View Single Post
20-01-10, 01:25 AM
Join Date: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by
ap4a - I would guess that critique on the picture rather than the story is what is being looked for here.
This kind of photography is supposed to tell a story, and when there's a back story provided to help guide the interpretation of that story it's helpful for important points such as that to not be omitted. It saves on assumptions, and a good journalist will try to be as unambiguous as possible.
Thanks to Polaroidsky for filling in the blanks, it puts the back story properly in to context.
With respect to the photo, the expression, stance and low key lighting give the image an angry feel which isn't out of place when presented in the context of being a victim of Thalidomide use. However it doesn't at first seem appropriate given the news of the payout as, initially, you would expect that would be well received, and so there's a conflict between the two aspects of the story being presented. However there's the possibility of some residual anger for it taking so long for the apology and payout to happen, or at the size of the payout which could explain the statement being made by the subject's demeanour. In regards to the processing, I think it's sympathetic to the angry feel that is initially experienced.
View Forum Profile
Send a private message to ap4a
Find all posts by ap4a