Searcher wrote:

Internet psychoanalysis? Please, no.

You have a point... at this stage I have no idea if you are just some inmature child just posting crap in order to get a reaction from people, on an LSD trip, an artictic serial killer, or a hybrid (I know you like the word).

I think I will just stay away...

Searcher wrote:

Searcher wrote:
I'm not ready to share yet.

Elaborate?

You're finding it difficult to get what you want out of your own work. You turn "the model" into your excuse for not being able to do so. It's not about the model. It's about you. You don't feel you can create what you want. It's frustrating you. Instead of accepting responsibility for it (and actually doing something about it), you're projecting blame outward.

You don't need to be complaining, or blaming, or even talking. You need to be trying and trying and trying and trying again. Maybe you'll tear yourself to shreds in the process, but odds are as painful as it is, you'll love every second of it. That is where you'll find your worth, your perspective and value in your creations.

This thread is just wasting time.

Davis Images wrote:

Sex act, cutting someone, dumping a bucket of cold water over them when they're not expecting it, yes it is the same.

Then maybe you can volunteer to model for the OP.. He wants you to cut yourself so he can watch.. after all it is just like getting some water dumped on you.. no big deal.

Kevin Connery wrote:
I'll type it slowly so you can follow it more easily.

1. You "want pain and struggle and chaos and introspection to show" in your images.
2. You "want [pain and struggle] on the set."
3. I cited an example where such was not needed, from an artist well known for his ability to portray pain, struggle, humor, and a great deal more human emotion than most competent artists.

Searcher wrote:
I got that. I want to know why you think his way is better.

Because his approach doesn't require causing avoidable and needless pain to someone who specifically isn't interested. (You noted that "Someone already inclined to cut themselves would be a bad choice for the shot, and that the real pain and fear is what you're interested in.)

Kevin Connery wrote:
You don't need real pain to portray pain. If you personally want to cause pain for your models, that's between you and them--but it is NOT necessary, and it's rarely an effective way to obtain a strong photograph.

Searcher wrote:
You do not know that. You cannot prove that. You are making an assumption which I reject as such.

Searcher wrote:
Most of my photography involves detailed stories replete with staged clues, but what I am talking about in this thread is another kind of image. One you seem to reject creating outright because it's too difficult.

You're claiming I've said something I've never implied or stated.

But you don't want to hear it; you want to be able to use the shield of 'Art' to justify causing pain in models who--as you noted in your first posts--are NOT interested in it, and are not interested in finding subject for whom this is acceptable.

Searcher wrote:
You think I'm being shortsighted, but I'm not.

I neither said nor implied you were.

Searcher wrote:
I'm not letting myself be limited by what is sane and insane. That sounds self-serving, but it's what I feel my recent experiences have prompted me to explore.

I do agree with the others who have indicated that seeking out a mental health provider might be a more effective way to achieve your personal therapeutic and cathartic goals, however, as well as being more beneficial to the community.

A photography site doesn't seem to be the optimum venue to search for subjects who will come over and let you "make it up as we go along" to "force the models out of the state of mind they had when they walked in". It doesn't appear as though the final images are what you're actually interested in.

Adieu

Daniel Savage wrote:

You're finding it difficult to get what you want out of your own work. You turn "the model" into your excuse for not being able to do so. It's not about the model. It's about you. You don't feel you can create what you want. It's frustrating you. Instead of accepting responsibility for it (and actually doing something about it), you're projecting blame outward.

You don't need to be complaining, or blaming, or even talking. You need to be trying and trying and trying and trying again. Maybe you'll tear yourself to shreds in the process, but odds are as painful as it is, you'll love every second of it. That is where you'll find your worth, your perspective and value in your creations.

This thread is just wasting time.

You're right. I don't have a model today.

Bryan Benoit wrote:
Then maybe you can volunteer to model for the OP.. He wants you to cut yourself so he can watch.. after all it is just like getting some water dumped on you.. no big deal.

Just a small scratch.

Searcher wrote:

You're right. I don't have a model today.

Who needs a model when you have yourself.

Kevin Connery wrote:
I do agree with the others who have indicated that seeking out a mental health provider might be a more effective way to achieve your personal therapeutic and cathartic goals, however, as well as being more beneficial to the community.

Less interesting path.

Kevin Connery wrote:
A photography site doesn't seem to be the optimum venue to search for subjects who will come over and let you "make it up as we go along" to "[i]force the models out of the state of mind they had when they walked in". It doesn't appear as though the final images are what you're actually interested in.

Adieu

I mostly use agency girls. The final images are only part of what I want out of photography. The consumation of the work is where I find the true joy.

Adieu, Mr. Connery.

Daniel Savage wrote:

Who needs a model when you have yourself.

I think I've been through that already. I must control the camera, and that is nearly impossible when one is a subject in motion.

Searcher wrote:

I think I've been through that already. I must control the camera, and that is nearly impossible when one is a subject in motion.

I've been known to create my own hindrances too.

Bryan Benoit wrote:

Then maybe you can volunteer to model for the OP.. He wants you to cut yourself so he can watch.. after all it is just like getting some water dumped on you.. no big deal.

How about getting your package smashed?

Odin's Eye wrote:
sex-pred in the making perhaps?

No. Where do you get off even suggesting that about someone?

Davis Images wrote:

How about getting your package smashed?

if that is what you are into I am sure the OP will be happy to oblige.

Daniel Savage wrote:

I've been known to create my own hindrances too.

:\

Bryan Benoit wrote:

if that is what you are into I am sure the OP will be happy to oblige.

I don't care much to photograph what anyone else is into.

