oldguysrule wrote:
what possible reason would one have for a 9-11 themed shoot if not to capitalize on the event? there is no possible purpose served other than the generation of $$.

Closure? Emotionial release? Showing another side to a story?

oldguysrule wrote:
what possible reason would one have for a 9-11 themed shoot if not to capitalize on the event? there is no possible purpose served other than the generation of $$.

Closure? Emotional release? Showing another side to the story...?

Nihilus wrote:

Curious question. Honestly not intending to bait, I'm just curious about the thoughts with those who would claim to be offended by attempts of this kind:

If the image is created/taken/birthed by someone who has/had personal loss/emotional-investment in the tragedies, would you be more prone to consider the beauty/moral/intent/artistry behind it? For instance, let's say someone who lost an immediate family member due to the events.

This is what I was alluding to in my second example. I have a suspicion that the very emotive reasons that people are getting initially bothered by these potential attempts would empathize with someone who would do it in an expressive form of personal therapy.

The other situation, however, I don't think would be met with such leniency...although I personally would find it more true to the reality of it. Then again, though...there is no real way to gauge which (or other) would be the case just by the image alone...

********************************************************************************************
It really depends on what the sole purpose of the creation was, if it were for say personal emotional healing or as a memorial for a family member/friend of one of the victims, and no commercial purpose, then I wouldnt have an issue with it.

I might even be okay with a commercial purpose, if the sole purpose was to help raise money for family memebers of the victims, and no money went to anything other than that purpose. . . Keep in mind, I said " MIGHT be okay with it"

However, most of these creations are to draw attention to the creator and possible commercial purposes, even if their is no financial gain directly, it still says "look at me, look what I did, aint i such a great person".

I just have an issue with people playing on tragedies for personal gain, which can come in many forms

J n X Photography wrote:
Oldguy:  How do you feel about the recent "9/11" themed movies?  I think they were done in good taste and to honor those who sacrificed their lives to save others and those innocently lost.

Lots of "art" has been created to honor/commerate tragic events or human loss.

The Black wall (Vietnam War memorial) comes to mind, as does the reflection pool.  I have seen lots of tattoos to the same effect.  Since when was it taboo to help ease the pain of suffering thru art?   As long as it is done in good taste, their is nothing wrong with it.  In fact, the two towers of light was an artistic homage, was it not?

Are you seriuosly dumb enough to equate the Viet Nam War Memorial with any piece of shit that Nicholas Cage finds himself in exploiting a national tragedy. Also, the two towers of light, while using artistic means of design to implement them, were simply a metaphor of the two towers. They aren't art, they are symbols of what was once there. All the things you mention required art and craft and skill to design and implement and they are certainly beautiful to look at, but they are in essence just symbols. The purpose of their creation is symbolic. Anyone that argues this point is a dunce and will not be treated as an equal.

Capt Stu Beans wrote:

Beautiful photograph!!!  Very tasteful homage honoring a horrible tragedy.  Well done.  I'm glad to see the proceeds are going to charity.

Bob Randall Photography wrote:

Are you seriuosly dumb enough to equate the Viet Nam War Memorial with any piece of shit that Nicholas Cage finds himself in exploiting a national tragedy. Also, the two towers of light, while using artistic means of design to implement them, were simply a metaphor of the two towers. They aren't art, they are symbols of what was once there. All the things you mention required art and craft and skill to design and implement and they are certainly beautiful to look at, but they are in essence just symbols. The purpose of their creation is symbolic. Anyone that argues this point is a dunce and will not be treated as an equal.

If they required art and craft to design and implement then it is by definition ART.  And yes, they are symbols, too.  The beauty in art is that it takes many forms and it SYMBOLIZES many things...the interpretation in the eye of the beholder.  What is crass exploitation to one viewer might be an honest attempt at a tribute for someone else.

J n X Photography wrote:

Oldguy:  How do you feel about the recent "9/11" themed movies?  I think they were done in good taste and to honor those who sacrificed their lives to save others and those innocently lost.

You didn't just say that did you?
Good taste? Honor?
What a vulture does is in good taste. What you are talking about is more akin to stealing the gold from your dead neighbors fillings before his body has cooled.

Electra T wrote:
I have to disagree. It's a historical event, and there will be poems, essay,songs, and paintings done about it, i don't see why you can't have a photoshoot on the subject. That's like saying "all other branches of art(artists) can express there feelings on the event..but photogs can't. It's cheesy". Even thought i can't think of how that's possible( i mean it'd have to be terribly obvious) but I've shot police officers and fightfighter for a photo project.

E.T., well said!  I like to see that we can agree on something

J n X Photography wrote:

If they required art and craft to design and implement then it is by definition ART.  And yes, they are symbols, too.  The beauty in art is that it takes many forms and it SYMBOLIZES many things...the interpretation in the eye of the beholder.  What is crass exploitation to one viewer might be an honest attempt at a tribute for someone else.

So you say, and on and on and on and on........  Bullshit.

Steve  Cottrill wrote:
This inappropriate?      Was washing my truck a day or so after 9/11,. looked up, and saw this, HAD to go get the camera.

While the only thing that came up in your post referencing a picture was a question mark, I just had to go look at your site simply because of the question you posed, wherein I saw lovely young ladies with little if any clothing surrounding a guy with a shit eating grin next to a picture of a cemetery. Now this is just a guess based on what I've seen so far, but I believe inappropriate is coming, don't know it for sure, but I've got a good idea based on what I've seen.

Steve  Cottrill wrote:
Tried to post the photo using the dayumned [img][/img] things.......grrrr

THERE.......lol

Nemi Bea wrote:
Okay, let me clarify something here.

Hell, even doing a portrait peice with the workers that are now dying may be able to be pulled off with some class.

Nobody that is doing projects like those are going to advertise here. That would not make even the slightest bit of sense.

Explain yourself Miss. 
My old age is increasing my daftness therefore I don't get your point.



i

KitaPanda wrote:
Alot of the people disagreeing with the original post seem to be under the impression that 9/11 themed shoots are all going to be done in a thoughtful way.

The only shoot I've seen advertised on here advised models to bring I love NY t-shirts and hats and stated that it would be fashion/urban/casual "with a twist". Take from that what you will.

I'm interested in seeing how the photos will be executed but right now, it sounds pretty cheesy. Exploitative? I doubt that anybody involved is making any money from the shoot. But cheesy, yes.

Never said every shoot would be thoughtful......I simply proposed looking at creating a piece that would pay tribute and provoke thought.  For some my creation would piss them off for sure.  For the ones I would be paying trubute to ... they would be appreciative I would hope.

Hamza wrote:
Nemi,
When you say 911 Themed shoot I don't quite know what you mean.  If someone can pull it off why not?  Just because it was a tragedy?  So?  WW2 was a tragedy, people make WW2 Themed pics all the time.  What's the difference?

Shindlers list is one of the best movies that honors an absolutely horrible event in the history of mankind.  If anybody could pull off a great 9/11 movie it would have to be Spielberg.