on the death bed

I just don`t think it is very good, technically or artistically.
 
fracster said:
I just don`t think it is very good, technically or artistically.
Click to expand...

You better watch, or it'll be your feet getting photographed next:p
 
I think everyone's missing two very important points about this image.

1) It's not meant to be a great looking image, such as you would see from a studio portrait, it's dead mans feet! It's supposed to stir some sort of debate, which it's doing really well! I don't think there's a forum for this type of image as you can't really critique it, just argue about it.

2) Photographing dead people is one of photography's biggest historical uses. In every culture, including our own, deceased family members where put in photo albums. It's natural to photograph death because we are all fascinated by it. Look at all the photos from histories wars and disasters. They're full of fallen soldiers and victims of bombings, shootings and murders.

The OP has done a great job of portraying death, it's just unfortunate there isn't a forum on here that appreciates that. Somebody should start one!
 
I like this image, though PP is not brillient it does prevoke alot of thought.

Should it be posted on here?? why not we get to see everything else from women being pregnant to chilren being born(ok not actual births but you know what I mean, couple of hours old etc) to kids growing up, of all ages, even to ones taking their clothes off, so why not a picture of death??

Spike
 
I like it tbh no problems at all and as said he did donate his body (i presume its a he) to science! If people didnt post thing like this and be a bit daring we wouldnt have a clue about half of the things in the world for example look at "Life" magazine photographers and how much people have learned about the world from them because they dared to do something against the grain..Anyways rant over lol
 
BRASH said:
You better watch, or it'll be your feet getting photographed next:p
Click to expand...
............Stamping your spleen out sunshine........:LOL:
 
I don't understand why people get so hung up on death. It's another part of life. I was once asked (inquisitively) if I'd ever photographed a funeral. The unfortunate answer was a 'no'. I'd actually quite like to.

Images like this is what photography is all about, and whilst some may find it distasteful there will be just as many who admire it. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather a forum full of boundary pushing images than squirrel after squirrel, baby with really sharp eyes after baby with really sharp eyes.

Full kudos to the OP, it's a simple image well executed. The B&W is welcomed, and certainly takes away some of the macabre effect.

Edit - Check out Tommaso Ausili's World Press Photo set from 2010 for similar distastefulness. Though with animal rather than human.
 
Last edited:
It's a good photo in terms of it creating response/discussion, and I personally have no problem with dead folk being photographed if they're anonymous or have given consent- but then I have been around death a lot in my work and am more comfortable with it than most.
It's a bit oversharpened though Tom. :)
 
I've already apologized for my previous posts in this thread, they were I'll judged and intemperate. I would like to clarify something though, I have no issues with the death theme. Like a lot of folk my age, I've unfortunately had experiences with death and dead people in my time.

To me I don't think Tom's image represents death at all. Death is blood and snot and gore and broken bones. This image is a sanitized, lazy and oft copied representation of death IMHO.

Phil, thank you for the Ausili link, I think they represent death a lot better, and the TBH the comparison to Life photographers is banal.
 
The best photos in history have been controversial, and death is a topic that affects us all, wether we like it or not.

Well done for getting the shot, its very good and I like the title.

I look forward to seeing some more (y)
 
Death is blood and snot and gore and broken bones.
Click to expand...

That is probably because that is virtually all that is reported. I think the op has produced a thought provoking image. It may not be technically or artistically perfert but most of the most iconic photos aren't.

A quote from the National Violent Death Reporting System:

The crude rate of violent death was 19.9 deaths per 100,000 population
Click to expand...
 
Dave Stone said:
That is probably because that is virtually all that is reported. I think the op has produced a thought provoking image. It may not be technically or artistically perfert but most of the most iconic photos aren't.

A quote from the National Violent Death Reporting System:
Click to expand...

I understand that, Dave, but what about Tom's image indicates how death occurred? Nothing, it's not an image about death, it's an image about being dead. It's a sanitized, anodyne image of someone no longer living and gives no insight into the death, and therefore, the life of the dead person.
 
gives no insight into the death,
Click to expand...

I agree, it doesn't. But, for me that is what makes it work. For you it is anodyne,bland, innocuous. The image does't try and force you to think one way, so leaving you free to interprit it as you like. Some have found it offensive. So to say it IS anodyne is incorrect. Thats the beauty of photography, art etc, it is subjective.
 
Last edited:
Dave Stone said:
I agree, it doesn't. But, for me that is what makes it work. For you it is anodyne,bland, innocuous. The image does't try and force you to think one way, so leaving you free to interprit it as you like. Some have found it offensive. So to say it IS anodyne is incorrect.
Click to expand...

