| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Controversial Baby Exhibit Article
Jeffrey Furticella, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
Muncie | IN | US | Posted: 11:11 AM on 08.04.06 |
->> interesting read from today's chicago trib -
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-0608030282aug04,1,7459476.s...
"Steal a toddler's lollipop and he's bound to start bawling was photographer Jill Greenberg's thinking. So that's just what Greenberg did to elicit tears from the 27 or so 2- and 3-year-olds featured in her latest exhibition, "End Times," recently at the Paul Kopeikin Gallery."
read, discuss, repeat.
-furt |
|
Erik Markov, Photographer
 |
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 12:03 PM on 08.04.06 |
->> Yea, I saw this in American Photo and it just seemed kinda weird. I don't know if it caused long-term harm to the kids or not, but Greenberg's explanation that this was how children would react if they knew the reality of the world they are growing up in just seems kind of a weird description of this project. But to each his own. I think the last quote "I'm just not sure there's any significance to the photographs, either" sums it up when trying to link it to the state of the world. 30 years from now, if someone looks at these photos, will they know its about something other than a child having a lollipop stolen? Probably not.
She enhanced her photos too to bring out tears... hmmm. Maybe she couldn't really get these kids to cry. Maybe these children really don't exist at all except in photoshop. I see a conspiracy. (yes, thats sarcasm) |
|
William Jurasz, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Cedar Park | TX | USA | Posted: 12:07 PM on 08.04.06 |
->> "The work depicts how children would feel if they knew the state of the world they're set to inherit, explained Greenberg, whose own daughter is featured in the show."
He's trying to speculate how someone else would feel. In reality he's just projecting his own feelings onto other people through deception. Worse, he's projecting those feelings onto young children who cannot consent and do not understand the issues, let alone what is happening. I find it reprehensible. |
|
Matt Roth, Photographer
 |
Baltimore | MD | United States | Posted: 12:08 PM on 08.04.06 |
->> hahahaha!!!
That's got to be one of the biggest media helium balloons I've read about in a while!
I don't think what Greenberg did was immoral/abusive what so ever. Obviously she was going for a specific reaction from the kids and, she got it by teasing the kid. Can any one of you tell me straight faced you've never teased anything? ahem! I got your nose...
And people, can we be honest with ourselves... kids get over stuff like a lolipop grab quickly. Alone, a photo of the kid crying won't cause any long-term psychological effects.
I mean, c'mon! We've all covered "cute kid" assignments. And there's always that one kid crying about something. Kids cry over dumb stuff. Besides, its not like the kids didn't get like three lolipops after the shoot.
Having said that, I feel like the metaphor she was going for is a bit of a stretch... she wouldn't eat a tuna sandwich because the oceans are messed up... pardon me while i pishaw.
Although, I imagine the photos are pretty cool. I'd look at em in a gallery -- and ignore the watered down global metaphore.
Crying babies amuse me.
hehehe! Now I sound like a baby bully.
matt roth |
|
Walter Calahan, Photographer
|
Westminster | MD | USA | Posted: 12:31 PM on 08.04.06 |
->> I've ordered a 30x36 for my wall. Grin.
Why can't I be this smart to promote my photography? |
|
Alan Stewart, Photographer
 |
Corydon | IN | USA | Posted: 12:38 PM on 08.04.06 |
| ->> Perhaps a better idea would be for parents to collectively kick Greenburg in the head...you know...so she can get an idea of what this world is really like. |
|
Matt Roth, Photographer
|
Baltimore | MD | United States | Posted: 12:47 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Okay... so it's been brought to my attention that when I said "crying babies amuse me," was a bit off color.
To clarify, I'm amused by the bratty outbursts kids have when they don't get what they want. You know... the kid wants a toy, the parent says no, and the kid errupts in an o-so-dramatic way. then they get over it in like 4 seconds. I think that's funny.
Now, a baby crying because its in pain, or being abused, be it emotionally or physically, is a completely different story.
That's why i don't really take Greenberg's theme seriously. These aren't tears of dispair or sadness brought about because the oceans are messed up or the environment is a gloppy mess, or because of war. They're tears brought about because the kid was being teased. Her point is dilluted by her methods, but I'm sure here photos are amusing and probably touching, only because of her methods. |
|
Jean Finley, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Iowa City | IA | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> I'll likely get flamed for saying this, but here goes.
I think we should be looking at this differently. Whining about the message or intent is a waste of time. Since I've looked at these images, three questions surface:
1. Wow! That is amazing light/texture/etc./etc/etc. How does she do that?
and ...
2. Wow! Those images are insanely commercially viable (or there "offspring" will be). How does she do that?
and..
3. Wow! She attached these images (that would have been otherwise buried in a sea of work) to a hot-button topic so people would talk about them, put them in their galleries, and plaster them all over the news. How does she do that????????
*sigh* |
|
Drew Buchanan, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Fort Walton Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 2:55 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> And.........
I could get in a huge argument about this issue, but my fingers disagree, so I'll leave it at that.
