Children should not be used in photography

Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux M MF - Chrome

09/13/2009 10:51:02 AM · #26

Originally posted by purifier:

Ok...here's a situation take a shot of a child and than an adult with the worthless camera in the world and from not so artistic angle of shooting and no post processing...I bet that 9 out of 10 people will like more the shot with the kid, and why? Oh well all of you are right...the kid drives more emotions in you, and you forget about the questions: does this photo look artistic, does this photo is well edited, does this photo is shot from the perfect angle?...and because of your emotions you give a highter score that it should have. If photography is all about driving your emotions of compassion lets flood DPC with shots of pain, hunger, suffering...then everybody would be happy.

And for what Ameed wrote I would just add:
If you didn't post a picture for kids, how would you score high?
If you didn't have kids in your commercial, how would you sell your goods?

oh well lets just USE THEM for better good
In France commercials involving children are banned.
Do you see where am I aiming at? I'm just suggesting that people should stop using something pure for their egoistic purposes. I'm not saying that everybody takes a photo of their kid with that tought in mind but I'm pretty sure that are some

this makes no sense TO ME... In fact, this type of thought process never even occurs to me... Why does taking pictures of kids = photography achievements..? some people always look for the negative in any situation... I seriously doubt this idea just popped into your head, so why dont you share what happened that made you come to this conclusion.. Did someone's image of their kid score higher then your image & you felt that shot was less important then yours??? I'm just curious..

edit to post:I'm SURE very few people take pictures of their kids with their own egotistic purposes in mind... I mean WTH????????? LOL... People take pictures of their kids because they change every single day... Because they are a part of what they are... Because a parent only see's the absolute beauty in their child and it almost hurts they love them so much and we as a parent know that they are growing up so we want to capture & freeze in time all these itty bitty moments they are still a child...

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 10:54:08.

signal2noise

Leica M9

09/13/2009 10:52:36 AM · #27

Best... Post... Ever!

Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:

Originally posted by purifier:

Do you see where am I aiming at? I'm just suggesting that people should stop using something pure for their egoistic purposes. I'm not saying that everybody takes a photo of their kid with that tought in mind but I'm pretty sure that are some

Well, until they get to a certain age children are pretty much useless to society. They can't operate heavy machinery or drive, are rubbish at arithmetic and so are worthless in any retail position such as working at Macdonalds or fried chicken shops, if you put them to work in a menial labouring position such as on a farm they just tend to muck about and generally not take the whole work thing seriously. So to society they are pretty much a waste of space apart from their one talent and that is their ability to evoke strong emotions in people. This is why they are perfect for photography and in particular advertising. I, for one, am far more likely to buy something if a child is used in the advertisement whether that is for chocolate, cigarettes or a car or something. Most of the time they just whine and moan so its good to get something back once in a while.

kenskid

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/13/2009 10:56:37 AM · #28

I think we should stop exploiting the water drop.

Maureen Theriot

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

09/13/2009 10:57:40 AM · #29

While I understand your point about children having a strong grasp on our emotions, I don't believe that I have seen much exploitation of children in the photographs on any of the boards that I post on. If we did eliminate photgraphs of children, what would we eliminate next? Beautiful young women? Those gritty yet powerful photographs of street people? Cute puppies?

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 10:58:08.

vawendy

Sony Alpha 1

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

09/13/2009 11:01:20 AM · #30

I'm waiting for someone to stick up for the veggies! I mean, really--we had a veggies challenge, and not only were the exploited, but there was some serious mutilation going on. Someone should save the radishes! No more radish or artichoke pictures!

BarbB

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/13/2009 11:07:19 AM · #31

Well, until they get to a certain age children are pretty much useless to society. They can't operate heavy machinery or drive, are rubbish at arithmetic and so are worthless in any retail position such as working at Macdonalds or fried chicken shops, if you put them to work in a menial labouring position such as on a farm they just tend to muck about and generally not take the whole work thing seriously. So to society they are pretty much a waste of space apart from their one talent and that is their ability to evoke strong emotions in people. This is why they are perfect for photography and in particular advertising. I, for one, am far more likely to buy something if a child is used in the advertisement whether that is for chocolate, cigarettes or a car or something. Most of the time they just whine and moan so its good to get something back once in a while. [/quote]

ROFLMAO!! It was worth reading the thread to find this quote!!! Timeless....

