Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    8,878

    Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    "My friend, why should you wish to shorten my life by taking from me my shadow? (To photographer Dr. Valentine T. McGillycuddy.)" ~ Crazy Horse
    I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.
    I'm not OCD. I'm CDO which is alphabetically correct.

  2. #2
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    13,391

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    The idea of "stealing one's spirit" by taking their picture has been revived by some neo wannabee Indians. I know one of them. How much this concept applied to historic Indians is questionable; but there were certain known cases - not any in our own neighborhood I can recall, however. Three of the people illustrated in "Almost Ancestors - Earliest Pictures of California Indians", I knew personally. Of course, they were little children when those pictures were taken, and old when I knew them. But camera-shyness was apparently not a feature of native Calif. tribes or the West in general. It's possible that the ghost dance cult factored into its rise in some places like the Great Plains.

  3. #3
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    12,349

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    No body really wants a picture taken

    Wanted posters do shorten a life
    sin eater

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    519

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    I had some excellent on the job training from the photographer Damien Waring in Honolulu. He was British and began his career in London, then had a studio in Hollywood for years before moving to Hawaii. He told me to never use the expression "take your photo" because of the negative connotation of the word take. Say "Make your portrait". Also never use the word "shoot" in any context related to the photography.

  5. #5
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    12,349

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    Good advice

    I will adjust my patter

    I donít even like writing the S word as it must be a key word for AI readers
    sin eater

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    8,878

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    Quote Originally Posted by Tin Can View Post
    No body really wants a picture taken

    Wanted posters do shorten a life
    Uhhhh...what about all folks falling off of cliffs while taking selfies?
    I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.
    I'm not OCD. I'm CDO which is alphabetically correct.

  7. #7
    Joe O'Hara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Posts
    560

    Re: Crazy Horse on the subject of portrait photography

    Quote Originally Posted by Neal Chaves View Post
    I had some excellent on the job training from the photographer Damien Waring in Honolulu. He was British and began his career in London, then had a studio in Hollywood for years before moving to Hawaii. He told me to never use the expression "take your photo" because of the negative connotation of the word take. Say "Make your portrait". Also never use the word "shoot" in any context related to the photography.
    Very much agreed.

    When I want to "go shooting", I take one of my guns to the range and make holes in paper targets (or rarely, aged laptops).

    When I go out with my camera, I am "photographing", which is the act of "making pictures".

    I have always thought the conventional ways of speaking about photography trivialize it, and reinforce the view that
    photography can be at best only a second-rate art. That has always annoyed me.

    That said, I sympathize with those who prefer that their portraits not be made. I have always felt that
    there was at least a potential invasion of privacy involved. Now of course, I realize that good photographers
    respect the subject, and that the subject may well enjoy and desire the process, and that the result may
    be very valuable for them and others. (Thinking about certain photographs of my grandparents, for instance.)
    It's just that it's not for me (on either side of the camera).

    I'm not worried about the light that reflected off of me, unlike poor Crazy Horse. Those photons are gone
    forever, no harm done if a few are absorbed in some silver atoms.
    Where are we going?
    And why are we in this handbasket?


    www.josephoharaphotography.com

Similar Threads

  1. Challenges of Being a Large Format Portrait Subject (Portraiture)
    By Andre Noble in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 23-Oct-2013, 06:40
  2. Does photography add anything to a subject?
    By Craig Griffiths in forum On Photography
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 24-Jul-2008, 09:29
  3. Meeting an Iconic subject of photography
    By domenico Foschi in forum Announcements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 9-Jan-2007, 10:37
  4. How many shots per subject? Am I crazy?
    By jdavis in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 24-Nov-2006, 05:41

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •