Options
Gun Statement
D3Sshooter
Registered Users Posts: 1,187 Major grins
I was asked to make a poster for the use of guns or not. I wonder what you'll think, since European thinking on guns is a bit different. I tend to lean towards the US side , after all I spend 10 years in Virginia, an loved-it.
A photographer without a style, is like a pub without beer
0
Comments
www.cameraone.biz
The image and composition are up to your usual standard of excellence. That bad
fingernail on the model's left hand (right as we view this) is a minor distraction, but
I'm not sure if anyone except someone used to analyzing photographs will notice.
Concept-wise, I don't care for it. I'm an anti-gun person in Florida - the Gunshine
State where the NRA owns the legislature and wants to allow any idiot to be armed
to the teeth with no restrictions.
Your concept seems to glamorize guns. She's posed, dressed, and caressing the barrel of the gun in a
way that suggests a sexual attraction between attractive women and guns.
The text is a bit highbrow for the issue. It's text that requires thought to take in the meaning,
and poster text doesn't usually require thought. Posters are not usually read and digested. They are
looked at and taken in as a whole. What would be taken in here is guns = sexy good.
The problem with asking an accomplished photographer like you to create a poster like this is
that you routinely create thoughtful images that other photographers admire, but not compositions
that the man on the Clapham Omnibus is going to "get" in the way you intended him to "get" it.
But, from a photography view, it's an excellent photograph with appropriate background.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
Txs Hackbone , will dodge in more highlights. That is a good idea. Text is a quote, and yes it makes you think twice or more.
Why is that ? Well I did it by purpose, so that both the Pro and Con weapon viewers keep on reading it. Because they will try to figure out the meaning. If it was simple wording , very quickly one would judge it pro or con and that was not the intend.
What it really says is: Responding to an offending and threatening force in an appropriate and defensive manner is proper use of your rights.
TXS Tony, the questions was about the total aspect. And yes I might have been to deep into the thinking while I was making up the scene.
On the other-hand that was also the intention, so that the viewers regardless if they are pro or con take the time in trying to understand the meaning. If it was to simple then the pro or con's would disconnect immediate. Now they read, and what it really says is " respond to violence in a moderate defensive way" . Looking at the model, a lovely lady holding the gun and thinking about it, she is not sure if she should use it or not . She handles it with care… the sexual undertone is something I did not plan. Is the way she holds the gun ? Or the long gun…?
Thanks for your response, I am presenting the poster tonight . Just wondering how it will be received.
P.S The fingernail is decoration. Today they tend to wear all kind of differed things glued to the nails, sometime just one .
Thanks Steve
Here in America the topic of guns has become a huge emotional, propagandized issue rather than a rational discussion of the topic.
If your goal is to promote personal responsibility and the right to defend your self and property, here in America what is known as the progressive left will demonize you.
If you should take the opposite stance, the conservative constitution leaning folks will think you are brainwashed, misinformed, and lacking rational thought. Rarely will they demonize you or call for you to be silenced.
So as far as America is concerned, no matter which message you promote, you will have many detractors.
The gun does not look real. Her fingernail can be fixed in post. The written message is too complex.
I think having her look longingly at the gun is sending a mixed message.
I believe that if the model's pose and expression matched the message this would be a more powerful image.
Sam
PS: I will be interested to learn what your fellow countrymen think of this.
Thanks Sam, well I am not making a statement myself. This was a request for a banner/poster. Requested by a movement that wants to allow weapons under very strict rules. Such as a clean penalty sheet, not on medicine, achieved the weapons eduction and the associated rules of defense. etc….
For the moment we do not have the right to defend our property, that is to say when a burglar robs your house empty , you are not allowed to defend your property with force. If you do, then you will end up in yale besides the burglar who will get free way before you. There have been cases were the victim had to pay the criminal because the victim did hit the burglar and he is now limping. A jewelry store was robbed 3 times, the owner was desperate and on the fourth robbery he pulled a gun and shot the robbers in the leg. Guess who is in jail for 3 years, yes indeed the owner of the store.
