I recently acquired a Canon 5D Mark III and 85mm 1.2 lens that I quickly put to use on some natural light photos of my 15 year old daughter. Some of which I posted on this site...
Now, I will be the first to admit that these are a little provocative given her age AND the fact that I am her father. I understand the \"creep\" conclusion one could come to...but how about this for my side of the story
Jodie Foster was 13 years old when she played a prostitute in Taxi Driver with Robert Dinero. Yet, some how, I am the bad guy for these mildly suggestive portraits of my 15 year old daughter. These pictures pale in comparison to the suggestive roles and themes teens played on TV and in movies. Why is it that portraits are subject to a double-standard I am sure they were high-fiving Jodie Foster when she landed the role. A model in a photograph (daughter or not) is not different than an actress in a movie--she is hired to play a fictional role.
I even had one uber-feminist imply that it was porn and then went on to say it was creepy for me to take a pic of my daughter like that. To which I asked, \"Okay...so it\'s not the picture, it\'s who took it?\" Of course she then went a totally different direction with it...
Sally Mann came under fire when she did a series of total nude photos of her kids...something I will never approach. In a way, I like the controversy as there is \"no such thing as bad press,\" but I am also irritated by the double standard applied to photography versus other mediums.
It is a damn shame there are people in the world who sexually abuse children. I sure as hell am not one of them. But because of their monstrous behavior, I am left having to justify my work.
If you are offended by the following, I do apologize.
I recently acquired a Canon 5D Mark III and 85mm 1.2 lens that I quickly put to use on some natural light photos of my 15 year old daughter. Some of which I posted on this site...
Now, I will be the first to admit that these are a little provocative given her age AND the fact that I am her father. I understand the \"creep\" conclusion one could come to...but how about this for my side of the story
Jodie Foster was 13 years old when she played a prostitute in Taxi Driver with Robert Dinero. Yet, some how, I am the bad guy for these mildly suggestive portraits of my 15 year old daughter. These pictures pale in comparison to the suggestive roles and themes teens played on TV and in movies. Why is it that portraits are subject to a double-standard I am sure they were high-fiving Jodie Foster when she landed the role.
I even had one uber-feminist imply that it was porn and then went on to say it was creepy for me to take a pic of my daughter like that. To which I asked, \"Okay...so it\'s not the picture, it\'s who took it?\" Of course she then went a totally different direction with it...
Sally Mann came under fire when she did a series of total nude photos of her kids...something I will never approach. In a way, I like the controversy as there is \"no such thing as bad press,\" but I am also irritated by the double standard applied to photography versus other mediums.
It is a damn shame there are people in the world who sexually abuse children. I sure as hell am not one of them. But because of their monstrous behavior, I am left having to justify my work.
If you are offended by the following, I do apologize.
What say you?
Jul 28, 2013 at 01:45 PM
Previous versions of russdenney01's message #11708511 « Here goes another controversial one... »
