snedigity1 wrote:
I would like to know you tide the flag on here like that well done.
The top was held by a small spring clamp behind her. The bottom is just wrapped and she is sitting on the edges holding it together.
Hope this helps
-Chris
The pics are nice.... and to be honest, I never even thought about the use of the flag as a bad thing. I was looking at the photo, like the rest of you should be doing......
The OP said, "I'd really appreciate your C&C on these images from today." Never did it say, "please comment on how wrong you think I am for using the flag like this".
liamh wrote:
Sorry, but you're wrong about the Queen. The reason for the furore over the Leibowitz portrait was that a BBC documentary team misrepresented what happened. With some injudicious editing they attempted to make it look like the Queen had lost her temper when in truth she had not.
Who cares what you or I or anyone else thinks about the use of the flag it only matters what that young lady's husband thinks. And I think he'll find them most agreeable.
point of clarification, the comments i was referring to about the queen's tiara were post on the internet regarding the u-tube like video.those post are over on the dpreview board and ll.. ... i was aware that the bbc documentary had materially misrepresented the situation when the story originally aired, which resulted in i believe in either a correction or clarification on their part...
as for who cares what any of us think about posted images? to an extent the people who post and ask for criticism do...if they don't care, why post or ask for c&c.
Eye contact is an important element in a portrait for me and #6 is the only shot where both eyes are visible and well lit. That said, since they are intended for her husband, seeing her eyes is less significant since he already has a stored memories of the face which will trigger his emotional reaction.
As for the use of flag, it does violate Federal Law per the U.S. Code, but the Supreme Court has also held that abuse of the flag is a form of protected free speech. Dilemmas like that are what make living in a democracy interesting.
Last year I played golf on the 4th of July and the course had put US Flags on all the pins. There was a little wire stand to place it on when out of the hole. On one green a playing partner, too focused on his putt, took it out the pin and just put it on the ground. Seeing that I walked over and put it on the little stand off the ground. As we were finishing putting a cart from the next foursome comes zooming up and some old gezzer - a relative term for me these days - jumps out and starts getting the face of the guy who dropped it on the ground, threatening physical violence with his 7-iron if the guy disrespected the flag again.
There was certainly no disrespect intended towards the flag by my playing partner, he just had his focus elsewhere and reacted by instinct, taking the flag out of the hole like he usually did. When I saw it on the ground it was also instinctive for me to go pick it up because I respect its symbolism, but I didn't say a word because I realized the guy's mind was elsewhere. I just thought it was very poor judgement on the part of the course to use the flags on the pins in the first place. But curiously, that violation of US Code didn't seem to bother the frothing geezer ready to take a divot out of the forehead of my playing partner. Ironies like that are what make living in a democracy interesting.
All things considered the safest place to display or photograph the flag is on proper flagpole waving in a stiff breeze It will not piss anyone off that way...
johnny0110 wrote:
The pics are nice.... and to be honest, I never even thought about the use of the flag as a bad thing. I was looking at the photo, like the rest of you should be doing......
The OP said, "I'd really appreciate your C&C on these images from today." Never did it say, "please comment on how wrong you think I am for using the flag like this".
cgardner wrote:
Eye contact is an important element in a portrait for me and #6 is the only shot where both eyes are visible and well lit. That said, since they are intended for her husband, seeing her eyes is less significant since he already has a stored memories of the face which will trigger his emotional reaction.
As for the use of flag, it does violate Federal Law per the U.S. Code, but the Supreme Court has also held that abuse of the flag is a form of protected free speech. Dilemmas like that are what make living in a democracy interesting.
Last year I played golf on the 4th of July and the course had put US Flags on all the pins. There was a little wire stand to place it on when out of the hole. On one green a playing partner, too focused on his putt, took it out the pin and just put it on the ground. Seeing that I walked over and put it on the little stand off the ground. As we were finishing putting a cart from the next foursome comes zooming up and some old gezzer - a relative term for me these days - jumps out and starts getting the face of the guy who dropped it on the ground, threatening physical violence with his 7-iron if the guy disrespected the flag again.
There was certainly no disrespect intended towards the flag by my playing partner, he just had his focus elsewhere and reacted by instinct, taking the flag out of the hole like he usually did. When I saw it on the ground it was also instinctive for me to go pick it up because I respect its symbolism, but I didn't say a word because I realized the guy's mind was elsewhere. I just thought it was very poor judgement on the part of the course to use the flags on the pins in the first place. But curiously, that violation of US Code didn't seem to bother the frothing geezer ready to take a divot out of the forehead of my playing partner. Ironies like that are what make living in a democracy interesting.