;) |
|
Nick Doan, Photographer
|
Scottsdale Phoenix Tempe | AZ | USA | Posted: 3:18 PM on 08.06.06 |
| ->> All I can say is that I'd never let that woman take photos of my kids. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
 |
Tempe | AZ | USA | Posted: 3:21 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Sorry, I think ALL of Jill's images are amazing. I also have a little more faith in the evolution of humans (if you believe that sort of thing ; ) ) that a one-time cry over spilled milk/stolen lolipops won't cascade us into dysfunctional creatures slunken down the food chain a few wrungs.
I read an in-depth some months ago on the project and the parents were present for the shoot and didn't seem too concerned with her tactics. I have seen far worse from photographers trying to get what they want for photos.
Plus, since I wasn't present, I know to take a little more that what a writer and editors present on a page for an article.
How about talk to her directly? |
|
Jon Thorpe, Photographer
|
Mississauga(Toronto Area) | On | Canada | Posted: 4:08 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Hmm... am I the only one to notice that the two people who were put off by the photos / tactics involved in taking the photos have pics of young ones as profile photos?
We apparently have some 'real' babies in the room. :D
Okay sorry.. I just had to poke some fun after noticing that - dont hate on me guys :)
But really - I think that the photos are extremely powerful, controversial and well executed in general. I would love to have a portrait of myself as a toddler like that!
I'm going to go along with the thought that this tactic really would not have impacted the kid for the long term. How many times did you have a toy taken by another kid when you were younger? or have a candy pulled out of your hand when at the grocery store because you snatched it out off the shelf when mum n dad were not looking? I doubt that the lolly trick would really do much to harm a kid in a psychological way. Every time im at a grocery store I hear someone's kid going off because they couldn't have something.. lol |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 4:59 PM on 08.06.06 |
| ->> wow. thanks I went to the gallery's site and looked at a bunch of them..very creepy stuff. |
|
David Stout, Photographer
|
Jonesboro | AR | USA | Posted: 5:10 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> I will admit that I personally don't care for the images one bit. Maybe I was spanked too much as a child or picked on by my older sister too much or maybe its the fact that I have a child of my own. In any case the images are not pleasant for me to look at. The only emotion that it invokes in me is pity of the children.
I wonder if the "artist" is going to do some type of animal cruelty photos next. I can see it now, kick the dog, click. Step on the frog, click. Shoot the cat with a BB gun, click.
Sorry but I don't buy it as art.
Its just twisted.
stout |
|
Drew Buchanan, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Fort Walton Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 5:43 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Personally, I think the reason why my generation(1980-present) is so screwed up is because kids aren't disciplined(spanked) enough. But I think were going off topic so I'll stop; respectful of the site.
...Just my opinion |
|
Bruce Twitchell, Photographer
 |
Coeur d'Alene | ID | USA | Posted: 5:47 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Not talking about the politics or whether or not it is mean to the kids or not, but it looks like to me the artist used the LucisArt Photoshop plugin on some of the images:
http://www.lucisart.com/
In particular this:
http://www.lucisart.com/pWhyeth1.htm
Now back to the other stuff. I have two kids. I have taken photos of them crying. I have taken the moment to take a picture of them crying before picking them up to console them. Why should all photos of kids be happy ones? I know, I know, it is one thing to photograph when they are already sad and another to make them sad on purpose to photograph them. I like the images. The kids are 2-3 years old. They are not going to be scarred for life over it, in fact they most likely forgot about it 20 minutes later.
The one thing that I did not think was necessary though was the kids all having their shirts off, that seemed a little weird to me. Was it to make them seem more vulnerable or something? I think the same effect could have been had with shirts on. Great thought/discussion provoking images no matter your belief if they are right or wrong. |
|
Bill Miller, Photographer
|
Thousand Palms | CA | USA | Posted: 5:49 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Take a look at Jill's site. Her lighting, and technique is excellent. And to top that off her prints go in excess of $4000 ea.
Her Portraits and the series from 2004 on Monkeys.
http://www.manipulator.com/
I have to agree with Jon. How many times have you gone to the market and seen that same reaction from a kid. And the parents were even paid since most of the kids used in the series are from agencies.
JMHO |
|
Aaron Rhoads, Photographer
 |
McComb | MS | USA | Posted: 6:36 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Oh Man!!! I had tons of crying baby photos. I worked for Glamour Shot's knock off company back in the day. I had to shoot toddlers all the time.
Parents would scare the crap of the kids trying to make them smile.
Some would actually threaten to hit the kids if they didn't smile.
That always helped.... I could have sold those... I was ahead of my time. |
|
Bill Mitchell, Photographer
 |
Tempe | AZ | USA | Posted: 7:11 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Wow, the reaction to this one is all over the board! I agree ... these children will not be scarred for life because a lollipop was taken away from them. But where does it end? Smacking a child to get them to cry for a picture would not likely permanently scar them. So what's next after that? Holding a match to their skin? The wound will eventually heal and they'll probably not remember it later. Is that appropriate? Where does it end? I realize I'm being overly dramatic here, but do you see the progression?