I know what your saying, Dave, and yes it is only my opinion about it being anodyne. I would never presume to speak on behalf of anyone else.
 
art yes - but this is supposed to be photo journalism and that is supposed to tell a story - like i said earlier i presume this is just one of a wider set and it might be more powerful in context
 
I agree Pete. As a peice of "art" (lets not argue about what is and asn't) with a good title, for me, works. As a peice of Photo Journalism I don't think it works with no story to it.
 
tamphotography said:
i posted it as i knew it would possibly create a talking point, it did, thats a good thing, we all have our critics, its how to develop, technically its not a great image, though an image dosnt have to tick all boxes to get a feeling or thought across, i had literally two mins to shoot, its part of the job, shoot fast, think fast,
.....
Click to expand...

Just wondering why you post in the Critique section if you don't think it is a great image. Surely that is the point of critique - you think you have a great image and want critique so that others can agree or disagree and give you pointers on how to make it a great image.

Pretty pointless asking for critique on what you think isn't a great image.

I agree what some others have said, I don't think it is a good image, certainly looks staged and is not really photojournalism. All in all a failure on all those specific counts (imo).

As for the subject matter, that doesn't offend me and I say that from the point of someone who's wife died just a few weeks ago. http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=409911
 
Pretty pointless asking for critique on what you think isn't a great image.
Click to expand...
Have to disagree here Vaughn.
 
Agreed IF the original post says something along the lines of "I know it's not a great image, how could I improve.. etc etc etc." but he doesn't. The first post makes no reference to anything along those lines.

Should have been posted in a General section, not a Critique one.
 
I find the pic more interesting and less offensive than all those pics of kittens and newborn babies that people always seem to have a desire to share...
 
Ploddles said:
Agreed IF the original post says something along the lines of "I know it's not a great image, how could I improve.. etc etc etc." but he doesn't. The first post makes no reference to anything along those lines.

Should have been posted in a General section, not a Critique one.
Click to expand...

IIRC...thoughts...

It has proven at least a great picture where people have been able to give their thoughts.

As I said on a prevous posting it is a very provocative picture, and postings on this thread has proved that. (y)
 
I notice, with some amusement, that Tom has changed the name of the image. I suppose that means you haven't accepted my apology.
 
Whites are blown and there is a halo around the feet.
 
I don't think he has, there has been no editing of the first post, and it doesn't contain dynamic code that can be changed at the host's source (Flickr).
Seems purely coincidental to me.
 
Marcel said:
I don't think he has, there has been no editing of the first post, and it doesn't contain dynamic code that can be changed at the host's source (Flickr).
Seems purely coincidental to me.
Click to expand...

Who ever said that photographers were meant to be observant, eh?
:LOL:
 
Marcel said:
I don't think he has, there has been no editing of the first post, and it doesn't contain dynamic code that can be changed at the host's source (Flickr).
Seems purely coincidental to me.
Click to expand...

Spooooky
 
Interesting thread not only for the image but also some of the reaction. Interesting because of the swings of the opinions.

Forgive me for a little theoretical physiology, but it seems these days it's easy to be 'outraged' on the Internet and jump on the bandwagon of protest. An obvious example was clarksons one show appearance where his suggestion of all strikers should be shot in front of their family was taken out of context by mischief makers. Only a few complained aft the programme but after the story ran in the media, fuelled by YouTube edits etc. soon tens of thousands of protests rolled in by people who never saw the programme.

And so to this thread. Is it really distasteful? If it hadn't taken ten seconds to write something on the computer would you really have gone out of your way to make the protest? If we water down the world with these minor issues, do we risk affecting the real issues? Ok end of amateur psychology.

As to the image, I thought it an interesting and provoking image of death, be it of a staged person or real it didn't matter to me, I took it as an image of death. People have already commented on the technical aspects but i thought the shallow depth of field forced the concentration onto the feet. The enough depth of field to indicate the sheet over the body, but the focus is on the feet. How did the dirt get there, how old we're the feet and here the person. Is it male of female? For such a simple image there's a lot of questions being asked and highlighted by the use of black and white.

On its own an interesting image, but it would make more if viewed as part of a set.
 
Ploddles said:
Just wondering why you post in the Critique section if you don't think it is a great image. Surely that is the point of critique
Click to expand...

He said the word TECHNICALLY. Some people do get caught on the technical side of things rather than the actual image when critiquing.

This whole thread is embarrassing. It is a prime example of why photo forums have such a bad rep.

Quite like the image, would be great if the project was part of a series on... In fact not giving anyone any ideas in case I ever get to photograph dead people.:geek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top