Selling Yourself ... my best story from the front lines

[paulr]

So yesterday I got a frantic email from my dealer: there's this guy from europe-- serious collector-- he's in new york-- not for long--i showed him your site-- he's seriously interested--here's his local number--call him now!

Needing cash more than the answers to any simple questions, I called the guy. I told him who refered me, that I'd heard he was interested in my work, etc. etc.

The guy instantly became enthusiastic, and said, "oh, yes, I'm very serious right now about expanding my collection of NUDE CHILDREN PHOTOGRAPHS."

Considering my website contains little besides barren landscapes, none of them as backdrops for nude children (as far as I can remember), I figured the guy was pulling my leg. I laughed. Then there was an icy silence.

The conversation got really awkward after that, as you might imagine. Needless to say, No Sale!

I wrote my dealer, laughing about this, and he said, "oh! he must have gotten you mixed up with Jock Sturgess! I sent him Jock's site too!"

So I've now been mistaken for Jock Sturgess. It looks like there IS a first time for everything.

[Walter Calahan]

You didn't need this sale.

But it is interesting that this "collectors" clearly knows nothing about what he is collecting. More money than sense, and a potential pedophiliac.

[Pete Watkins]

Refer him to Jock Sturges, he appears to cater for this sort of _________ , think of a word and put it in.
Pete

[Eric Rose]

you should report his name and number to the local authorities. who knows what else he is in NY to purchase.

[paulr]

Refer him to Jock Sturges, he appears to cater for this sort of _________ , think of a word and put it in.
Pete

Jock caters to serious collectors ... ones who aren't likely to confuse him with me!

I think this guy can find everything he's looking for on the web.

[CG]

Refer him to Jock Sturges, he appears to cater for this sort of _________ , think of a word and put it in.
Pete


Boy, I totally agree. Report to the proper authorities!

Anyone photographing people under 80 years old without proper clothing is a pimp to perverts.

I'd include Sally Mann, and a whole bunch of bad people like Wynn Bullock with naked children in the forest, and that awful Ed Weston with his purient beach nudes. All bad.

Seriously, I'm not comfortable presuming I know Sturges intent. Maybe he's a really good photographer who shoots nudes. Does that necessarily mean he abuses young people?

Is the moral standard constructed so that if someone, somewhere, might use our products in an offensive way, that we are forbidden to do our work? That casts a very wide net with lots of unintended and undesirable consequences.

The "collector", on the other hand, fails the whiff test. I see no redeeming aspect.

Best,

C

[paulr]

The "collector", on the other hand, fails the whiff test.

Yeah, it was a brief but pretty sketchy whif.

The funny part is that I think I offended him.

[domenico Foschi]

I am furious!
This person should be reported to the authorities. I have nothing, absolutely nothing, against Jock sturges work,it is beautiful, there is nothing wrong with it.The problem are these sons of bitches who are sexually aroused by these images.
If this bastard was a real collector of photography, he would have known Jock Sturges; from his query it is evident that is interest are underage children and that shouldn't pass unnoticed.
Be grateful that you have this information and the email address of this person, so that you might pass it to the authorities.
If he is not what he appears to be, there will be no harm done, if he is what seems to transpire from his query, you have helped to get rid of someone who could damage for life many children.
I encourage to see it as your duty to act.

[paulr]

All we know about this guy is that he seems sketchy. What's to report to the authorities?

[Scott Knowles]

Anyone photographing people under 80 years old without proper clothing is a pimp to perverts.

Well, I can understand this view with children, there are laws governing this, but adults? That's shoot Photo.net all to hell, they would lose the significant number of photographers. And don't stop by a newstand anytime soon, I heard there are some of "those" magazines.

[Dirk Rösler]

All we know about this guy is that he seems sketchy. What's to report to the authorities?

Thought crime -- obviously!

[CG]

Well, I can understand this view with children, there are laws governing this, but adults? That's shoot Photo.net all to hell, they would lose the significant number of photographers. And don't stop by a newstand anytime soon, I heard there are some of "those" magazines.

Perhaps I became obscure in an attempt at over the top humor. My point was that while there are lots of legitimate artists who's work involves nudes, it is the viewer who, in this case, was out of line, not any particular photographer. I am wary of the occasional potshots people take at Sturges based on his subject matter. Ditto some of Sally Mann's work. They are both, in very different ways, much worth note. All this aside, I have to say, I like best the very different sort of work in Mann's "Deep South" book.

Best,

C

[cyrus]

There's a good bet that the guy WAS the authorities himself, trying to see if someone has something illicit to sell.