The Unfortunates
In a recent post (22nd September), the eloquent and gifted photographer, Mr Jimmy D, imparts his wisdom as to how to become a successful photographer. He says:
“If you seek more positive responses from viewers regarding your work as a pretty girl shooter, you'd do well to photograph models who stereotypically fit most people's perceptions of beauty. Simply put, the hotter the model the more wowed people will be by your photographs of them. Leastwise, it mostly works that way. I know this sounds like I'm saying beauty trumps craft when it comes to pretty girl shooting. (I suppose I am saying exactly that.) If you really want to wow people with your work, shoot the hottest possible….If you seek more positive responses from viewers regarding your work as a pretty girl shooter, you'd do well to photograph models who stereotypically fit most people's perceptions of beauty.”
Basically he seems to be arguing that if you wanna be a successful photographer, then you should shoot the hottest babes.
Good God. I can’t tell you just how offensive this post is, on so many different levels.
I mean, three weeks ago I was committed to marrying Jimmy (should my divorce ever go through) - he was my knight in shining armour, on a huge pedestal. In a single post, he hasn’t so much wobbled on the pedestal, but taken a huge dive off it, landing with a giant “splat” on the studio floor.
C’mon Jimmy, you can’t seriously believe that?
Leaving aside the issue of dwarves (read the post), which rendered me fuming for most of the day (ask Rich – the poor guy went through hell with my ranting), my dearest Jimmy appears to be saying, basically, you should shoot only babes, 18-25 years, long hair, slim, big boobies, pretty face (makeup-enhanced, naturally!) Shoot to society’s narrow perceptions of what is beautiful, desirable, and commercially saleable, and you stand a much more likely chance of fortune and glory. And he’s not just talking about glamour photography, but all nude photography (otherwise he wouldn’t have talked so much about dwarves.)
Jimmy is saying, basically, yes, this is just how it is. Sad but true. This is how society works. Live with it.
If this is true, well shit, why don’t I just give up on modelling now, crawl back into my hole, and forget about ever being a model? O.K. I’m realistic and I know I'm never going to be a glamour model. The harsh reality is that I am disabled, I am old (modelling wise), I am not beautiful, I definitely don’t conform to the stereotype. I am a middle aged mother, a modelling has-been. And do you know what? I think this makes me a more interesting photographic subject. I have met many girls who don’t conform to the stereotypical model. They are fat, or overly thin, or old, or young, saggy, disabled, facially disfigured, and yes, I used to have a friend who was a “dwarf” (oh how she hated that phrase) and she was as much a woman as your 18 year old babe. My (more correctly termed) “short-stature” friend was beautiful, physically as well as mentally, and she was a very sexual and erotic person. I’m damned sure that she would make a fantastic model.
We “unfortunates”, we “freaks”, are people too. And we can be good photographic subjects, as much as any “normal” surgically enhanced glamour model.
A good photographer will shoot everyone, not only shoot what is conventional or what society considers to be perfect. I have encountered several most excellent photographers who would gladly kill for the chance to photograph “the unfortunates”, and who would shoot them well, and be critically acclaimed for the art, make money, and who would empower their subjects as a result.
Read Bailey’s Democracy. And then tell me that “beauty trumps craft.”
It’s not all about the money. It’s about the photography and art. To all photographers, including amateurs, professionals and those in-between, I say to you:
Step outside the box. Shoot the unconventional models. Shoot ALL TYPES OF WOMEN.
Step outside your “groove”, your genre, photograph “REAL LIFE”. It might not fit with what the average man in the street wants, but guess what? It might make you a better photographer. And it’s a heck of a lot more likely to get you featured in The National Portrait Gallery. Plus it will leave you more satisfied with your art.
We DO live in a perfect world. One that values real beauty over illusion. If you believe otherwise, then you’re shooting for the wrong audience.
Syd, lookin’ fab!
P.S. Note to Jimmy: before you think I’m just just having a go at you, I’m most definitely not. This is an important and contentious issue, and all comments and discussions are very welcome!
I gave my dear friend Don a rather hard time about shootin' only young nekkid chix only a few weeks ago! And I would fully expect either of you to photograph me, and do a most excellent job too.
Rich BTW, is staying well out of this. He says he sees both sides! (Typical!)
“If you seek more positive responses from viewers regarding your work as a pretty girl shooter, you'd do well to photograph models who stereotypically fit most people's perceptions of beauty. Simply put, the hotter the model the more wowed people will be by your photographs of them. Leastwise, it mostly works that way. I know this sounds like I'm saying beauty trumps craft when it comes to pretty girl shooting. (I suppose I am saying exactly that.) If you really want to wow people with your work, shoot the hottest possible….If you seek more positive responses from viewers regarding your work as a pretty girl shooter, you'd do well to photograph models who stereotypically fit most people's perceptions of beauty.”