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/13/2009 11:09:34 AM · #32

Originally posted by kandykarml:

Because a parent only see's the absolute beauty in their child and it almost hurts they love them so much and we as a parent know that they are growing up so we want to capture & freeze in time all these itty bitty moments they are still a child...

Funny, that parent thing about preserving the loving moments.....

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/13/2009 12:02:15 PM · #33

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Funny, that parent thing about preserving the loving moments.....

Jeb, in all fairness to the OP, I don't take the sense of this as being that "parents are exploiting their kids by photographing them" as much as it's "when you enter an image of your kid in a photography contest you're exploiting him/her..."

Now, I'm not sure I *agree* with this, of course (in fact, I'm pretty sure I don't), but it's a far cry from painting "parents who photograph kids" as egotistic etc etc etc people... It's about the use of the image with a particular goal in mind, as far as the OP is concerned...

R.

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 12:02:30.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/13/2009 12:31:25 PM · #34

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Funny, that parent thing about preserving the loving moments.....

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

In a previous post, I explained my stance on the OP's premise by giving examples of what I consider to be a more conventional application of children's pics.

In this last post, I was simply agreeing with Kristin's mention of the beauty of the captured moments.

It seems pretty apparent to me that the OP sees images of children in a completely different light than those of us who have and work with children.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 STM Lens

09/13/2009 12:32:43 PM · #35

Let the histrionics begin...or continue...

09/13/2009 12:33:21 PM · #36

Originally posted by bear_music:

Jeb, in all fairness to the OP, I don't take the sense of this as being that "parents are exploiting their kids by photographing them" as much as it's "when you enter an image of your kid in a photography contest you're exploiting him/her..."

In all fairness then to everyone who's responded to this thread that disagree's, I'm curious to see an example... It's quite clear to me that the OP here has a specific image in mind or maybe more then one, and I'm curious as to why the OP is so sure the photog of those images was :

Originally posted by purifier:

using the innocence of a child to play with the emotions of the viever just to score high. What do you think?

It's quite possible that the photog's were doing exactly what Jeb showed us an example of... isn't it????

Unless someone included in their image description the fact that they saw a adorable child that fit the challenge description and thought, hmmmm, I had a better idea or one that was the equivalent, but knowing how much children pull at the heart strings of voters, said to themselves, I'm going to go with this one instead so I can guarantee myself I higher vote...... Then I don't see how the OP or anyone else that holds this point of view, has a leg to stand on..

So, again, I'm seriously curious.. Where is it coming from..

ps.. was this histrionic enough,or should I add more.. LOL..

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 12:35:03.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/13/2009 12:44:14 PM · #37

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Thank you for in some way correcting me bear_music and I appriciate your opinion. I certainly would not request for all of you to stop taking photos of you children, but waving with those photos infront of the whole world is something different. I don't know, my point of view is that family is a sacret thing and I for sure would not post that kind of photos in some near/distant future of my life.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

09/13/2009 12:45:54 PM · #38

i think that happens here quite alot... and to a lesser degree the use of images of suffering ( homeless folks perhaps, etc ). the sole purpose of which is to try to garner a higher score.

do i think it's wrong, not really. but i think i see where the OP's perspective is stemming from. though the OP's stance is a bit too broad IMO.

Originally posted by purifier:

Originally posted by purifier:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
using the innocence of a child to play with the emotions of the viever just to score high. What do you think?

vawendy

Sony Alpha 1

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

09/13/2009 12:46:52 PM · #39

Actually, when I use my child or my neighbor's child in a photo for DPC, they are paid models. Usually they're paid in ice cream or something. But they're paid. So unless paid models are exploited I see no difference.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/13/2009 12:48:44 PM · #40

purifier might find that even more revolting...