Searcher wrote:

No. Where do you get off even suggesting that about someone?

sociopathic behaviour displayed, and your own comments regarding the artistic intent of rape, though won't do it despite the legalities. All you need is to get passed the fear of the legal system, and what else is stopping you, if you think it would make for good "art"

Odin's Eye wrote:

sociopathic behaviour displayed, and your own comments regarding the artistic intent of rape, though won't do it despite the legalities. All you need is to get passed the fear of the legal system, and what else is stopping you, if you think it would make for good "art"

There was another post about that, which you seem to have overlooked.

Searcher wrote:

No. Where do you get off even suggesting that about someone?

Where do you get off suggesting that random strangers should be willing to endure pain and injury for the sake of your art, when you are clearly not willing to do the same yourself or even display examples of it? How about suggesting that people who are not interested in or willing to suffer or cause others to suffer must not be "serious" or "committed"?

Searcher wrote:
Does putting the word in quotation marks mean you are afraid of it?

"art"

art

ART

LOVE

love

"love"

Must you contain it?

I contain it when I think it is being used to hide a line of bullshit, or is being used for a purpose it doesn't fit. i.e. I "love" pizza. honestly, I just enjoy the taste and texture of what I consider to be good pizza, that doesn't mean I love it.

Your "art" sounds to me as a cheap way for you to get off and hurt others, pretending you are a rapist or watching a rape. No, I didn't overlook it. I just still see that persona in your responses.

Searcher wrote:

You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

I think your idea of the process is a tad messed up.
You want edgy, shoot your interperetation of it.   You want someone to actually cut themself and bleed for you?  Shoot self portraits.

Searcher wrote:
And yet something tells me most models here on MM would never go for it. The thought of a tiny break of their skin would send them into a panic. I find that sad. It actually depresses me to think about that.

Have you considered that cuts on a model's skin reduces her or his chances for future work?  Would you be willing to destroy your camera for my art?  If you say no, I'll be depressed.

Pay enough for the model's time, the time it takes for the cut to heal completely, and pay for the model's pain and suffering (as a court would award in an injury lawsuit) and you'll find your model.  Say a hypothetical $400/day for 10 days plus an additional $2000 for the pain.  Lay down $6K, and I'll do it.  Hell, I'd do it for $5K.

And for $10K, I'll break my camera.

Brian Diaz wrote:
Have you considered that cuts on a model's skin reduces her or his chances for future work?  Would you be willing to destroy your camera for my art?  If you say no, I'll be depressed.

Pay enough for the model's time, the time it takes for the cut to heal completely, and pay for the model's pain and suffering (as a court would award in an injury lawsuit) and you'll find your model.  Say a hypothetical $400/day for 10 days plus an additional $2000 for the pain.  Lay down $6K, and I'll do it.  Hell, I'd do it for $5K.

And for $10K, I'll break my camera.

Good lord. O_o

I realize I'm probably unique, but I only charge $75-$100/hour for a shoot with blood. My main problem is finding photographers willing to do it.

"pain and suffering" for a shallow cut is negligible, and takes maybe 3 days, max, to heal. No more than a pinprick for feel, if that. If you're looking for exposed bone and muscle tissue, then you're going to need to pay more, if you can find someone willing to go to that depth. (which I won't)

LadyLockeout wrote:
If you're looking for exposed bone and muscle tissue, then you're going to need to pay more, if you can find someone willing to go to that depth. (which I won't)

that there are people out there who might actually consider mutilating themselves for pay is absolutely atrocious. I don't understand it and so I don't want to judge it, but holy shit... I cannot wrap my brain around that one.

Davis Images wrote:
Brilliant Idea!


There are some people who don't like some of their body parts and have them removed by surgery by legitimate doctors. Why not track down someone like that and make a deal?

Because that involves too much planning and effort, remember? He doesn't want body-modification artists, or people like LadyLockeout who seem to enjoy the attention they get for being willing to hurt themselves on camera - that would take too much energy on his part to set up, and anyway, he wants "real fear," not a seasoned person with plenty of experience with physical injury. He basically just wants regular models to show up and let him do whatever he wants to them while taking pictures of the whole thing, apparently. Gee, that doesn't sound like a classic horror movie plot at all...

Searcher wrote:

That's sad.

That's harsh. Why aren't people allowed to live their life as they choose? Maybe David prefers to draw on suffering that's already there for his art. Or maybe he just wants to show beauty. Just because you don't want to purposely cause yourself pain for your art doesn't mean you're "sad". It just means you've got different motivations.

Odin's Eye wrote:
And its one thing to make sacrifices for your own art, but I think the issue we are having with the OP is he wants others to sacrifice for his "art" but he isn't clear about what it is, just that is has to cross "a line". Shoot some real life cannibals, that could cross quite a few lines. Shoot someone masturbating with the bones of a deceased loved one, that crosses a few lines. But again, don't ask someone to do something that you won't do to yourself, and his excuse of "Well I'm not a stationary subject"...yeah...no thanks.

I haven't read the whole thread...I'm not judging anyone...I was just weighing in on what I thought of the original subject. Considering the fact that this is a 4 page thread, and the inflammatory nature of the topic, I'm sure plenty of stupid things have been said all around.

Searcher wrote:
That might be interesting to shoot, but one would get into more trouble than it is worth. Though, you would never know for sure unless you carried it out.

there we go. in response to shooting someone being raped.

Kevin Connery wrote:

Kevin Connery wrote:
That depends. Are you "painting" (photographing) for therapy, or to communicate with others?

Searcher wrote:
I only know after.

So it's therapy while you're shooting, and sometimes results in something you can use to communicate. That's fair. What's odd is that you've indicated that other participants should be willing to commit themselves to what may well only be therapy for you.


Presenting something that will portray a broader understanding of humanity usually requires having that broader understanding before trying to portray it.

Remind me to put you on my list of people I probably can't win a debate against