Photographing the Homeless. What's Your Ethics On this?

[NB23]

Social change?
I'm a photographer, not a philosopher nor a politician.
Gandhi wasn't a photographer nor would it have helped him the least bit to be one.
Not even HCB changed the world. What a funny idea.

Why is "social change" a photographic concern or even a topic? Photography gives me, and probably others, a rush. That's all there is to it.

 

[removed account4]

art porn ?

give me a break

these are quite strong images and if part of a larger series
really makes a statement about homelessness and human neglect.

consent of people in street photography that's kind of funny?
since when do people get consent when photographing on the street ...
there isn't a shred of privacy on the street ...

scott did you get consent + releases from people who you might have photographed
on the streets of france, or object release forms for all those facades you photographed ?

in any case, this work is much more interesting and thoughtful than other street photography
and street-architecture photography posted in-thread or in-gallery.

nice work NB

 

[cliveh]

there is no trouble in mymind photographing homeless people if you show them and treat them with dignity and respect
there are toomany people who walk around with a camera and photograph someone passed out on the corner
or under / on a pile of "stuff" as if to show these folks as a freak-show.

John, isn't your last post almost contrary to what you said above.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

My point is not that social change is a requirement for taking a photograph. Nor is obtaining written consent. The consent distinction I'm making is that the blind man or the unconscious man are incapable of registering the presence of the photographer and exercising consent by removing themselves from the field of view of the photographer or otherwise indicating they do not want to be photographed. When I was in France taking photos, if someone saw my camera and indicated they did not want to be photographed, I did not take their photo. I would not take the photo of someone obviously homeless because in addition to the absence of privacy the homeless person has as a precondition of their homelessness, they may well not be capable of articulating consent because of mental illness and are not aware of what is happening to them.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Again I think it has to do with intention and what one wishes to accomplish. If pictures of homeless people helps raise an awareness of their lives and challenges, and if it's done well (like NB23's photos above), it could certainly spark interest among people who are better off to lend a hand and find ways of helping out.

I don't think the act of photographing homeless or ill-fortuned people is disrespectful. But the intent must be scrutinized, and I hope that there is a will somewhere within the conscience of the photographer to do good by these fellow humans.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Photographer Douglas Beasley posted today on Facebook, a beautiful portrait of an older man in a hat, and accompanied it with the text:

"While traveling I often make portraits of people, but I think deeply how to do it in a respectful way. I believe it's always best to ask first. When you 'steal' photos by waiting until you think they are not watching sends a clear message to others about your intentions, integrity and ethics. What do you think?"

I just read his post and thought it was perfect to add to this conversation. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says, but I really respect that a photographer thinks about making the portrait in a way that is respectful and empathetic, where they consider the person being photographed, and with a real sensitivity.

 

[removed account4]

John, isn't your last post almost contrary to what you said above.

perhaps it is, but it is not showing these subjects as a freakshow
the first one shows solitude and aloneness, the second one also.
if the photographer threw money on the ground and had
photographs of the passed out guy in a pile of money to me that
would have crossed the line and been distasteful. one apug member posted
a photo he took on his way to work of a homeless guy passed out in a pile of
debris / trash &c with $$ thrown at him so it made it seem "ok"

no it isn't art-porn, disrespectful, or distasteful, and there certainly is no need for model release forms.

 

[irvd2x]

People walking in the distance, under a "foot center" sign.
And in the center, a footless and blind homeless. Ignored by all but me.

Ethics? Respect? What are you guys talking about?

You noticed him with your camera,made a wonderful photograph,..but,as someone who lived out of my Jeep for awhile,I hope you at least noticed him with a sandwich or some offer for some level of assistance.

I remember finding a five dollar bill and feeling a qave of relief.It meant I could buy an endless cup of coffee at Denny,which in turn gave me access to an outlet to charge my phone which in turn helped me do job searching,and more importantly,use my cellphone camera to photograph everyday.It kept me mentally stable just to do something productive.For me,photography,even as primitive as using an old 3mp little device,was that in composing the image..I was in the present.I wasnt struggling with my past, or despairing about an improbable future,but rather..as I looked through the viewfinder my mind is filled with the evidence that at least in THIS monent,and in THIS light, I can see something good,beautiful,and right.
It is a redemptive process..all because that day,I had five bucks.

Many homeless are mentally ill.I can tell you, if you are not beaten down before you became homeless..you will be.The energy to do each day what we all take for granted is enormous.

So..take the photograph, then say a prayer, then offer something more if you can..even conversation.A persons biggest fight is for some sense of inner dignity..even if.on the outside it looks like that battle has been lost.

