Adding personal views on the back of a photo...acceptable or not?

[invisibleflash]

I am sending this (non LF) photograph out to the special collections archives of a large state library.

http://www.artslant.com/ny/works/show/721151-the-lost-princess

They did not buy it, I am donating the print to them as well as a number of other prints. I always print on the back of my photographs the information that pertains to it. Name of photograph, date taken, copyright info etc.

But, this is what I feel like adding on as a side note...

Note: In 2013 shooting children 'street style' has become a major problem for many a male photographer. Two weeks prior to shooting 'The Lost Princess' I was at a Catholic block party fund raiser. I was shooting for 15 minutes in the afternoon, testing a Widelux camera. I was approached and questioned as to what I was doing taking photos of people at the fair. I returned later that night to photograph again. Within 5 minutes of shooting I was approached and told if I don't leave they would call the police. Seems that every male that points a camera at a kid nowadays is a pedophile.


I was wondering if it would be of any archival use to document the societal problems some photographers may experience?

Or is it unprofessional and should I just list the basic photo details?


Thanks

[BarryS]

Why not write it on the front of the print?--with a metallic gold sharpie. Seriously, it seems weird to include your rant on a donated photo.

[invisibleflash]

Why not write it on the front of the print?--with a metallic gold sharpie. Seriously, it seems weird to include your rant on a donated photo.

That is why I wanted some opinions. In the past I have used notes, but they are very basic and give details about the subject, local shooting conditions, etc. And then only if they are really needed to explain aspects of the photo.

It is not weird to me, but I like to hear others take on it. To me it would be weird if I put it on a purchased print that was not donated. I would let the buyer know this is what I usually put on this print. Do you want it on the back or not?

[BarryS]

Unless the text is an integral part of of the art, there's no reason to include it regardless of donation or sale. I know a lot of artists and they all have their issues--but have never seen a painting with a message about the rising cost of paint included on the back. Your text is backstory and the details are best saved for your memoirs.

[Moopheus]

I was wondering if it would be of any archival use to document the societal problems some photographers may experience?


Will the back of your print be on display?

[vinny]

Will the back of your print be on display?

like that double-sided inkjet paper? ooh yeah

[Otto Seaman]

I always embed my essays on racial purity and proof that we are descendants of aliens into my photos' metadata. Is there something wrong with that?

[Brian C. Miller]

... I was approached and questioned as to what I was doing taking photos of people at the fair. I returned later that night to photograph again. Within 5 minutes of shooting I was approached and told if I don't leave they would call the police. ...

"Wow, I am so glad that I am getting your harassment on video. I'll be sure to upload it to YouTube."


I always embed my essays on racial purity and proof that we are descendants of aliens into my photos' metadata. Is there something wrong with that?

Is metadata that little strip along the edge of the sheet? And doesn't racial purity have something to do with NASCAR?

[invisibleflash]

like that double-sided inkjet paper? ooh yeah

I don't think so? Do they display both sides very often?

Even so, they can put a liner on it.

[Drew Bedo]

Iluvmyviewcam



Respectfully:


A displayed image should be able to stand alone telling its own story to each viewer. Each viewer may bring away something different. This is true in painting , sculpture and any other medium.

If an image xcan only be effective with text, it becomes journalism in my opinion.

Yet, your thoughts on photographing in public deservs discussion in the public square, There are forums where you may bring this topic.: Online (here ) blogs and so on, print editorials and other news outlets and the legal system if your rights have been violated is some way.

The back of a donated print is probably not the right place to air your views.

[Drew Bedo]

In the early 1990s I tried some super-telephoto shots of the rising sun. I rigged a spotting scope with an glass-less Alphax shutter and jamed all that in front of a Speed Graphic with a DIY bracket to lash it all together.

One early morning I parked on an overpass miles outside Houston to get first light on the city kyline. This was way out in the country and there was no traffic crossing over the freeway. The gear was assembled and focused yadda-yadfda. and I waited in the dawn light for the sun.

Within five minutes, a County Deputy showed up. I waved and smiled and he looked at my gear from the patrole car. We exchanged a few easy words: he asked, I explained and offered to move off. He said I could stay and wished me a good day.

People are a lot more aware about things today. "If you see something, say something" is practiced by many in this post-9/11 world . . .and when it comes to kids, I would just drop it.

[Michael Alpert]

You asked for opinions; so without intending any disrespect toward you as a person (I obviously don't know you), here is mine. It seems to me that your post (and your written statement for the print) suggests that you have a very self-absorbed perspective on the situation. Given all the weirdness found in contemporary urban life, is it any wonder that people would be suspicious of a stranger with a camera? Perhaps the real problem is that you did not ask for permission before going to the block party. From my point of view, "street style" is a polite (but dishonest) term for intrusion.

[invisibleflash]

Iluvmyviewcam



Respectfully:


A displayed image should be able to stand alone telling its own story to each viewer. Each viewer may bring away something different. This is true in painting , sculpture and any other medium.

If an image xcan only be effective with text, it becomes journalism in my opinion.

Yet, your thoughts on photographing in public deservs discussion in the public square, There are forums where you may bring this topic.: Online (here ) blogs and so on, print editorials and other news outlets and the legal system if your rights have been violated is some way.

The back of a donated print is probably not the right place to air your views.

Thanks Drew!

I appreciate the feedback

[invisibleflash]

You asked for opinions; so without intending any disrespect toward you as a person (I obviously don't know you), here is mine. It seems to me that your post (and your written statement for the print) suggests that you have a very self-absorbed perspective on the situation. Given all the weirdness found in contemporary urban life, is it any wonder that people would be suspicious of a stranger with a camera? Perhaps the real problem is that you did not ask for permission before going to the block party. From my point of view, "street style" is a polite (but dishonest) term for intrusion.

That is all true. Never really thought about asking the people that put it on. People just come and go. It is a big affair, but on private property.

[Jody_S]

I feel your pain, having been accosted multiple times and indirectly accused of all sorts of horrible crimes against humanity simply for having a camera and looking like an axe murderer.

Still, I don't know if the reverse of your photo is the proper place to air those grievances.

[Drew Bedo]

embomib Tosik:

Welcome to LF Photography forum.

Please repost a complete reply that addresses the topic of this thread.

Respectful cheers