder people end up on their arses with attitudes and perceptions like that, it's quite sad really, to have such a suburban detached attitude of real life.

There was a funny article in the local government sponsored rag here the other day. Photograph of a squat where a lot of mates live. The story read along the lines of...

'These people live here for free, beg on the streets and still have the latest MP3 player and mobile phones etc etc etc'

It's a big place. I guess they're just getting ready to justify an illegal eviction.


Not surprising that people have these attitudes when the press always promote the stereotype.

 

[stowpirate]

removed

 

[Aldebaran]

Answer to OP.

Yes it is. You not only violate their privacy, you add to that "personal gain". I wonder what you would do if anyone abused you, and violated your privacy, for such a non-"reason".
(Hint: There is no excuse.)

salaam.

 

[chooch]

Tricky.
Not a big fan of the Oh look, some poor people approach to street photography but I can see it having some uses, depending on intention. And they´re ain´t much personal gain in coming 17th in the Urban photo competition.

It´s potentially humiliating, and I wouldn´t do it, but I can´t say how it´s necessarily different from other photos I would take without permission, or that others would take and that I´d maybe be impressed with. hmm:

 

[cesare]

Tricky.
Not a big fan of the Oh look, some poor people approach to street photography but I can see it having some uses, depending on intention. And they´re ain´t much personal gain in coming 17th in the Urban photo competition.

It´s potentially humiliating, and I wouldn´t do it, but I can´t say how it´s necessarily different from other photos I would take without permission, or that others would take and that I´d maybe be impressed with. hmm:

Is this a call-out thread then

 

[boskysquelch]

Is this a call-out thread then

course it frkkn is ...why haven't you returned my call eh?

nice to see Aldebran's oh so thoughtful but none the less knobbish, superior, elitist & up his own arse as usual, comments.

Thought proper Mooozlims dint agree with imagery & idolatry of Life?...oh yeah...theyz have exceptionz. Coz theyz teh Knowers.

 

[cesare]

course it frkkn is ...why haven't you returned my call eh?

Ain't looked at the comp thread this month Fuck sake Firks, coulda been an interesting thread

Been no ringing on the landline doody and I has been having a day off from me mobby, guess you're saying I should turn it on or summat

 

[Blagsta]

I am sure this is going to upset some urbanites but how do you know if the person you are photographing are genuinely homeless and not just begging and commuting home every evening? There is a lot of money to be made on the streets,

oh fuck off

 

[boskysquelch]

oh fuck off

 

[Stanley Edwards]

I'm still struggling to believe anyone actually made that post. If I had read it in the Daily Mail I would have bit my tongue, but here on Urban


Mayhem outside tonight. I'm really not up for it. Got threatened by some guy with a knife and a bloody hand yesterday. Tried to tell police. They just didn't give a fuck. "But, the guy has a knife - he threatened me and he had fresh blood on his hand". Not bothered. But, they still jailed a mate for Three days for playing drums in the streets.

Cowardly fuckers


Rant over. I may go out for tapas now

 

[Firky]

Ain't looked at the comp thread this month Fuck sake Firks, coulda been an interesting thread

Isn't a call out threa of such, more a reaction to what was accepted and left to go unchallanged on a board that prides its self in being against such things.


P.S

Phone calls from squelch rarely last less than an hour, I'd pencil in an afternoon if you're a lass

 

[cesare]

P.S

Phone calls from squelch rarely last less than an hour, I'd pencil in an afternoon if you're a lass

Was just 15 mins

 

[Pavlik]

oh fuck off

i shared a squatted flat in hackney with an old mate who used to bunk the tube down to leicester square for a few hours begging.
he said he'd make loads of money in no time at all.
and he did have things like mp3 players and mobiles too.

so not every homeless beggar you see is neccesarily homeless.

havent been following this thread btw. just read a few comments and wanted to put my tuppence worth in.

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...
so not every homeless beggar you see is neccesarily homeless...

Guess what? Not every homeless person sleeps in vomit soaked cardboard boxes surrounded by booze cans!

That's the bit people find offensive.

 

[Blagsta]

i shared a squatted flat in hackney with an old mate who used to bunk the tube down to leicester square for a few hours begging.
he said he'd make loads of money in no time at all.
and he did have things like mp3 players and mobiles too.

so not every homeless beggar you see is neccesarily homeless.

That may have been the case years ago, I doubt it is now. For one, the police regularly do begging ops in the west end where they arrest anyone begging and ASBO the most persistent ones. Some people get big drops from time to time, but often they have to sit there for ages enduring verbal and physical abuse. There are much easier and more pleasant ways of making money.

 

[cybertect]

Here's a bit of a different take on the topic

http://www.luvera.com/

Photographs and Assisted Self-Portraits

The archive Photographs was assembled by Luvera through weekly workshops hosted across London attended by over 200 homeless and ex-homeless people. Providing his subject/participants with cameras, Luvera facilitated the building of each individual’s contributory portfolio toward the larger bank of images, gathering diverse viewpoints on the experience of homelessness from the inside. Comprised of contributions ranging widely from intimate portraits and images of the everyday experiences and surroundings of the contributor, through to visual explorations of concepts and ideas to do with the notion of homelessness and the experience of the city, the images from the archive Photographs are an insightful presentation of homeless and ex-homeless people portrayed in a way previously unseen, by simply allowing the individuals to represent themselves and their own points of view.

Devised to provide a representation of the contributors to the archive, each image in the series Assisted Self-Portrait is the trace of a process that blurred distinctions between Luvera and his subject / participants during the photographic sitting, investing in the subject a greater level of control, collusion and power in the creation of their representation than is usually offered in a traditional photographer / subject relationship. Played out in locations of the participant’s choosing, over repeated sessions, Luvera taught each participant how to use large format camera equipment using Polaroid and a long cable release. Each subject was an active participant and co-creator of the image, while Luvera, as the photographer, served more as a facilitator, tutor and technical advisor.

 

[Blagsta]

Here's a bit of a different take on the topic

http://www.luvera.com/

Completely different though, doing workshops with homeless people.

 

[cybertect]

Indeed.

 

[disco_dave_2000]

Interesting thread. Whenever I've taken photographs of 'homeless' people on the street I always ask permission and try to give them either something to drink or a sandwich. I've probably only done this a dozen times and yep, each time, felt a little uncomfortable about doing it.

Anyways, a slight derail - but a book I recommend for some great portraits is by Harvey Wang and is a study across a number of years of the residents of the few remaining 'flophouses' on the Bowery in New York - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Flophouse-Life-Bowery-David-Isay/dp/0375503226 - It has a some history about the buildings and the 'hotels' and some commentary / interview (written in the first person) with the subjects. Really interesting and an example of where this sort of photography has been done well and with some humility.

 

[cybertect]

The question of whether Dorothea Lange was taking these pictures 'for her own self gain' arises, I suppose. She was being paid by the Farm Security Administration for the job (and indeed directed quite closely about what to take pictures of).