Well,the subject hit close to home(no pun intended).But to add another..being homeless is no walk in the park..but sometimes..thats all it is.

Here is an image or two from that time.


Sent from my LG-P509 using Tapatalk 2

 

[removed account4]

My point is not that social change is a requirement for taking a photograph. Nor is obtaining written consent. The consent distinction I'm making is that the blind man or the unconscious man are incapable of registering the presence of the photographer and exercising consent by removing themselves from the field of view of the photographer or otherwise indicating they do not want to be photographed. When I was in France taking photos, if someone saw my camera and indicated they did not want to be photographed, I did not take their photo. I would not take the photo of someone obviously homeless because in addition to the absence of privacy the homeless person has as a precondition of their homelessness, they may well not be capable of articulating consent because of mental illness and are not aware of what is happening to them.

most people on the street ( outside ) who are being photographed have no idea they are being photographed
either by camera wielding photographers of the myriad of surveillance cameras perched on
every telephone pole, ATM machine or building --- unconscious, blind, drunk on drugs just hanging out biding time.
as i said previously NB's images are not distasteful, or disrespectful. the photographs aren't mocking these people
just the opposite. there are plenty of photographs of people on the street ( and street photography ) that mock and plain nasty.
these aren't evenclose.

 

[cliveh]

most people on the street ( outside ) who are being photographed have no idea they are being photographed
either by camera wielding photographers of the myriad of surveillance cameras perched on
every telephone pole, ATM machine or building --- unconscious, blind, drunk on drugs just hanging out biding time.

That doesn't make it OK.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

I remember finding a five dollar bill...

So good to have you, your images, and especially your point of view on this topic, here...

Ken

 

[removed account4]

That doesn't make it OK.

whats not OK? surveillance photographs,
or no right to privacy, or photographingpeople
without their consent, or street photography
or photographing people living life on the edge?

personally i dislike pet photography but as long as
its not mocking, im ok with photographs of people on the edge.

 

[cliveh]

whats not OK? surveillance photographs,
or no right to privacy, or photographingpeople
without their consent, or street photography
or photographing people living life on the edge?

personally i dislike pet photography but as long as
its not mocking, im ok with photographs of people on the edge.

What's not OK is not treating people (who ever they are) with dignity or respect, as you mention in your original post.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

...
as i said previously NB's images are not distasteful, or disrespectful. the photographs aren't mocking these people
just the opposite. there are plenty of photographs of people on the street ( and street photography ) that mock and plain nasty.
these aren't evenclose.

I never said they were distasteful and disrespectful. But I do see them as taking advantage of the subjects because they DO dehumanize them in the sense that the people are reduced to symbols or even graphic forms. They have been essentialized into a dehumanized stand-in for homelessness and disability. That is both a strength and weakness of the medium - the ability to transform a subject from specific to generic, or rather to allow the subject to inhabit both specific and generic spaces simultaneously, because the subject is so uniquely detailed that you can't see them exclusively allegorically.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

So good to have you, your images, and especially your point of view on this topic, here...

Ken

I will second that. Thank you for sharing with us your view and experience.

 

[removed account4]

I never said they were distasteful and disrespectful. But I do see them as taking advantage of the subjects because they DO dehumanize them in the sense that the people are reduced to symbols or even graphic forms. They have been essentialized into a dehumanized stand-in for homelessness and disability. That is both a strength and weakness of the medium - the ability to transform a subject from specific to generic, or rather to allow the subject to inhabit both specific and generic spaces simultaneously, because the subject is so uniquely detailed that you can't see them exclusively allegorically.

scott

thats what photography is reducing things down to a graphical symbolic form.
you might think his images are dehumanizing, i find them to be just the opposite
unfortunately the lions share of photography in this day and age
doesnt do it well.

===

couldnt agree more cliveh
too much disrespect out there,
all we can do is buck the trend i suppose ...

 

[removed account4]

You noticed him with your camera,made a wonderful photograph,..but,as someone who lived out of my Jeep for awhile,I hope you at least noticed him with a sandwich or some offer for some level of assistance.

I remember finding a five dollar bill and feeling a qave of relief.It meant I could buy an endless cup of coffee at Denny,which in turn gave me access to an outlet to charge my phone which in turn helped me do job searching,and more importantly,use my cellphone camera to photograph everyday.It kept me mentally stable just to do something productive.For me,photography,even as primitive as using an old 3mp little device,was that in composing the image..I was in the present.I wasnt struggling with my past, or despairing about an improbable future,but rather..as I looked through the viewfinder my mind is filled with the evidence that at least in THIS monent,and in THIS light, I can see something good,beautiful,and right.
It is a redemptive process..all because that day,I had five bucks.