All things considered the safest place to display or photograph the flag is on proper flagpole waving in a stiff breeze It will not piss anyone off that way...
Good story Chuck and thanks for sharing. It's safe to say that I have learned a lesson in this thread and will use that information in the future.
-Chris ...Show more →
I like #3 myself. I think the B&W needs a bit more punch. Overall I like the creative style.
Concerning the use of the flag - wow I am surprised on all the comments. It isn't like it is being burned - even then like cgardner stated the Supreme Court says that is protected under free speech.
bka20d wrote:
point of clarification, the comments i was referring to about the queen's tiara were post on the internet regarding the u-tube like video.those post are over on the dpreview board and ll.. ... i was aware that the bbc documentary had materially misrepresented the situation when the story originally aired, which resulted in i believe in either a correction or clarification on their part...
as for who cares what any of us think about posted images? to an extent the people who post and ask for criticism do...if they don't care, why post or ask for c&c.
Thanks for your clarification. Next time you'll know not to believe everything you read on the internet (except this post). As for C&C, I was referring to the use of the flag as described by the OP not C&C in general.
Great story Chuck, one that neatly summed-up the confusion and misunderstanding. I wonder what Mark Twain would make of this thread? "Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest" (Twain).
liamh wrote:
Interesting comments about the flag. Remind me someone please, did Madonna get into trouble when she featured the Stars & Stripes in her video for American Pie?
i don't know about madonna and the video but i know the lead singer of stone temple pilots really angered alot of people when he came on stage wearing nothing but the flag.
FipChris wrote:
There is no disrespect intended here to any person or our flag. I am a 9 year veteran of the US Army, my wife for 6 years, both our fathers are Vietnam Vets. This young lady happens to be in the Air Force. Her husband is currently serving in Iraq with many of our friends. These images were taken as something to be sent to him. I am, however, a bit disheartened with you all....comments like these:
U.S. Flag code........ Desecration of the flag....... Ignorance........ Just don't know better........
Are a bit harsh. It not surprising though. It's actually common to see a bunch of people stand around pointing their finger and quick to put someone down. Nice to see so many keyboard enthusiasts are still here.
Here's another spin....
You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. ...Show more →
I was the one that originally criticized you for using the American Flag in a manner that violated the U.S. Flag code and I stand by my opinion (that you asked for).
I am not a "keyboard enthusiast" as you suggest. I am a Vietnam Veteran who served as an Active Duty Medic and later as an Infantry Lieutenant in the New York State National Guard. I am very proud of my country and it's symbol the American Flag. I have defended it's misuse in the past and will continue to do so, for that is my right.
You did not use the flag in a form of protest (which is not as "right" as you suggest), but in a manner to profit from it's misuse. Honor is not the American Flag draped over the genitals of a naked woman.
Having myself a double nationality, French and Canadian, I am very surprised by the comments over the US flag.... I can tell you, in Canada and in France, no one would have even noticed such a thing (with the french or canadian flag, and I was lieutenant in my army as well for a while)... Disrespect is one thing, and I don't see it in these pictures... The pictures are awesome, and at the opposite, it gives the flag a still even better image. I would understand if the images was degrading the flag, with somebody burning the flag, or with an ugly model giving a bad sensation to the overall image... But that's not the case... Moreover, like Chris said, his military background shows his deep respect for his country....
We have to be careful with too much nationalist cause it is the same way integrist muslims (or whatever is the religion) feel to kill people nowadays, just because somebody said something against their god... And as an advanced democraty, we should send good exemples, not doing what they do....
Please, don't send me insults.... I don't mean to insult your flag either... I love going to the states and you guys...
Andre Goli wrote:
Having myself a double nationality, French and Canadian, I am very surprised by the comments over the US flag.... I can tell you, in Canada and in France, no one would have even noticed such a thing (with the french or canadian flag, and I was lieutenant in my army as well for a while)... Disrespect is one thing, and I don't see it in these pictures... The pictures are awesome, and at the opposite, it gives the flag a still even better image. I would understand if the images was degrading the flag, with somebody burning the flag, or with an ugly model giving a bad sensation to the overall image... But that's not the case... Moreover, like Chris said, his military background shows his deep respect for his country....
We have to be careful with too much nationalist cause it is the same way integrist muslims (or whatever is the religion) feel to kill people nowadays, just because somebody said something against their god... And as an advanced democraty, we should send good exemples, not doing what they do....