To get an impartial opinion, I asked my wife, who is a non-photographer and a mother. Her immediate reaction is that it's inappropriate because it's mean to the children. That's it ... plain and simple. If the parents are allowing a third party to tease their child for monetary gain, then that borders on abuse.
Folks, where do we draw the line on what's appropriate for the sake of art? When it comes to children, we should err on the side of the child.
I vote for this being inappropriate. |
|
Walter Calahan, Photographer
|
Westminster | MD | USA | Posted: 7:16 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Aaron
You missed your calling!
I wish my prints were selling for 4K a pop, and advertising agencies were banging on my door to give me 50K campaigns, just for taking a lollipop away from a 2-year old.
I'm crying just like those kids. |
|
Drew Buchanan, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Fort Walton Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 7:17 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> Could this be related, even if it's not Reuters still has some problems to work out.
http://newsbusters.org/node/6793 |
|
Drew Buchanan, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Fort Walton Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 7:18 PM on 08.06.06 |
| ->> So sorry, wrong thread. |
|
Melissa Golden, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Inverness | FL | USA | Posted: 7:24 PM on 08.06.06 |
->> I think the pictures are beautiful and I'm going to start popping babies out ASAP so I can try this on them and take pictures.
But seriously folks.... if there's one thing I learned at a very early age, life ain't fair. Sometimes mean photographers take your lollipops.
There's a tremendous difference between taking candy from a baby and smacking it in the head. I'd hardly call the former cruel when compared with the latter reality that children face all over the world. Perspective. Please. |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
 |
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 11:28 AM on 08.07.06 |
->> Greenberg does excellent and original work and she is deserving of her fame and fortune. She has also created a valid discussion through her art.
We seem to have a generation of mommies and daddies ready, willing and able to rush their children off to psychotherapy at the first sign of anguish whether it be the loss of a lollipop or a bad hairstyle. Nothing to be done about it perhaps but find it amusing and sad. Raising these children with such a false sense of reality and values is much more cruel than removing a lollipop and it is being done to them by their own parents. |
|
Sam Morris, Photographer
 |
Henderson (Las Vegas) | NV | USA | Posted: 4:06 PM on 08.07.06 |
->> I wonder how scarred Winston Churchill was after Karsh took away his cigar? (look it up, young'uns)
I did a similar thing a few years ago for an illustration on parental stress. Set up the lights, had my wife hold our infant and put our then 2-year-old into her playpen when she didn't want to be in it. Crying ensues, arms get raised up, a dozen photos are snapped and then she was taken out of the playpen. I recently asked her about it and she had no recollection of the event. When I dug the photo out for her she thought it was pretty funny.
And if you can't see a line between making a kid mad by taking his lolly and actually physically hurting them, please, don't have kids. |
|
Michelle Posey, Photographer
|
Little Rock | AR | United States | Posted: 6:07 PM on 08.07.06 |
->> I heard of this last month on a Slate.com article.
http://www.slate.com/id/2145277/
I tend to agree with the writer about the artistic worth of the exhibit. I don't much like Greenberg's photos, not for their content, but because of their plastic-y, ad-ready look.
I know that's what all the kids are doing, and kudos to her -- she's got a good gig, all right. I just don't look to Target ads for my personal artistic inspiration.
Also, an unfortunate encounter with a too-too self-conscious New York photographer a few years ago (I was held hostage to her 2-hour speech consisting mainly of things she should be only telling her therapist) just put me off of any exhibit that needs an artist statement for me to understand its "political implications."
Meaning, the "It reminded me of helplessness and anger I feel about our current political and social situation" statement makes me want to chew nails.
Still, each to his own. |
|
Matthew Brush, Photographer, Assistant
|
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 6:41 PM on 08.10.06 |
->> ""->> Not talking about the politics or whether or not it is mean to the kids or not, but it looks like to me the artist used the LucisArt Photoshop plugin on some of the images:
http://www.lucisart.com/
In particular this:
http://www.lucisart.com/pWhyeth1.htm ""
No way. She's a brilliant artist and I gaurantee you she wouldn't use a cheesy plugin such as the lucis arts. Those are weak. With proper photoshop techniques you can create far beyond any plugin. To say the least it's her lighting and then some desaturation, high contrast in the curves, possibly a dup layer with a highpass filter set to overlay.
Anyway, I love the shots because they exhibit another photo most of us have nevr seen. |
|
Casey Riffe, Photographer
 |
Valparaiso | IN | USA | Posted: 7:25 PM on 08.10.06 |
| ->> I wish I had thought of it. Kids aren't always cute, and it's okay for people to see that. |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
SB-900 TTL AF Shoe Mount Speedlight
|
Available from:
Samy's Camera
|
Price: $499.95 |
Notes:
The SB-900 i-TTL Speedlight leads the Nikon Creative Lighting System delivering the portability, power and versatility to support any photographer's creative lighting imagination. SportsShooter.com users should call 866-726-9463 to get the special SportsShooter price.
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|