Basically he seems to be arguing that if you wanna be a successful photographer, then you should shoot the hottest babes.
Good God. I can’t tell you just how offensive this post is, on so many different levels.
I mean, three weeks ago I was committed to marrying Jimmy (should my divorce ever go through) - he was my knight in shining armour, on a huge pedestal. In a single post, he hasn’t so much wobbled on the pedestal, but taken a huge dive off it, landing with a giant “splat” on the studio floor.
C’mon Jimmy, you can’t seriously believe that?
Leaving aside the issue of dwarves (read the post), which rendered me fuming for most of the day (ask Rich – the poor guy went through hell with my ranting), my dearest Jimmy appears to be saying, basically, you should shoot only babes, 18-25 years, long hair, slim, big boobies, pretty face (makeup-enhanced, naturally!) Shoot to society’s narrow perceptions of what is beautiful, desirable, and commercially saleable, and you stand a much more likely chance of fortune and glory. And he’s not just talking about glamour photography, but all nude photography (otherwise he wouldn’t have talked so much about dwarves.)
Jimmy is saying, basically, yes, this is just how it is. Sad but true. This is how society works. Live with it.
If this is true, well shit, why don’t I just give up on modelling now, crawl back into my hole, and forget about ever being a model? O.K. I’m realistic and I know I'm never going to be a glamour model. The harsh reality is that I am disabled, I am old (modelling wise), I am not beautiful, I definitely don’t conform to the stereotype. I am a middle aged mother, a modelling has-been. And do you know what? I think this makes me a more interesting photographic subject. I have met many girls who don’t conform to the stereotypical model. They are fat, or overly thin, or old, or young, saggy, disabled, facially disfigured, and yes, I used to have a friend who was a “dwarf” (oh how she hated that phrase) and she was as much a woman as your 18 year old babe. My (more correctly termed) “short-stature” friend was beautiful, physically as well as mentally, and she was a very sexual and erotic person. I’m damned sure that she would make a fantastic model.
We “unfortunates”, we “freaks”, are people too. And we can be good photographic subjects, as much as any “normal” surgically enhanced glamour model.
A good photographer will shoot everyone, not only shoot what is conventional or what society considers to be perfect. I have encountered several most excellent photographers who would gladly kill for the chance to photograph “the unfortunates”, and who would shoot them well, and be critically acclaimed for the art, make money, and who would empower their subjects as a result.
Read Bailey’s Democracy. And then tell me that “beauty trumps craft.”
It’s not all about the money. It’s about the photography and art. To all photographers, including amateurs, professionals and those in-between, I say to you:
Step outside the box. Shoot the unconventional models. Shoot ALL TYPES OF WOMEN.
Step outside your “groove”, your genre, photograph “REAL LIFE”. It might not fit with what the average man in the street wants, but guess what? It might make you a better photographer. And it’s a heck of a lot more likely to get you featured in The National Portrait Gallery. Plus it will leave you more satisfied with your art.
We DO live in a perfect world. One that values real beauty over illusion. If you believe otherwise, then you’re shooting for the wrong audience.
Syd, lookin’ fab!
P.S. Note to Jimmy: before you think I’m just just having a go at you, I’m most definitely not. This is an important and contentious issue, and all comments and discussions are very welcome!
I gave my dear friend Don a rather hard time about shootin' only young nekkid chix only a few weeks ago! And I would fully expect either of you to photograph me, and do a most excellent job too.
Rich BTW, is staying well out of this. He says he sees both sides! (Typical!)
Labels: Syd
posted by Lin at 5:30 PM
5 Comments:
You tell 'em!
Lyn-- i think you might have (somewhat) misunderstood who and where that post (of mine) was aimed. i certainly didn't mean it to apply to all genres of (femme) model photography. Nor was it meant to be mysdwarfinistic. (I think I just invented a word: One that might never be used by anyone else.) Anyway, my post was directed, specifically, at glamour, beauty, and tease photography and, even more specifically, at photographers who post on forums that cater to those genres.
I'd provide a more elaborate reply but I've been shooting in Las Vegas all week (and operating on about 3 hours sleep each day) and, consequently, my brain isn't functioning properly or efficiently.
No worries, Jimmy, honestly!
I'm renowned for my....er...over-sensitivity at times!
It's true that JimmyD's post is blunt. However, given the objective, his advice is right on.
But as a boudoir photographer, if I had that mindset, I'd fail miserably, because my female clients want images that will "wow" them and their lovers, not viewers of photography message boards and the general public. Different audience, different requirements.
I've written more on a related topic here.
Will
Lin,
I demand that you retract the statement that you are not beautiful. You are beautiful.
If you will not retract the statement, I will organize a protest outside your house, hire billboards on the highway leading to your house, and jam your office fax machine with protest faxes.
You know I can do it. So give up and admit that you're beautiful.
april
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home