AirMatix wrote:
Great! We haven't had a don't-use-the-American-flag-in-the-wrong-way thread this year. But they come around every so often - I've seen at least two before this one. And it is always the same arguments and the same counter-arguments.
From an outsider's view (I'm South African, and proud of it too!) I must admit that the Americans who commented on this thread are absolutely priceless. Stereotypical in my eyes, but fantastic to observe in action. Frankly, I don't have any feelings for your flag - I usually see it spray-painted onto the tank of a motorcycle, or tattoo'd onto the arm of a biker - but hell, you guys are really entertaining!
Interesting that the USA are involved in so many wars. The way you chaps go at each other for using the flag, it is surprising that you still have time left to fight anybody else! There may be another American civil war yet - between the flag worshippers and the flag not-carers!
Anyway, the picture is poor, in my opinion. The flag adds nothing to it, nor does it take anything away. I think it is important to get lighting and focus right, before concentrating on props and clothing and even poses. Get the basics in place, and then worry about the rest....Show more →
Ok lets get one thing right. 9/11 never meant Iraq....
Terror is what the people of New Orleans feel because Bush cut more then 30 million dollars of funding on Levys and other coastal support systems. How about the fact that America has fleets of helicopters that are in iraq, not New Orleans..
How ridiculous--the flag is touching the ground. This jingoistic nonsense has to end--it really makes no sense and is more an expression of a persons insecurity about this country then the photographers attempt to wrap his model in the warmth of the red white and blue.
As far as the photo goes--its a little soft for my tastes.
knox wrote:
Well obviously Bush isn't "willing to defend the right" you speak of. . . . HE didn't "defend" it in Viet Nam and he certainly isn't breaking his neck to send his two 'out of work' daughters to "defend" it in Iraq. Just like he wasn't breaking his neck to help low income, 'primarily' black Americans in New Orleans. Government officials blamed people that didn't evacuate! I saw the tape. I guess it didn't enter their minds that some of these people don't have limos and gas guzzling SUVs like they all have . . . . so they COULD evacuate. OR the money.
As far as arrogance . . . read YOUR post. A PhD means little. It sure wouldn't mean anything to those in the Superdome. They can't eat it.
Let's go tell the people suffering in New Orleans about a little photo on the net of the flag draped around a model . . . . . . .see if we can make them cry or get angry at the lack of patriotism. . . . . as Bush's air conditioned helicopter goes rumbling by overhead...Show more →
Flags are symbols. The American flag issue would have been more of a clear cut issue if the photographer was not American. Flags have been used as protest and such, and as long as it is by those citizens, then I personally think it is ok, and ok to protest the abuse. I guess the use of the flag for no "legitimate" purpose is the worst offense.....
Ok lets get one thing right. 9/11 never meant Iraq....
Terror is what the people of New Orleans feel because Bush cut more then 30 million dollars of funding on Levys and other coastal support systems. How about the fact that America has fleets of helicopters that are in iraq, not New Orleans..
And just for your information, I'm American...
democratic or republican, you need to stop watching tv and read some books. your post IS ENTIRELY wrong!
and Im American
*as for the photo,,, yeah he def got the exposure but seems a lil soft near her face.
Some keep saying the post is "wrong" about Bush cutting funds to repair levees and other coastal support systems. It IS indeed true. On top of that, the Feds were also asked by the Mayor of New Orleans specifically for help repairing specific levees but his request was turned down "because a lack of funds due to the war"
Also, the 9/11 Commission stated there was no link to Iraq and 9/11.
It is also a fact that our National Guardsmen have been yanked from home and sent to find "weapons of mass destruction" (yea right) . . . helicopters / ships / etc are being used at war that should be here. These are facts . . .so what part of his post is, as some keep saying "wrong"? These are all clear cut facts. Whether you are Republican / Democrats or a kangaroo.
I too fought for what the flag represents, but not for the flag. I definately do not mind a creative statement that in someway makes me think, or makes a point. In this case, however, although it is a technically good capture, I am unsure of your point.
Crop to just the head and shoulders, lose the softness, and maybe you would capture a more personal relationship between the model and the flag, not to mention avoiding any difficulties concerning flag desecration.
I really don't think any desecration was meant here guys...but even if it was...
Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. ~Abraham Lincoln
We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it. ~William Faulkner
Big Kahuna wrote:
Thank you setiprime, you beat me to the draw.
I fought for our country, my father fought and was wounded
in action for our country, my brother died for our country.
You have the right to say crap like: give me a break.Your lucky to be
able to say crap like that because of the sacrifices others
have made.
It's what that flag stands for not the flag itself that upsets us.
So don't take it at such a piss poor attitude.
PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN
Why? No one is being overly rude? Some passionate discussions between adults, albeit in a photo forum, though it's not harming anyone. Let's face it, there are some things of major magnitude happening outside of photography . . . Of course if it were getting ridiculously heated, then it would be inappropriate in a photo forum.
Your comment makes no sense, as the thread doesn't need to be "deleted" or "locked" . . . . just don't open the thread!!!
I remember in the 60s during protests of certain issues etc, some of us wore shirts made of flag 'material'. Some people thought it was "horrible" that we would do this, but it was our way of expressing ourselves, which of course we have a right to do. BUT, I was thrown out of school and almost arrested for wearing bell bottoms made of flag 'type' material. They said the shirts were bad enough, but "below the belt was communist". *smile*
Jim Slonaker wrote:
It's time to lock or delete this thread.
It should be simple to understand Knox. This is more a politcal rant then anything having to do with photography. A large portion of the posts don't even comment on the photo itself. They just take it as an opportunity to bitch about someone they didn't vote for. It's a photography forum. All I'm saying is lets try to at least keep it close to something that resembles one. Instead of endless argueing and debating like we are doing right now. All over something that shouldn't be here to begin with.
Jim . . ."rant" . . .would be a hyperbole. Sure, it may be a displaced output in a photo forum. But it's not like it's keeping someone from posting a photo, as it's pretty quiet here.
I see us as people who have mutual interest (photography) . . that are simply talking / possibly debating with intelligence, not "ranting" about a tough situation happening in our country. Since we do have shared interest as opposed to going to a political forum, I find it interesting to hear other photographers views. Even if they are somewhat heated.
But my point was, why do you personally keep coming to the thread? Are you looking for comments on the photo? Or trying to close the thread from people's opinions you don't agree with? As it makes no sense. I don't know why it should bother you, if you just don't open the thread.
Anyway. it doesn't really matter . . . not trying to milk the thread or the point anymore. Though I was interested to hear views. I may have learned something, hell we all may have, even in our passionate viewpoints and feelings. I'm not scared of them
Jim Slonaker wrote:
It should be simple to understand Knox. This is more a politcal rant then anything having to do with photography. A large portion of the posts don't even comment on the photo itself. They just take it as an opportunity to bitch about someone they didn't vote for. It's a photography forum. All I'm saying is lets try to at least keep it close to something that resembles one. Instead of endless argueing and debating like we are doing right now. All over something that shouldn't be here to begin with.