Please, don't send me insults.... I don't mean to insult your flag either... I love going to the states and you guys......Show more →
This is not at all the same as a battle over religious fundamental extremists.
It is similar to the Quebecquois battle over English influence and the inherent dislike of the Canadian Flag and all things relating to English rule. You describe yourself as French first and then Canadian, but you country is Canada, not France. How many places in Quebec do you find the Canadian flag? Government buildings only? The Quebec Flag can be found everywhere in the Provence.
You have a law in Quebec that prohibits English only signs, and the signs that are bilingual must have French words larger than English.
I do not mean to insult you either, but please understand my love of country, Frenchman.
The code seems, to an outsider, to bestow something akin to religious relic status to the flag. Making no judgement on either side, all I can say is that it is a surprise to find such a thing as part of a secular democracy that, at the same time, holds free expression so dear (hense the conundrum hinted at by someone's post above with regard to the supreme court rulings regarding burning). Anyway, the nearest paralel I can make (and it may well be incorrect - this is just how it appears to me at the momen) is to how some muslims suggest that putting the name or image of Allah on products is a sin, and I recall the extreme outrage over political cartoons published in Europe a year or two ago.
Anyway, I suppose it is good that people feel strongly about nationhood, but the paralels are, well, a bit inconvenient, and difficult to fully comprehend. Though perhaps as an outsider, I can't hope to fully do so. Here in Canada we have what I consider a very nice flag, and it did bother me greatly to see it burned or stomped on, but I'm also kind of glad it's not illegal to do so. Heck, I'm fairly certain that nearly every university dorm has the darn thing used as drapery in it somewhere. =)
I have found FM a great place to 'lurk', to learn and grow as a photographer. I can only hope to get nearly as good as some of the great photographers here. But I have noticed two disturbing trends.
The first is the cult status some photographers have attained. They post many great pictures, but some pictures they post would receive quite negative critiques if it was posted by a 'no-name'. And the flaming some people take when they are brave enough to point out the obvious about these pictures. Disappointing!
The second disturbing trend (to me) is how willing (eager even) some people are to start a war of words over something beyond the c&c of the picture. I found jerryrock's attack on others, including 'Frenchman' (his term), to be uncalled for and inappropriate.
I wish there was stronger sense of patriotism in Canada, or more accurately, a more demonstrative attitude about it. This is something I admire Americans for. But I do believe Canadians are more tolerant of different perspectives and accidental 'offences'. It would be nice if we were all a bit of both.
I think the pictures are well done overall; a nice balance of attempted creativity, tastefulness and effort to create a photograph that would be appealing to the intended recipient. Congrats.
This is but the second time I have bothered to comment on the non-technical antics here at FM. I've had my say, so I'll be moving on to another thread. Sadly (not) I won't be around for my flaming...
FipChris wrote:
Thanks everyone for your photo critique. The shadows mentioned a few times were intentional.
For those more concerned with the flag......thanks for expressing your opinions.
-Chris
Chris, despite my difference of opinion on the use of the flag, please let me express my gratitude for your service to this country.
As for those who feel the use of the flag should not be a point of C&C, I completely disagree. If an image is presented for C&C, every element of the image is and should be open to comment and criticism. That said, I think the point is well taken about the fact that some images and elements of images have always been a part of art. One may or may not agree with the image or the use of the elements of the image, but there certainly is a long history of this in art. I don't expect that to ever change.
Numfar wrote:
Anyway, the nearest paralel I can make (and it may well be incorrect - this is just how it appears to me at the momen) is to how some muslims suggest that putting the name or image of Allah on products is a sin, and I recall the extreme outrage over political cartoons published in Europe a year or two ago.
While I understand your drawing the parallel, please keep in mind that nobody here is calling for the death of the OP, unlike the situation with the political cartoons. We are able to point out an opinion regarding the relative respect for the flag. BTW, my point here is NOT to rehash the flag issue - only to point out that the parallel really isn't a good one.
Please note that I'm not trying to be argumentative, but rather simply addressing your point.
Well, fair enough to highlight that point, but I guess I was more drawn to the anger/outrage than specific calls for death. To me, the anger inspired in some fundamentalists (on both sides) is the link, not the specific calls for retribution. So from that perspective, I suggest the parallel works. But hey, I'm not really vested in it, so I'm happy to agree to disagree, or even agree to not care too much - from here, it's just an interesting curiosity about two foreign lands and how some of their most extreme believers deal with perceived misuse of their particular sacred symbols.
It will not piss anyone off that way...