Forums > General Industry > Photo Art or child abuse?

Photographer

CSI-PHOTO

Posts: 268

Trenton, Michigan, US

On Good morning a america there was a story of photographer who takes pictures of children who have been crying or are upset from an experience. Is the media making it a bigger issue than it deserves? Do you believe the photographer should labeled a child abuser?

Jul 28 06 11:46 am Link

Photographer

Lens N Light

Posts: 16341

Bradford, Vermont, US

Not unless he causes the crying through some overt act.

Jul 28 06 11:48 am Link

Photographer

American Glamour

Posts: 38813

Detroit, Michigan, US

Maybe the child is crying because he knows how bad the pictures are going to turn out!

Jul 28 06 11:50 am Link

Photographer

MMDesign

Posts: 18647

Louisville, Kentucky, US

They were most likely referring to Lauren Greenfield. There was a rather long thread about this a week or so ago.

Jul 28 06 11:53 am Link

Photographer

James Jackson Fashion

Posts: 11132

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

Been done before...

Jul 28 06 12:18 pm Link

Wardrobe Stylist

stylist man

Posts: 34382

New York, New York, US

Lens N Light wrote:
Not unless he causes the crying through some overt act.

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

Jul 28 06 01:46 pm Link

Model

Ximena Barreto

Posts: 670

Monterey, California, US

thank goodness for the ACLU!

Jul 28 06 01:50 pm Link

Photographer

James Jackson Fashion

Posts: 11132

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

MHana wrote:

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

BASTARD

Stealing candy from babies.

Heh...

Jul 28 06 01:52 pm Link

Photographer

Lens N Light

Posts: 16341

Bradford, Vermont, US

MHana wrote:

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

I guess one could say that is a good thing?

Jul 28 06 01:52 pm Link

Wardrobe Stylist

stylist man

Posts: 34382

New York, New York, US

Lens N Light wrote:

I guess one could say that is a good thing?

Not giving it to them in the first place would be a good thing.

Jul 28 06 01:54 pm Link

Model

theda

Posts: 21719

New York, New York, US

MHana wrote:

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

That sounds like child abuse to me.  Yup. Never say no to an infant.  They'll write a tell all book about it.

Jul 28 06 01:54 pm Link

Photographer

Carpe Imago Photography

Posts: 1757

Dousman, Wisconsin, US

MHana wrote:

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

Okay, if he did it to my daughter just to make her cry I'd kick his ass from hear to China.  And I'm a non-violent sort of guy. 

Photography in its purest form should be about capturing moments that happen...not making them happen.  I realize that flies in the face of what most of us do in the area of glamour or fashion, but how many times do you see photographers hurting models just to make them cry?

Kids?  Yeah, I'd hurt him.

Jul 28 06 01:59 pm Link

Wardrobe Stylist

stylist man

Posts: 34382

New York, New York, US

Carpe Imago Photography wrote:

Okay, if he did it to my daughter just to make her cry I'd kick his ass from hear to China.  And I'm a non-violent sort of guy. 

Photography in its purest form should be about capturing moments that happen...not making them happen.  I realize that flies in the face of what most of us do in the area of glamour or fashion, but how many times do you see photographers hurting models just to make them cry?

Kids?  Yeah, I'd hurt him.

It was done by a woman photographer.

Jul 28 06 02:12 pm Link

Photographer

Jack D Trute

Posts: 4558

New York, New York, US

https://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b372/jacktruth/bushbabyAP130706_479x600.jpg

Jul 28 06 02:24 pm Link

Photographer

MMDesign

Posts: 18647

Louisville, Kentucky, US

The amazing thing is they both have the same IQ.

Jul 28 06 02:29 pm Link

Photographer

Stephen Moskop

Posts: 88

Chicago, Illinois, US

Carpe Imago Photography wrote:
Photography in its purest form should be about capturing moments that happen...not making them happen.

That is a bold statement about the philosophy of photography...

I disagree.  Even sports and event photographers make thousands of split-second decisions about composition, light etc.  They may be capturing a moment, but the act of photography changes that moment- gives it a meaning, editorializes it, gives it moral force beyond "the moment."  Photographers put things in front of their lens like painters put paint on canvas.

I don't like the idea of taking the candy from the baby- it's just mean, but as far as "capturing the moment", it is no different than what all photographers do.

Jul 28 06 02:29 pm Link

Photographer

DarioImpiniPhotography

Posts: 8756

Dallas, Texas, US

MHana wrote:

It was done by a woman photographer.