Many homeless are mentally ill.I can tell you, if you are not beaten down before you became homeless..you will be.The energy to do each day what we all take for granted is enormous.

So..take the photograph, then say a prayer, then offer something more if you can..even conversation.A persons biggest fight is for some sense of inner dignity..even if.on the outside it looks like that battle has been lost.

Well,the subject hit close to home(no pun intended).But to add another..being homeless is no walk in the park..but sometimes..thats all it is.

Here is an image or two from that time.


Sent from my LG-P509 using Tapatalk 2

thanks, and i hope things are good these days.
i offer a sandwich or gift card to a grocery store as often as i can.
unfortunately some people roll their eyes and suggest i am
" part of the problem " as they climb into their chevy taho oe caddy escalade
all alone and speed off to get another latte ...

nice images too

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Are you going to just photograph homeless people, or actually going to do something positive to help their circumstance? Payment perhaps?
I was homeless myself in the 1980s. There are friendships that are formed and interdependencies and bonds built over time. If somebody leaves or dies, it affects the whole group. I am not aware of photographers in Melbourne, here in Victoria, actively seeking out homeless people in their known places, especially since recently a homeless man was murdered in a thrill kill by a teenager. To me, it is morally corrupt to photograph homeless people either as documentary or presumed interest in the finished image — it's a difficult, cold, lonely and risky life of nobody's own particular choice in many cases. So if you are going to photograph people form a friendship and provide a small token of sustenance to see them through another night. It makes the world of difference.

 

[rolleiman]

I think the photographer should ask himself..."Am I really concerned over the plight of the homeless, or am I merely trying to massage my own image"? .....It's not difficult to go to some deprived area and come back with "meaningful" pictures of the poor and the dispossesed. What is far more difficult and a true test of talent is to take the kind of street pictures Cartier Bresson was known for...Pictures containing wit and humour, taking the ordinary everyday situation and turning it into something almost poetic. ....If you can do that then you can justifiably call yourself a photographer.

 

[cliveh]

On the reverse side of the coin, I was once walking down a subway and noticed 3 or 4 girls who were begging. I happen to know that they all came from middle class families and were doing this as a sort of experimental sport, but at their age they regarded it as fun.

 

[removed account4]

To me, it is morally corrupt to photograph homeless people either as documentary or presumed interest in the finished image — it's a difficult, cold, lonely and risky life of nobody's own particular choice in many cases.

hi pdj

is it ever not bad?
i understand where you, cliveh and fc are coming from ...
but if a person did the things you suggest, help, feed, enable
a homeless person and the series didnt degrade, humiliate
but did the opposite and humbled the onlooker to realize
it can happen in an instant to anyone ... would it still be
morally corrupt?
while it seems that i think anything goes, i dont.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

My point is that it is an ugly thing to do to point a camera at a homeless person, or group of homeless — I have seen such rude and arrogant behaviour from photographers and tourists photographing groups of homeless that it is no surprise to see them rail at these sticky beaks. In a world this size there is much more to occupy photographers than seek out easy prey of homeless people with a camera. In a nutshell, leave them alone.

 

[irvd2x]

I appreciate your comment and your approach to this issue.Let others roll their eyes..the day may come where their eyes will roll for different reason.None are immune from hard times.

Sent from my LG-P509 using Tapatalk 2

 

[irvd2x]

Are you going to just photograph homeless people, or actually going to do something positive to help their circumstance? Payment perhaps?
I was homeless myself in the 1980s. There are friendships that are formed and interdependencies and bonds built over time. If somebody leaves or dies, it affects the whole group. I am not aware of photographers in Melbourne, here in Victoria, actively seeking out homeless people in their known places, especially since recently a homeless man was murdered in a thrill kill by a teenager. To me, it is morally corrupt to photograph homeless people either as documentary or presumed interest in the finished image — it's a difficult, cold, lonely and risky life of nobody's own particular choice in many cases. So if you are going to photograph people form a friendship and provide a small token of sustenance to see them through another night. It makes the world of difference.

Amen to that..well said,brother.

Sent from my LG-P509 using Tapatalk 2

 

[eclarke]

The wealthy, Rush Limbaugh people think that "these people" like to live like this. What a tradegy..we have uber billionaires in this nation and people who need to collect cans, sleep in doorways and eat garbage.. WTF, we are asking about photographing them???