Village Voice's West Indian Parade Photos

Well, I haven't been to the parade, so I can't comment on how well the photos capture the essence of the event. I did, however, think the multiple tush close-ups were unnecessary and borderline inappropriate. We can get a good sense of the outfits without having the girls squat and aim their butts at the camera. Ditto for the close-up cleavage shots from multiple angles. But this is the Village Voice, I guess...

I liked 4, 10, 16, 18, 19, 22, 26, 28 (that's about as far as I went). The shot of the army of cops was okay if you were trying to prove a point about police presence overkill. A pic of a large group of girls in their matching skimpy outfits together would have been fine. The shirtless guy sitting in the litter - meh. The rest - should have been left unpublished.

There were a few good looking chicas in the photos...I saw a lot more at the parade.

It's just a bad photographer in general too. only a few look really professional. Now here are some really nice pics from gothamist

http://gothamist.com/2009/09/08/culture_spirit_on_display_during_we.php

Lo Kee wrote: A photo of an event, actually picturing the event, cannot be a misrepresentaiton of the event that is pictured, could it?

that's absurd. there are many, many examples of how people's assumption that "the camera doesn't lie" leads them to misunderstand events only known to them through photographs.

photographs are artificially framed in terms of space and time. if that weren't the case, there would be no need to hire good photographers, since anyone's photograph would capture an event.

here's one example: http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/12099/

here's a report on patterns of bias in reuter's photographs: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=36&x_article=176

if you go to that photographer's website, that seems to be what she likes to shoot, kind of the trashy side of whatever event she's at. At least that's my impression.

I prefer the photos on flickr

'm actually with Jack on this one- the photos were the truth, maybe not your truth, but reality nonetheless. I've lived on this parkway for 11 years, I've attended EVERY one (and ones before that). So what the photographer didn't show all the "happy" smiling (drunk) faces. Please. While there are good times and bad at this parade, the one thing you cannot deny is its realness. I'll bet you no one that got their picture taken gives a rat's ass about the perception of their photograph.

Fucking gorgeous, Dr J. =D>

Subject: Well

I think this photographer was trying to be all diane arbus, not trying to be offensive, just trying to be a little more interesting.

The net effect, however, is quite unpleasant and even offensive, particularly the strange lingering on the buttocks, feels quite racially charged.

I think I figured out what is weird about those photos. No pictures of the crowd. It makes it look like just a handful of people in costumes marched down a kind of empty, dirty street. We see all the trash on the ground but we don't see the source of it: the gajillion people that were there.

Idlewild wrote: Although now or days it seems like our local politicians have stolen the limelight as well as the floats. I believe they should dress in the same costumes.

That would be way more than I want to know about Marty Markowitz

whynot_31 wrote: [quote=Idlewild] Although now or days it seems like our local politicians have stolen the limelight as well as the floats. I believe they should dress in the same costumes.

That would be way more than I want to know about Marty Markowitz

Oh I don't know. I think Marty trying to walk on stilts would be "hilarity ensues". On the other hand, I wouldn't mind seeing Tish James in one of those glitter outfits.

Cool The Kid wrote: A photographer from what I understand isn't supposed to interfere w/the subjects they capture

This isn't Nature on PBS - the level of interaction depends on what (and how) you want to capture. Of the shots that I saw (I got bored by the 20s), they were mostly in the wide-to-normal field of view, putting the photog smack in the subject's face (or ass), so it's fair to say that there was interference by virtue of proximity, if nothing else. In any event, it's not necessary to 'interfere' with your subjects to paint the scene in a negative or a positive - a good photographer has a number of techniques to draw the viewer's attention to certain aspects of a given subject. The same thing can be photographed in an endless variety of ways and evoke different reaction for each.

Cool The Kid wrote: Plus the day was overcast and gray from what I remember

Overcast/cloudy is actually the good photog's favorite weather; it gives softer light - shadows/light & dark transitions are less hard and more flattering.

Cool The Kid wrote: And ppl do get drunk & into trouble w/the cops. It's the nature of a parade this huge.

Joy and happiness is also a huge part of the parade, which is one of the reasons that many feel that the photos are biased, because not much, if any, is represented.

Cool The Kid wrote: Me personally, I would have tried to capture the sheer size of it all... a photo from a rooftop capturing masses stretching the whole way down EP would do much more justice to the event than something like photo #24

Agreed, capturing the masses would have been great, but I think that just above crowd level with the same wide angle used in most of the photos would have done beautifully.

Cool The Kid wrote: So it speaks more to the photog's inexperience or poor photographic judgement than a 'misrepresentation' of the event. I think people are a little too sensitive these days.

I think that it speaks to both, but I do agree that people are too sensitive sometimes...

I have watched this post with great interest, I have concluded what most people have,little slant toward the negative. Taking photos of cellulite and the obese is wrong. Next year the photo spread shall be edited to show people with good smiles and proportion. We have got to stop letting just any person take your photo, Obvious to me lots of people were not asked what their best angle was that day. We can't show that 30% of the population is obese it's just wrong.