Robbery and burglary becomes a real issue since the border to eastern europe is open, Romanian, Kosovars and other criminals use heavy weapons and excessive violence in simple brake-in's.
People are fed up , and want to have the right to defend them selfs and household.
The majority 55% tends to support the call for more rights for the victims (right to defend body and household with equal force as the attacker). The other group is against, and thinks that it will just escalate. Often they refer to the USA.
As you can see , we are as devided as the US and we do not have a weapons lobby (NRA),
Thanks for commenting,
I do understand what you are saying. After a little research Belgium may actually have a high homicide, burglary, muggins rate, than the US.
At any rate when taking about gun deaths in America if we take into consideration, the number of suicides along with gang related shootings, America is actually pretty safe.
Also note, guns are used by normal non criminal citizens more responsively then our police officials, and account for saving citizens lives, property as well as deescalating potentially violent situations.
While a real debate about the details of gun ownership can be valid, no government on earth has the right to prevent someone from protecting the lives of their families or themselves.
Sam
I like it. Model's expression is thoughtful (I don't agree with other comments indicating she is lustful), which fits with your intention that the viewer think. The text did require thought (could it be a bit shorter?), so I think you hit the mark you aimed for.
Chooka chooka hoo la ley
Looka looka koo la ley
and wold love to see another shot of this exact pose with her eyes looking directly at me...now what would that convey?
Like the other commentators, I think your photography is always incredibly excellent!
But, imo, the setting established by the background - although suitably neutral - is not suitably contextual with the dress and appearance of the model.
Also, the doorway centered with the model bugs me for some reason.
Please correct me if wrong, but it looks like the pistol is a replica in appearance, and fires only a BB type projectile.
From a Graphic Arts perspective, I think that; a) the black box intersecting the text is awkward; b) the font style is too informal and incongruous with the subject matter;
c) the full bleed of the background texture gives the appearance of the subject being placed-on, rather than framed-by the background elements and poster border - this is a subtle point, but
posters are created by combining several pieces to create visual impact - and as such, framing can be an important element.
However, the real reason I chimed-in is to take issue with the characterization/perception that the NRA is (merely) a "weapons lobby".
The NRA is a nation-wide organization of members that - primarily through training and educational programs - promotes the safe, responsible and
lawful possession and use of firearms - and advocates for the irrevocable constitutional right to do so.
Despite the hyperbolic punditry to the contrary, many firearms are not intended to be, nor - in fact - are ever used as a "weapon".
That said, firearms are dangerous machines capable (like so may others) of malignant mis-use - something humans have demonstrated a willingness to do throughout history, and with whatever "weapons" are at hand.
Thanks Eia for commenting, the gun is not a plastic type, it does fire plastic bullets an is a metal replica.
Real guns are hard to get, and those that have one are not that keen to borrow them. The point was made before and I will do some dodging etc….so it looks more real….. I do have some other shots…where the lady is looking at the spectator. I didn't work that well , since I lost the "thinking" expression and it became more a "beware of the owner" .
Thanks for commenting Earache, yes indeed you spotted that correctly it is a replica for the reasons I stated with the previous commentator.
The black box, indeed I fully agree with you. However the real picture has texture to it and the black box is not just a black box. Of course that is something you cannot see. On the Eizo Graphical monitor (10bit) the blacks have far more detail. On the web , that detail is getting lost. In fact the darker detail is also a shutter/blinds just like the one behind the model.
In this picture nothing is added afterwards except the text. The background was there (shutter/blinds) . Why Shutter/shooter Blinds/blind….. maybe a bit far and not a to clear message in the picture. The doorway is not a doorway but a panel of the shutter/blind that is less lit, the same effect of the black and as such it appears as a doorway.
So, concerning the black aspects. I properly should adjust the views (less blacks) for internet views and simulate a 8 bit display on the Eizo. Thanks for pointing this out.
