Re: Art 21: Ann Hamilton

I don't think there's a moral problem if the people aren't identifiable (ie:
they're just a blur). I guess it could be voyeuristic but I guess I look at
it as more of a study of these anonymous human-like figures interacting. I
know what you mean though. I don't steal that one grape either. :) I
think it's because I'd feel guilty, not so much because I'm worried about
being caught. :)

rob

> From: "Lisa Reddig" <lisa@julianrichards.com>
> Reply-To: pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com
> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:06:26 -0500
> To: <pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
> Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Art 21: Ann Hamilton
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: R Duarte <rahji@rahji.com>
>
>> candid images of people.
>
> For fun you should check out this odd site I heard of last week.
> http://www.pinholespy.com/ It's a little strange, but interesting.
>
> There have been a number of well known photographers who have done sneeky
> pictures like that. (My favorite Harry Callahan to name one) The dillemma
> as always with these kinds of things is the moral one. I know legally
> people in public can be photographed legally. But I would feel paranoid
> doing it secretly. Too much stress. Kind of like stealing a grape at the
> fruit stand, it doen't really matter, but it stresses me out because of the
> minute possibility of being caught. And I guess my voyeristic tendencies
> are quite small.
>
> lisa
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
> Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
> unsubscribe or change your account at
> http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/
>
Received on Fri Jan 25 12:33:26 2002