If you havent noticed recently, women can actually be guilty of the worst crimes on record.

Jul 28 06 02:30 pm Link

Photographer

DarioImpiniPhotography

Posts: 8756

Dallas, Texas, US

Jack D Trute wrote:
https://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b372/jacktruth/bushbabyAP130706_479x600.jpg

He has that effect on a lot of us.

Jul 28 06 02:31 pm Link

Photographer

Christopher Hartman

Posts: 54196

Buena Park, California, US

How does Hollywood get babies to cry on camera?  I have a feeling it's not going to be all that different.

Jul 28 06 02:35 pm Link

Model

Nic B

Posts: 166

New York, New York, US

I hardly think that constitutes "abuse." They probably give the candy to the kid in the end anyway.

Jul 28 06 02:38 pm Link

Photographer

James Jackson Fashion

Posts: 11132

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

MMDesign wrote:
The amazing thing is they both have the same IQ.

and I just thought the picture was showing that they both needed their diapers changed.

Jul 28 06 02:43 pm Link

Photographer

Stonekey Photography

Posts: 507

Wilmington, North Carolina, US

MHana wrote:

The act was taking candy away.
This was not done by just waiting for them to cry.

Taking candy away from a baby is hardly abuse.  Letting them cry is hardly abuse.  If they were like bitch slapping the kids, shaking them violently, dislocating joints, chopping off members, shooting them, making them drink gallons of water, throwing them in the ocean to drown them.  Those are abuse, but not taking candy away.

Jul 28 06 02:49 pm Link

Photographer

Shawn Kuck

Posts: 407

Columbia, Tennessee, US

Lens N Light wrote:
Not unless he causes the crying through some overt act.

Actually she causes the crying, in one instance she did it by giving the kid some candy and then snatching it away. They're beautiful images and most of you democrats should appreciate the sentiment, since it's her statement against the Bush Administration and the War. The fact is artist do things outside of what most people would consider normal to accomplish their ideas and its not like she punched the kid in the nose.

Shawn

Jul 28 06 02:52 pm Link

Photographer

MMDesign

Posts: 18647

Louisville, Kentucky, US

James Jackson wrote:

and I just thought the picture was showing that they both needed their diapers changed.

Another way of saying they're both full of shit, eh?

Jul 28 06 02:53 pm Link

Photographer

DarioImpiniPhotography

Posts: 8756

Dallas, Texas, US

Bryan Patrick Coleman wrote:

Taking candy away from a baby is hardly abuse.  Letting them cry is hardly abuse.  If they were like bitch slapping the kids, shaking them violently, dislocating joints, chopping off members, shooting them, making them drink gallons of water, throwing them in the ocean to drown them.  Those are abuse, but not taking candy away.

Um, I disagree.  You take a child and teach them to distrust adults and that they can be mean?  They'll turn out like me.  Do you really want that?

Jul 28 06 02:54 pm Link

Photographer

johnkphotography

Posts: 78

New York, New York, US

I think Good Morning America is child abuse.

Jul 28 06 02:54 pm Link

Photographer

Shawn Kuck

Posts: 407

Columbia, Tennessee, US

Ximena Bright wrote:
thank goodness for the ACLU!

What???!!!??? Yeah thank goodness we have them to protect people disrupting funerals of soldiers with signs that say "Thank God for IED's" and oh wait "Fag Sin = 9-11". Yeah I'm sooo happy they're around.

Shawn

Jul 28 06 02:56 pm Link

Photographer

PJQ Photography

Posts: 1728

Los Angeles, California, US

johnkphotography wrote:
I think Good Morning America is child abuse.

LOL...that was good.

I still have to read the article, but I have the Calendar section from the L.A. times with the story on this photographers show, the photos are damn awesome in my book.  (If we're talking of the same photographer and photos, I'm sure we are).

Jul 28 06 03:00 pm Link

Photographer

MMDesign

Posts: 18647

Louisville, Kentucky, US

Shawn Kuck wrote:

What???!!!??? Yeah thank goodness we have them to protect people disrupting funerals of soldiers with signs that say "Thank God for IED's" and oh wait "Fag Sin = 9-11". Yeah I'm sooo happy they're around.

Shawn

You can't just pick and choose what groups can exercise their constitutional rights. While I obviously disagree with what those religious nuts are doing, it is a constitutionally protected right.