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/13/2009 12:59:46 PM · #41

Originally posted by vawendy:

Which reminds me ... the keyboard is crawling with MICE! Of course it's dirty ...

As long as people are entering a photo with the intent of scoring as highly as possible in a popular vote, then they should obviously be entering the most captivating, emotion-tugging image they can make, whatever the subject.

09/13/2009 01:07:10 PM · #42

Originally posted by kandykarml:

Originally posted by bear_music:
Jeb, in all fairness to the OP, I don't take the sense of this as being that "parents are exploiting their kids by photographing them" as much as it's "when you enter an image of your kid in a photography contest you're exploiting him/her..."

In all fairness then to everyone who's responded to this thread that disagree's, I'm curious to see an example... It's quite clear to me that the OP here has a specific image in mind or maybe more then one, and I'm curious as to why the OP is so sure the photog of those images was :

Originally posted by purifier:
using the innocence of a child to play with the emotions of the viever just to score high. What do you think?

It's quite possible that the photog's were doing exactly what Jeb showed us an example of... isn't it????

Unless someone included in their image description the fact that they saw a adorable child that fit the challenge description and thought, hmmmm, I had a better idea or one that was the equivalent, but knowing how much children pull at the heart strings of voters, said to themselves, I'm going to go with this one instead so I can guarantee myself I higher vote...... Then I don't see how the OP or anyone else that holds this point of view, has a leg to stand on..

So, again, I'm seriously curious.. Where is it coming from..

ps.. was this histrionic enough,or should I add more.. LOL..

Finaly some people appeared in this thread that have objectiveness and rationality...and also not being rude. You've hit the spot kandykarlm. Did you ever noticed that in many contests (considering the task in the contest) where a photo of a kid is the last thing that will cross on your mind to post, but still there they are 3-4 or maybe more photos with kids only connected to the specific task with the title of the photo. For example for the forthcoming contest "9" I take a picture of a kid (without a birthday cake) and wrote in the title "I'm 9 years old now". The example is lame I know but I won't point out any specific photos that I have seen in many many contests

09/13/2009 01:09:40 PM · #43

Originally posted by soup:

purifier might find that even more revolting...

well I'm stunned by that comment, leaving me nothing more to say, that was a good example why I'm against it.

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 13:14:47.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/13/2009 01:15:09 PM · #44

Originally posted by purifier:

Okayyyyyy.. Now I understand what you are saying you disagree with... I appreciate you taking the time to give an example of what you meant..

njsabs

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

09/13/2009 01:23:24 PM · #45

I, for one, am completely guilty for using children in the challenges......they are my favorite subjects to photograph.....

EDIT TO ADD: that is exactly what I am trying to do is evoke an emotional response. Is it for scores?....no, not always.....but yes, it is for emotional impact.

Message edited by author 2009-09-13 13:40:19.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/13/2009 01:30:15 PM · #46

Originally posted by njsabs2323:

that is exactly what I am trying to do is evoke an emotional response. Is it for scores?....no, not always.....but yes it is for emotional impact.

About half of those shots are in my favorites folder.

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

09/13/2009 01:43:06 PM · #47

I use em and pay em nothing, I keep a few locked away under the stairs incase a good challenge comes up where I can shoe-horn a few in

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/13/2009 01:48:30 PM · #48

Originally posted by MAK:

I use em and pay em nothing, I keep a few locked away under the stairs incase a good challenge comes up where I can shoe-horn a few in

09/13/2009 01:57:03 PM · #49

I for one can honestly say that there is only ONE subject that evokes an emotion for me............ an emotion that makes me cringe... so, I simply refuse to vote on those imgaes.. And, that subject is the imfamous Woody... Not children, not homeless people, not adorable dogs or cats... It's woody and it makes me sick... hate it hate it hate it... So, out of fairness for the photog, and the fact that I can't objectively vote on them, I just pass em along..

I think something like this fits perfect in this particular challenge..