Israel wrote:
...Hell, let them dig me up after I'm dead and shoot some pics with my rotted corpse for all I care!

As in "Drop-dead gorgeous"?

Rachel of RageWear wrote:
I guess i just come from the school of thought that dead people should be left alone..and this rant directly relates to some stupid looking, distasteful photos i saw. And i actually have yet to see something of that nature that was worth everyones time and effort

Well, it's certainly as easy to make CRAP pictures in a cemetery as anywhere else.

Rachel of RageWear wrote:
guess i just come from the school of thought that dead people should be left alone..

some of the hard-core VooDoo tribe in New Orleans (NOLA) will feel differently ...

... but yeah, you're right, there are some graveyard photos that are in poor taste.

FML

Rachel of RageWear wrote:
I guess i just come from the school of thought that dead people should be left alone..and this rant directly relates to some stupid looking, distasteful photos i saw. And i actually have yet to see something of that nature that was worth everyones time and effort

I don't personally care for the graveyard photos either. But just because you and I don't like the shots, does that mean they have no artistic value? Hell, I don't like the Mona Lisa, but there are a lot of crazies out there who think it's the best thing since sliced bread!

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
Anyway.
I have a graveyard shot in my portofolio and there's a whole [implied] story behind it.
It has a lot of meaning.
Go check it out.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to leave comments!

If I hadn't read the caption...I wouldn't have guessed the 'implied' story behind it since you don't look pregnant in the shot or really thought of you being at a graveyard for that matter since it's really kinda hard to tell where you are in the shot.

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
Anyway.
I have a graveyard shot in my portofolio and there's a whole [implied] story behind it.
It has a lot of meaning.
quote]
Yeah, not really what i was complaining about...like i said in the first post, backgrounds are fine and whatnot..just humping a headstone is not really my idea of a tasteful picture

Michael Kirst wrote:

If I hadn't read the caption...I wouldn't have guessed the 'implied' story behind it since you don't look pregnant in the shot or really thought of you being at a graveyard for that matter since it's really kinda hard to tell where you are in the shot.

Funny.
The photo was in the photographer's port before mine, with a different caption that doesn't explain the story, and people left comments on it expressing that they thought that's what was going on.
It's very clear that there are tombstones in the shot, including the one my hand is on.

I wasn't asking for critique, by the way.

Rachel of RageWear wrote:

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
Anyway.
I have a graveyard shot in my portofolio and there's a whole [implied] story behind it.
It has a lot of meaning.
quote]
Yeah, not really what i was complaining about...like i said in the first post, backgrounds are fine and whatnot..just humping a headstone is not really my idea of a tasteful picture

Well.. What if I was naked in that photo?
[I'm asking because we did more shots that were nude.]

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
Go check it out.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to leave comments!

Huh?

The Things Ive Seen wrote:
Why is everyone associating sexy with graveyards in the first place? I'd like to see some of these photos that raised this issue. If the intent was to be "sexy" in a graveyard, then I will agree with everyone who is arguing against it. There is no place in a cemetery for "sexy".
However, cemeteries certainly have many appealing qualities for photography. The provide fantastic light and shadows in the ones with tall trees. The can provide a mood for the shot. All of this can be achieved without even revealing the fact that it is in a cemetery.
I also happen to have 3 photos currently in my portfolio that were taken in cemeteries. My intention certainly was not for them to be "sexy".

Thank you! thats what i mean, as long as the model isnt crawling all over the headstones, i'm sure a photog can make something amazing

Michael Kirst wrote:

Huh?

That's my way of showing how I feel about at least half of the members of this site.  It didn't even occur to you as a humorous comment because you're so used to seeing things like that.. Am I right?

Wynd Mulysa wrote:

That's my way of showing how I feel about at least half of the members of this site.  It didn't even occur to you as a humorous comment because you're so used to seeing things like that.. Am I right?

Lol, I love you.

Wynd Mulysa wrote:

It's very clear that there are tombstones in the shot, including the one my hand is on.

I wasn't asking for critique, by the way.

Actually I was just commenting...but if you wanna be that way about it...
I wouldn't say the tombstones in the shot are 'clear' as they are out of focus. The one your hand is on is practicly cut out of the shot all together.
And you were asking for comments and I left one. If you disagreed with it, that doesn't automatically make it a critique. A critique would be something more like .... "...the range of tones is nice for a sepia shot. The lighting is nice. The expression is lost and a bit blank..." etc.

J Schumacher wrote:
You know....

If I was lying in a graveyard for a long time....

And some cute girl was sitting on my headstone....

Don't think I'd mind it much. Break up the monotony.

Unless you're a lawyer...then you'd be buried too deep to notice.

Michael Kirst wrote:

Actually I was just commenting...but if you wanna be that way about it...
I wouldn't say the tombstones in the shot are 'clear' as they are out of focus. The one your hand is on is practicly cut out of the shot all together.
And you were asking for comments and I left one. If you disagreed with it, that doesn't automatically make it a critique. A critique would be something more like The tombstones are out of focus on purpose.  No one else had a p.... "...the range of tones is nice for a sepia shot. The lighting is nice. The expression is lost and a bit blank..." etc.

Okay, I get what you're saying.  I guess I wasn't ready for you to tell me what you didn't like about something I only jokingly asked for comments on [and when people ask for comments, they mean they want you to leave them on their portfolio.]  People like [and get] the photo, including myself.. And that's really all I care about.

If I had actually meant that I wanted you to tell me what you think of it, I would be very appreciative.  So, let's pretend that's the case.  Thank you.

Wynd Mulysa wrote:

Okay, I get what you're saying.  I guess I wasn't ready for you to tell me what you didn't like about something I only jokingly asked for comments on [and when people ask for comments, they mean they want you to leave them on their portfolio.]  People like [and get] the photo, including myself.. And that's really all I care about.

If I had actually meant that I wanted you to tell me what you think of it, I would be very appreciative.  So, let's pretend that's the case.  Thank you.

Let me apologize for any tone that might have come across. It was not what was intended. You have a nice port and a great attitude. It's late...and my brain doesn't function so well on a lack of sleep..
Best, MK

Anthony Wallace wrote:
absolutely nothing

Except for all of the sexy dead stuff!

Rachel of RageWear wrote:
What is so freaking great about a gothic model straddling a tombstone?? Not only is it cliche, but it’s really disrespectful! Using a cemetery as a backdrop...fine, but don't roll around on the headstones. How many models would perch themselves on top of the roof of a house, or on top of a car of a person that they don't know? Hopefully none and hopefully no photographer is asking them to violate property like that. Ew, i think i'm just frustrated because i'm sick of angsty girls with dark eye makeup, pouting, and trying to look innocent while sandwiched in between a husband and wife. So there, my rant…Moral: Its hard to make that kind of stuff look tasteful, and its been done!

Dear Graveyard Fashion Arbiter:

Well I'm sure glad you have set us all straight on this! There's a lot of people here who have shot these kinds of scenes and probably don't realize all the ways it's wrong that you've explained. I'm really glad that someone, particularly someone who can draw on their vast experience in the field, can spell it out so well. It's an opportunity for all of us to learn. That doesn't even touch the many of us who might have made one (or even more) of these cliched, disrespectful images of some angsty girl with dark eye makeup and might have even instructed the model to pout (as you so carefully point out).

I hope all my fellow photographers in MM-land will heed Rachel's advice and her moral. "It's been done!" she says. No point in wasting your damn time on this kind of stuff. I have a few graveyard shots, and, for that, I apologize. On behalf of my fellow photographers, I thank you for your deep and sage advice. There certainly is no room in our field for this kind of "imagery."

Rachel of RageWear wrote:
I guess i just come from the school of thought that dead people should be left alone..and this rant directly relates to some stupid looking, distasteful photos i saw. And i actually have yet to see something of that nature that was worth everyones time and effort

Cemeteries are for the living,.......not the dead.