Thanks for the NRA explanation and your point is taken.
Kind regards,
Steve
I'd also like to see the girl shoot that thing. If the spur on the hammer didn't end up lodged in her forehead, She'd be picking her self up off her no doubt shapely posterior 6 ft back from where she touched the thing off.
I used to do a LOT of glamour shoots with my guns. It was pretty funny to see the way most people held them or more over, didn't have a clue how to hold them. Trying to get a girl to point any handgun be it the 8" 44 or the 5" 9mm was often as task. If they were trying to shoot me from 6 ft away my lightstands and the makeup table would be in some trouble but I'd be fine.
I did have a few people express some anti gun sentiment but I also noticed that seemed to quickly fade when they held one. The over whelming thing was they loved the whole feeling they created in the pics and whenever I did a set of pics with one be it a handgun, rifle or shottie, they always bought plenty of them.
The PC wowser mentality has run rife here in Oz and what was a part of our culture is now being legislated out of existence and guns are made out to be something only psychopaths would want to own.
2 weeks ago I drove my elderly father half way across the state back to his home town to see his even more elderly only surviving brother and sister. 3 out of 11 left.
We went up to the lookout above the town and My father told me how he used to go up there shooting Rabbits on " billy goat hill" when he was a Kid about 12 Yo.
The town was so close there is no doubt my son could have easily thrown a baseball and hit houses in the town itself. My father told me how They would shoot more rabbits than they needed for dinner and walk into town on the way home with the rifle over one shoulder and the rabbits in the other arm and walk up the main street up to the pub and sell a few of the extras for money to go to the pictures.
Even he laughed at the riot walking through the town with a rifle would cause these days. When we saw my Aunt and uncle they recounted the same thing and my uncle talked about how he worked for a guy after school and instead of being paid the guy gave him a .22 rifle which my uncle at 10 Yo was stoked with. Apparently My grandfather was well pleased with the trade as well and my uncle made a lot more money getting paid by another farmer shooting Foxes on his property and then getting paid for the pelts as well.
As the 3 of them said, there were no mass shootings back then and a murder made the front pages for a week.
I remember buying my first gun. I went to the police station and got a license on the spot for $7. I then walked into the shopping center to K-mart and bought a .22 Semi auto and 500 rounds of ammo. A week later I went back and bought a pump action shottie. Had to hand the shottie in a few years ago when they were banned.
2 years ago I went to my Nices fancy dress party with my wife as bonny and clyde. I made up a fake gun with a bit of broom handle and an old stock I had up the garage from years back. My cousins who are cops gave me a very strong heads up about it saying I could be done for carrying an illegal weapon because even fake guns have to be licensed here now and what i had made with a stock, broom handle and some black paint looked too real from a distance. They strongly recommended I dismantle the thing for the trip home in the car. I Laughed remembering my grandfather kept a rifle under a blanket on the back parcel shelf f his car till he died and there were a couple of boxes of ammo in the glove box as well.
These days he would be considered some sort of maniac by the do gooders whom are full of crap.
I'm over all this wowser stuff now. The more PC nazis I offend the better. All the gun carry on is just an excuse for the across the board lapse in the morals and mentality of people. If I wanted to off someone not having a gun wouldn't stop me. Probably wouldn't use one if I had one anyway because there are better ways of getting away with it if you don't want to get caught.
The do gooders and tree hugger types seem to have it in their heads people who like guns are crazys who want to go round shooting places up. Every gun owner I know that hears about these mass shootings just gets a bit down that they weren't there with their guns to take out the Psychos and save the people they harmed. Normal people don't dream of harming others, they dream of saving them from the nut jobs.
That is insulting and demeaning. Is it because she is blonde and well-dressed that you assume she doesn't know how to handle her weapon? Or do you just think that no woman is capable of handling a large hand gun?