Jul 28 06 03:01 pm Link

Photographer

Shawn Kuck

Posts: 407

Columbia, Tennessee, US

I don't believe interupting the peace at a funeral is a protected right. I think grieving families should be allowed to grieve and they should protest before or after, but not during. It's disgusting. Or they should have at least one sign saying "this person died so I can do this protest". It's disgusting and there should be laws against it. It's a funeral!!! even worse it's a soldiers funeral!! I'm not saying they can't say it, I'm saying they shouldn't be able to say it there.

The law the ACLU is suing Missouri about says they have to be 300 feet away, I don't think that is too much to ask for a family to say goodbye ... Even if it was Hilters family.

Shawn

Jul 28 06 03:09 pm Link

Photographer

James Jackson Fashion

Posts: 11132

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

Shawn Kuck wrote:
I'm not saying they can't say it, I'm saying they shouldn't be able to say it there.

And I'm not saying you can't say you're hungry or order food ever again, I'm just saying you can't say it at a restaurant or anywhere someone who would get you food is located...


Unless the speech is going to immediately and directly put an actual risk of danger in to a situation it should be allowed.  (ie, fire in an amphitheater isn't allowed, because people will run and trample each other)

Jul 28 06 04:28 pm Link

Photographer

James Jackson Fashion

Posts: 11132

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

Shawn Kuck wrote:
The fact is artist do things outside of what most people would consider normal to accomplish their ideas and its not like she punched the kid in the nose.

https://somethingpositive.net/arch/bitters.gif

Jul 28 06 04:29 pm Link

Photographer

Rp-photo

Posts: 42711

Houston, Texas, US

Carpe Imago Photography wrote:
But how many times do you see photographers hurting models just to make them cry?

I once gave a model candy and took it away:

https://img4.modelmayhem.com/060530/21/447d0414cbe45.jpg

Jul 28 06 05:07 pm Link

Photographer

MF productions

Posts: 2064

San Jose, California, US

ive seen the photos and i dont like how the photographer is making these kids cry , it seems very staged and fake in the photos. perhaps if the photos where done spontaneouly it have better results but forcing kids to cry is pretty much child abuse art or not .

Aug 04 06 08:50 am Link

Model

e-string

Posts: 24002

Kansas City, Missouri, US

missing fingers product wrote:
ive seen the photos and i dont like how the photographer is making these kids cry , it seems very staged and fake in the photos. perhaps if the photos where done spontaneouly it have better results but forcing kids to cry is pretty much child abuse art or not .

Taking candy away is NOT child abuse. lol

Aug 04 06 08:52 am Link

Photographer

byReno

Posts: 1034

Arlington Heights, Illinois, US

There are a lot of ways to look at this.  Maybe she should have pointed her camera at the mothers who are dragging their screaming kids out of Toys R Us.

Aug 04 06 10:40 am Link

Model

Manda Mercure

Posts: 506

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

can someone post a link to these photos? i cannot seem to find anything on her site.


additionally, i would assume that all these children had their parents present, as well as permission to do whatever she did. taking candy away from a child is NOT child abuse.

Aug 04 06 11:01 am Link

Photographer

Ivan Aps

Posts: 4996

Miami, Florida, US

Carpe Imago Photography wrote:

Okay, if he did it to my daughter just to make her cry I'd kick his ass from hear to China.  And I'm a non-violent sort of guy. 

Photography in its purest form should be about capturing moments that happen...not making them happen.  I realize that flies in the face of what most of us do in the area of glamour or fashion, but how many times do you see photographers hurting models just to make them cry?

Kids?  Yeah, I'd hurt him.

Amen brother!!!!!  It may not be abusive as in hitting a child, but it is abusive in the manner that it is cruel to do something to a child in which they have ability to understand why....then to do it so you can get a "strong emotional" image....pure selfishness seeing that the child gets nothing great out of it other than some emotional sadness.  Basically, only a complete loser and sorry ass photographer would feel that it is OK to be mean and cruel to a child to promote themself.

Aug 04 06 11:09 am Link

Photographer

Photografika

Posts: 73

Utica, Michigan, US

Mandy McKeating wrote:
taking candy away from a child is NOT child abuse.

While I wouldn't want my kid forced to cry for a photograph (hell I could do it myself by saying "time to turn off the tv and go to bed"), I agree the term abuse is a bit much. Maybe child misuse?

Aug 04 06 11:10 am Link

Photographer

Photo Girl Raquel

Posts: 170

Canby, Minnesota, US

byReno wrote:
There are a lot of ways to look at this.  Maybe she should have pointed her camera at the mothers who are dragging their screaming kids out of Toys R Us.

LOLOLOLOL!!!!! Thats what I am talkin about!!

Aug 04 06 11:11 am Link