Something tells me that you're the kind of guy who would hand the gun to a woman who had never shot one before and stand back laughing as she fired it for the first time instead of first teaching her about proper stance and how to manage recoil. And then post the video on youtube for the laughs.
My Photos
My Blog
On Google+
On DrivingLine
No it's not. It sounds like you have some sort of axe to grind and want to arc up at any little comment you want to make an issue of. I know painfully well a lot of guys aren't capable of handling large handguns but pride and ego stops them admitting it.
Is it because you have something against guns or pretty young women or something else that makes you so quick to level these sarcastic remarks?
No, in my 20 years as a qualified instructor and Range officer I have found hair colour and presentation level of clothing to have no effect on a persons proficiency with a firearm. I made a tongue in cheek remark because I have have seen 100's of times how people, Men and women, whom have never fired a handgun before, especially a large caliber one, often can barely keep the thing in their grip and the way they let them fly around and often near do land on their arses. The recoil energy on that thing would be more than what the girl weighs and without knowing how to hold it, it would kick her around like anyone else her size. Seen it happen more times than I care to remember.
I gave a friend of mine who is only a little bloke a 357 with a factory load and despite him having shot a LOT of rifles, I was catching him the moment after he fired it from falling on his arse. I had worked him up on various calibers to get him used to the recoil progressively but I guess the jump from a 9mm and .38 was a lot more than he expected.
He was not a big guy and given the slim build of the girl in the pic, ( who is probably taller) like most lightly built and inexperienced people, I have every reason to believe the gun in the pic which clearly isn't any pop gun, would be more than she could control and most likely sit her on her arse as well.
People with slim builds have less body mass to absorb recoil so proper technique becomes even more important for their safety and others around them.
This is my observation based on 20+ years of being a range officer and an instructor rather than the sexist conclusion you have jumped to. If you have found different in your capacity with your firearms qualifications, I'd be interested to hear it.
Well congratulations! You have a perfect score of 3 for 3 entirely and laughably wrong.
As a range instructor I have probably taught more people to shoot ( and shoot at competition level) than you have fired rounds so no, that's not what I would do at all and if your comment wasn't so far from the mark and your attitude so self serving, I might even be offended.
You sure have jumped to a lot of conclusions based on one comment. Your Cynicism does nothing positive for your credibility.
I never give anyone a centrefire caliber unless they are 100% competent and have experience in proper control and handling of a rim fire first which they must demonstrate to me, regardless of whoever else may have signed them off to go to the larger calibers.
When I do train them on centrefire, they go back to the classroom for more instruction and dry firing exercises. Then they are allowed to start off on target loads in a .38 and get some experience on that before they go to anything else including auto's.
In my experience, women are far easier to teach to shoot than guys because the women don't turn up with disillusions of grandeur of shooting smiley faces in the target as fast as they can empty the gun or think they are the next Rambo. They recognise their inexperience and listen to what you tell them rather than being in a gut busting rush to spray lead round the range with the biggest hand cannon they can get their sweaty mits on. Not all guys are like that but a lot of the young ones certainly are.
FYI, I look at those YT videos and cringe when I see people being given hand cannons that haven't the first idea of what they are going to do. You even see some morons allow the person ( male or female) to hold the gun close to their face to supposedly get a sight picture. How no one has been killed doing that or lost an eye I'll never know. Maybe it's because YT takes them down so they don't get seen. The amount of people with scope cuts from handguns and rifles alike is worrying enough.
If I was in one of those vids you speak of, I'd be the one screaming for the person to stop and after making the firearm safe, I'd be the guy knocking the teeth down the throat of the moron that gave it to the unsuspecting and very likely victim.
I have taught everyone from 15 yo kids to senior Cits how to shoot and even had the training method I set up in my pistol club 18 years ago adopted by the state shooting association which it now bases about 80% of their recommended training criteria on that to other clubs and associations and has been written up and recommended by many shooting journals and authorities.
I don't know what the axe you are looking to grind is but you sure picked the wrong person to grind it with on this topic.